HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » lapucelle » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next »

lapucelle

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Jun 13, 2016, 01:17 PM
Number of posts: 2,167

Journal Archives

Rebecca Traister's profile in NY Magazine of post-election HRC

is honest and straightforward, alternately maddening and heartbreaking.

I find Traister to be an excellent journalist and a serious writer. Her presentation and analysis are both measured and nuanced. She is neither acolyte nor enemy. She is a feminist.

It's a long read, but worth it.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/05/hillary-clinton-life-after-election.html

For Traister's immediate post election analysis, you can click here. (Note that Traister used the title "Shattered" for her essay long before Allen and Parnes appropriated it for use in their superficial Clinton "expose".)

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/hillary-clinton-didnt-shatter-the-glass-ceiling.html

An archive of her recent work can be found here:
http://nymag.com/author/Rebecca%20Traister/

Chris Matthews just made a reference to Buffalo Bob

and Mr. Green Jeans.

It was Captain Kangaroo, Chris.

La Resistance en France : Aux armes et caetera

May the 4th

be with you....

Chuck Todd MTP 4/23: Genuine Ignorance or Alternative Facts?

“What is the Democratic Party doing getting involved in a mayoral race in Kansas?” a grinning Todd asked his panel on MTP this morning.

Did Todd know that the answer to his question was readily available to anyone truly interested in finding out? It was the news division of his own parent network that reported the facts in a news story just yesterday.

As per NBC News:
The tensions (between Sanders and Democrats over his non-endorsement of Ossoff) were further elevated by the fact that Sanders praised a mayoral candidate in Omaha, Nebraska, who was revealed to have a mixed record on abortion.

At Sanders' request, the DNC added a stop on the tour to promote Health Mello, prompting backlash from pro-choice groups and accusations that Sanders was applying a double standard — or perhaps a loyalty test — about what it means to be a progressive.

Perez, who skipped the Omaha stop in order to campaign for Ossoff, had to put out his own clarifying statement Friday.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/democrats-vs-trump/bernie-sanders-clarifies-support-jon-ossoff-after-dustup-n749491

Say what? The unscheduled stop was added to accommodate a specific request made by Sanders? Perez didn’t participate? Then why did Chuck blame Perez for a mess that Democrats didn’t make? That wasn’t very honest.

Was Chuck uniformed, misinformed, or deliberately dissembling? We deserve better from a man who touts himself as a fearless truth-teller.

Journalists have a duty not to put their thumbs on the scale through the deliberate omission of important facts and context. Are there any rules anymore, Chuck? And if so, will you actually play by them? These days, what passes as journalism could use a little refereeing. Democrats are not afraid to blow the whistle

When did Sanders's endorsement of Mello

morph into the DNC's embrace of the candidate? Perez's statement that "every Democrat, like every American, should support a woman’s right to make her own choices about her body and her health" was explained this way in the Huffington Post.

Perez’s statement follows the DNC’s controversial embrace of Heath Mello, a Democratic mayoral candidate in Omaha, Nebraska, whose years-long history of voting against abortion rights in the state Legislature drew fire from progressives this week.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/democrats-tom-perez-abortion-rights_us_58fa5fade4b018a9ce5b351d?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004

Why is the HuffPo story framed in a way that leads readers to conclude that progressives put pressure on the Democratic party to do the right thing? That's not how this happened.

NBC News gets the story right.

The tensions (between Sanders and the DNC for Sanders's reluctance to endorse Ossoff) were further elevated by the fact that Sanders praised a mayoral candidate in Omaha, Nebraska, who was revealed to have a mixed record on abortion.

At Sanders' request, the DNC added a stop on the tour to promote Health Mello, prompting backlash from pro-choice groups and accusations that Sanders was applying a double standard — or perhaps a loyalty test — about what it means to be a progressive.

Perez, who skipped the Omaha stop in order to campaign for Ossoff, had to put out his own clarifying statement Friday.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/democrats-vs-trump/bernie-sanders-clarifies-support-jon-ossoff-after-dustup-n749491

Joy gets it #2.

A stoic Ms. Reid wasn't buying what they were selling.

In a shattering interview, Allen and Parnes dropped their grins and desperately tried to seem objective and measured while insisting that their book of anonymously sourced juicy tidbits is serious work of political analysis. "That's why everyone needs to buy it," a panicked, yet profit-driven Allen explained to a stone-faced Joy.

I'm not sure which I liked better, the full on stare or the skeptical side-eye.

In Celebration of Science!

"

So who's reading "The Destruction of Hillary Clinton"?

Although Susan Bordo's cogent work is not getting the publicity that more gossipy recent releases have garnered, Bordo is an academic who focuses on on gender and cultural analysis rather than unsubstantiated juicy tidbits from anonymous sources.

From her publisher's website:

"Gossip is easy. Get to the deeper truth, with this in-depth look at the political forces and media culture that vilified and ultimately brought down Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Presidential campaign.

The Destruction of Hillary Clinton is an answer to the question many have been asking: How did an extraordinarily well-qualified, experienced, and admired candidate—whose victory would have been as historic as Barack Obama’s—come to be seen as a tool of the establishment, a chronic liar, and a talentless politician?

In this masterful narrative of the 2016 campaign year and the events that led up to it, Susan Bordo unpacks the Rights’ assault on Clinton and her reputation, the way the left provoked suspicion and indifference among the youth vote, the inescapable presence of James Comey, questions about Russian influence, and the media’s malpractice in covering the candidate."
Anyone truly interested in an honest appraisal of what went wrong in 2016 should check it out. You can read excepts on line or take a peak through the pages at the publisher's website.

http://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/558341/the-destruction-of-hillary-clinton-by-susan-bordo/

Why is the Trump administration going after Assange?

Is it a threat to make sure he doesn't talk, or is it preemptive play to diminish the credibility of any dirt Assange spills?

Or is it something else?
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next »