Fucking NY Times

8 Likes
13 Likes

The New York Times was finally shamed into denouncing Trump.

The Philadelphia Inquirer showed them how to do coverage.

12 Likes

It’s difficult to archive an interactive article like this*, so here’s the gift link with the complete texts,

*perhaps that’s the point.

4 Likes

They couldn’t resist, though:

The Democrats are rightly engaged in their own debate about whether President Biden is the right person to carry the party’s nomination into the election, given widespread concerns among voters about his age-related fitness.

8 Likes
5 Likes

11 Likes

From my morning NYT e-mail:

Somehow he’s able to delivery “detailed, complex answers” but let’s talk in depth about how he flubbed a couple names. Biden quite obviously knows Trump isn’t his VP, and Putin is not the President of Ukraine. I’m not sure that Trump actually knows the difference between Erdogan and Orban.

Somehow he’s able “passionately criticize” important issues, while at the same time not looking “vigorous” enough and speaking too “softly”.

Oh, and in case you all didn’t know it already, he’s 81. Thanks, NY Times!

Jesus H Christ, it’s like short of Biden doing a Willy Wonka somersault to the podium and then proceed to recite the entirety of the Constitution from memory, no matter what he does will never be good enough for these people. I guess even if he did, he would be criticized that his acrobatics weren’t acrobatic enough, and that he recited the Constitution too slowly for their liking that he didn’t put enough oomph into Article VI, he should have rapped Article II, or he should have recited the 27th Amendment in iambic pentameter.

12 Likes

Biden should invite them to an interview at the White House. Make them sit waiting for four hours; then be too busy and ask if they’d like to play with commander.

9 Likes

JFC. I haven’t read this, nor do I have any plans to read it but the title alone give me vibes of the author painting gender-affirming care as “parents bring their kids to their family doctor who listens dismissively to their concerns for 5 minutes, shrugs, sends them on their way a jug of hormones and an appointment in 2 weeks gender-affirming surgery #wokeism”.

Beyond that, who is this person or any of their “evidence” to say if it “works” or not – whether or not it works is up to the recipient and it seems that from people that I know who receive this kind of care, it works pretty fucking well.

The only anecdotal evidence I have to say it didn’t “work” was with a trans-woman at my job that made the choice to de-transition when their treatment introduced some serious medical problems. (And I only knew this because they were very open about their journey.) That’s not even an indictment against gender-affirming care. Sometimes medical treatments have bad outcomes. :man_shrugging:

6 Likes

Pamela Paul is an anti-trans fanatic. Almost every column she writes is about the devious deviltry of trans people. Without Pamela Paul, the Onion never would’ve had to publish their “Journalism’s Sacred Duty” article.

8 Likes

Well then I’m especially glad I didn’t read that dreck. Thanks for the link to The Onion article – it’s as astute as ever.

3 Likes

Should’ve included the Wikipedia link: Pamela Paul - Wikipedia

The “Talk” page on her is also helpful: Talk:Pamela Paul - Wikipedia

3 Likes

00bd0d60bc1eeddd

7 Likes
7 Likes

“Painted!?!” That’s some hyper-realistic painting right there!


4 Likes