the most important election of your lifetime: 2012 american general election thread

I think you mean "crony"

#crony2012

my little crony

"helpful actions" will have little to do with this election.

― Pangborn to be Wilde (Dr Morbius), Thursday, July 19, 2012 12:14 PM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

what color is the sun dr morbs, the sun is brown

lol good luck microsoft http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-19/microsoft-hires-pollster-penn-to-lead-consumer-initiatives-1-.html

oof. would gates himself been taken in a con like that?

well, he did keep ballmer in power

The problem with Glenn Greenwald would be, what??...he isn't sufficiently Democrat-partisan? His articles are too long (Boring!!) He actually includes references demonstrating his claims? Strawmanning his arguments is kind of hard? What he demonstrates embarrasses your sense that you support the moral high ground in all things?

Anyway, I am glad he left Salon, which will reduce by about 50% my chances of visiting that site. Well, I tend to be embarrassed for turning on Salon in much the same way that I used to be embarrassed to be a Huffington Post reader (until I cut my visits down to about once every couple of weeks or so). Both websites constitute Exhibit A in the case for the internet's corrosive effect on headline ethics.

Actually somebody should do a poll here for the most misleading headline/article content ratio ever posted on either site. Or, somebody shouldn't.

Both websites constitute Exhibit A in the case for the internet's corrosive effect on headline ethics

I get the impression you are not so familiar with the Guardian...

lol yes you nailed it my problem with greenwald is that he's so great he makes me realize how flawed I am xp

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/19/glenn-greenwald-moves-from-salon-to-guardian-u-s/

my issue is that he isnt sufficiently democrat partisan, but to his credit hes completely un self righteous abt it

sure the Guardian is probably headline/content bullshit too, I mean can it be escaped anymore? If clicks are the thing, who cares why they happen?

lol yes you nailed it my problem with greenwald is that he's so great he makes me realize how flawed I am xp

snark conquers all i guess

At the Guardian, Mr. Greenwald joins other American-based columnists — including Michael Wolff, Ana Marie Cox and Naomi Wolf — as part of its effort to create a larger presence in the United States.

bummed wolf blitzer turned down their offer, feel like hes a better fit than glenn

as long as Vic Perry is here, my work may be done.

xxp don't tempt me. there's nothing i'd like better than explaining exactly what is wrong with glenn greenwald, but no one else will enjoy it. start a greenwald C/D thread tho. i'll be happy to contribute

nb i've refrained from reading him for over a year (when i was so annoyed i removed him from my rss feed) so most of my complaints will be circa 2011 and earlier tho i can't imagine he's evolved much since then

Oooo i'm quaking...."you can't handle the truth!"

most of my complaints are circa 2011...so you probably missed the little drones issue....get outta here....

hey morbius, we can be a crimefighting team! with capes and everything!

glenn greenwald only source of drone news AMERIKKKA 2012

You wrote: Oooo i'm quaking...."you can't handle the truth!"

I wrote: start a greenwald C/D thread tho. i'll be happy to contribute

UPDATE XXIV: AS OF 5:30 PM EST, DEMOCRATS CONTINUE TO SUPPORT BARACK OBAMA, DESPITE NOT HAVING SUPPORTED GEORGE W BUSH

UPDATE XXV: POLITICS BEGINS TO SEEM VAGUELY TRIBAL???

(i mean i like gg fine)

hey morbius, we can be a crimefighting team! with capes and everything!

― Vic Perry, Thursday, July 19, 2012 5:27 PM (38 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lol dude u new here huh

zactly. Greenwald (who I've read since 2006) seems redundant because threads like this exist.

ask vic perry thread

Morbz is strictly mad scientist

xp

I'm sure California libs or whatever need a blogger who satisfies their craving for self-cannibalization.

delicious

with a latte

Um, does somebody want to claim that the mainstream news coverage of drones has been particularly good? Or that there hasn't been plenty of excuses for why it is no big deal? Because it is not that Greenwald is the only person to write about them, it's that most of the coverage is pretty much "HOW RESTRAINED WE ARE IN OUR CURRENT KILLING PRACTICES!" See Gene Lyons and Andrew Sullivan for the partisan Democrat take. You know, Obama will probably win anyway, people don't need to defend every goddamn thing he does.

NYT drone coverage seemed decent to me but yeah it's pretty ignored. apart from when they kill someone worth talking about, news orgs totally run with those

As he torturously reminds us today, Sully isn't a Democrat

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/07/why-obama-is-right.html

lots of people on the internet have been v critical of drones

Digby, the Balloon Juice folks, Jonathan Bernstein, Larison (maybe), just to name a few, have been plenty critical.

Not that I'm looking to have things thrown at me, but the idea that NYT drone coverage has been good is exactly the sort of thing one might question after reading Glenn Greenwald.

Anyway, I have to go. Say nice things about me in my absence.

What was the issue with drones again?

and drones have def gotten way more coverage than than the other ways we kill people, why because drones are new and creepy

^^^^^

why did I click on that Sullivan link

there have been big long articles about drones in rolling stone and esquire recently, the latter the one that keeps being like "you, mr. president, have made these choices. you... are the Lethal President."

What was the issue with drones again?

That there's a few of them in this thread?

god sullivan is such an idiot

Reagan was right in 1980. Obama is right in 2012. And there is no contradiction between those two statements.

sry alfred calling in the drones, you will be missed

angel, down we go together

the issue is not the drones as much as the LEGAL secret kill orders around them