Reply to Everyone is gone at the Washington Post... Almost no Metro section left...

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Everyone is gone at the Washington Post... Almost no Metro section left..."

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Good. Let that rag die. [/quote]

This. It used to be a respected paper. Now it’s just regurgitated woke punch lines. [/quote]

Whatever. You clearly never read it before. [/quote]

DP.  I grew up reading the WaPo.  I read it every day until about two years ago, when we finally realized how utterly biased and absurd it is, at which point we canceled our subscription.  The PP is correct.  There is nothing serious or respectable about the WaPo any longer and it's been that way for some time.  [/quote]

I don't think the Post changed. I think [u]you[/u] changed. And obviously I don't know anything about you personally, but everyone I know personally who has this opinion used to read the Washington Post but now watches a lot of Fox.[/quote]

Not the PP you replied to, but [b]Fox is biased the other way[/b]. It's possible to recognize different types of bias in various places, PP! I think it's worthwhile to check in on all news sources regularly to monitor the level of bias, and general nonsense various reporters are feeding the unwary public. Then you're less surprised when people believe Trump won the 2020 election, or when others want to defund the police or turn a blind eye to juvenile crime, both of which are untenable positions, and yet, some people still cling to them. The reporters that push these unbaked ideas are partially to blame, but the larger issue is that people insist on living in their little echo chambers with no critical thinking whatsoever.

So read all the news. You might surprise yourself. As a lefty, I recognize for example that we need more border control. Not because "immigrants are poisoning the blood of our country"; but because we can better serve these very courageous and competent people (you need both plus luck to survive the trek they made), who will definitely improve our nation's dynamism and gene pool with their can-do attitudes, if we control their entry, which then means we can shuttle them where employers need them, and we can reduce their number traipsing across people's lawns at the southern border.

[/quote]

Yeah, no. Everyone has biases, of course, but there is no equivalent between Fox and Washington Post. It's a false equivalence.

Also a big "Yeah, no" to the idea of "improving our gene pool" with immigrants. Eugenics from anonymous self-described lefties is still eugenics.[/quote]

PP you replied to. Sigh. Well, I can't help you if you're willfully blind. The left has just as much to reproach itself with as the right in general (not for Trump-specific items, that's a right-wing special), and this is common across all developed nations. The left usually is urban-and climate-friendly and protective of certain minorities, but ignores the rural poor and operational issues with immigration. The right is usually more rural-friendly and protective of traditional values, but ignores social and climate change and reflexively clamps down on immigration, even when it hurts their bottom line. If both sides talked to each other more, decades-old resentment wouldn't fester to the point that you can issue a blanket "yeah no" to anything concept that's not in your bubble, and claim eugenics instead of understanding actual demographic changes.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics