Monday, June 26, 2017

Nazis? What Nazis?

Neonazis rally at the Lincoln Memorial. Why not?

The son of Trump's favorite Flynn was scheduled to speak, but I have not been able to find a report that says whether he did or didn't.

A lot of people -- me, included -- have wondered what the attraction was that Flynn has for Whiny Baby Donald. 

All in all, another brick in the wall.



27 comments:

  1. Well, when a pro-Palestinian dyke is discovered whispering in the ear of the president of the United States, I'll become alarmed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Harry, the first two words of your post linked to an incredibly obscure group that has virtually no support anywhere.

    My link went to a publicly sponsored parade full of progressives who were all too happy to exclude Jews.

    Antifa riots, no-platforming, assaults on speakers, heckler's veto, blatant anti-Judaism, assassination fantasies, complete subversion of journalistic ethics.

    All of that is coming from the left.

    And from Trump? Moronic tweets.

    You leftists are completely unhinged.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Not as obscure as we'd like and I would not have said any attention to them if they were not closely linked -- via at least two strong links -- to the Oval Office.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Not as obscure as we'd like and I would not have said any attention to them if they were not closely linked -- via at least two strong links -- to the Oval Office.

    They aren't linked at all, as proven by your lack of links.

    But far more astonishing is your complete ignoring of fascism where it has repeatedly actually reared its ugly head -- thereby proving progressivism is just a different spelling -- whilst shrieking like a teen girl faced with a spider about nothing.

    Antifa riots, no-platforming, assaults on speakers, heckler's veto, blatant anti-Judaism, assassination fantasies, complete subversion of journalistic ethics have actually happened, in case you aren't keeping up with the news.

    ReplyDelete
  5. All the items on your list apply equally well, or better, to the rightwing.

    ReplyDelete
  6. No, Harry, they don't.

    The right hasn't excluded Jews, or started riots, no-platformed speakers, or started violent riots, or beat people with bicycle locks, or engaged in grotesque journalistic malfeasance.

    All you are left with is the snotty response of a petulant fourth grader.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It has done all those things, plus slashed people's throats. but your last item is so laughable that I suppose that even you, upon reflection, will withdraw it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Bollocks, Harry. I will happily provide links for every one of my assertions: they are facts, they actually happened.

    ... but your last item is so laughable that I suppose that even you, upon reflection, will withdraw it.

    By all means, Harry, provide me with specific examples of mainstream "rightwing" news outlets that have covered themselves in merde like CNN, the NYT, WaPo, LAT, CBS, NBC, et al.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I have to say that your timing is, again, remarkably bad

    ReplyDelete
  10. I have to say, Harry, your response is a fact vacuum. As always.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'll let Washington Post commenter FauxReal answer you:

    If you didn't watch John Oliver last night, I highly recommend you watch the video sometime. Oliver took on Sinclair Media. We think of Fox as the Republican propaganda network. Sinclair is even more dangerous because they own local TV stations around the country and push out Conservative propaganda. It's quite an eye opener.

    Sinclair is in the midst of making their empire even bigger with a $3.9 billion merger with Tribune Media that would significantly consolidate local television networks.

    You should also be aware of this from December:

    Kushner: We struck deal with Sinclair for straighter coverage

    "Kushner said the agreement with Sinclair, which owns television stations across the country in many swing states and often packages news for their affiliates to run, gave them more access to Trump and the campaign, according to six people who heard his remarks.

    In exchange, Sinclair would broadcast their Trump interviews across the country without commentary, Kushner said."

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-campai...

    The Hill has the video of John Oliver explaining Sinclair and their methods. Please watch it.

    http://thehill.com/policy/technology/340542-john-o...

    ReplyDelete
  12. Harry:

    I live in Germany, I can't watch John Oliver.

    Regardless of anything else about Sinclair, what could be straighter coverage than broadcasting interviews without commentary?

    As opposed to what, say, John Oliver does, which is to fluff progs preconceptions non-stop.

    ReplyDelete
  13. That wouldn't be coverage; that would be a free ad.

    ReplyDelete
  14. No, Harry, that is coverage: presenting it as it was, without layering characterizations on top.

    You do that all the time, and just as frequently screw it up.

    ReplyDelete
  15. If you have an Internet connection, you can watch Oliver.

    Here's a link.

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/47320_Video-_John_Oliver_Takes_Apart_the_Far_Right_Sinclair_Broadcast_Group

    Your definition of 'coverage' is what Pravda does. Reporting differs.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Harry, I would have to be dead to care less about John Oliver, late night comedian, than I do already.

    The straightest possible coverage is that without overlaid commentary.

    If memory serves, CSPAN does quite a bit of that already.

    Harry, what you do, and what the NYT, WaPo, CNN, etc do far too often, is Pravda ... I mean coverage.

    It sure as hell isn't reporting.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Harry, the first two words of your post linked to an incredibly obscure group that has virtually no support anywhere.

    My link went to a publicly sponsored parade full of progressives who were all too happy to exclude Jews.

    Antifa riots, no-platforming, assaults on speakers, heckler's veto, blatant anti-Judaism, assassination fantasies, complete subversion of journalistic ethics.


    Speaking of company.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Once again with the fact-free smears, Harry. What is it with you progressives?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Well, here's a fact, although I am sure all my readers have already taken note of it:

    You use antifascist as a smear word

    ReplyDelete
  20. Harry, that isn't possible. Antifas relentlessly smear themselves, while demonstrating how fascistic progressives like you are.

    Oh, and I'm sure you can provide a direct quote where I've used "antifa" as a smear word.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Oh. Right. Got it. You lied again.

    ReplyDelete