politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This is interesting, but honestly, after the last 8 months of news on Israel and Gaza, I basically have to discount anything from, or anyone whose opinion is developed from, the NYT's reporting. The NYT has gone from paper of record to something akin to New York Post level off bull-shit, effectively wrapped up in more "acceptable" / "cleaner" verbage and relying on a better reputation to do basically the same level of propaganda.
I whole-heartedly agree with the articles sentiment in that Biden not being the candidate is only news' to the Times because of their failure to acknowledge to what many of us here and in alternative media have been seeing for a very long time: that Biden isnt' and hasn't been a viable candidate. But like with so many here, the Time's was too busy carrying water to notice how far off track they had gotten, and their intentional ignorance to Biden's obvious issue set the stage for this over-reaction in the other direction.
All and all its just more support for alternative media where you can just pay the creators directly or federated media like lemmy which can remain unbought.
This is an impressively corkscrewed logical construction. Let me offer a simpler one:
The Times's uncritical support for Israel is of a piece with its loud and unwavering recent criticism of Biden. The concordance brought about between your pretense that they were ever nice to Biden, and your pretense that Biden is an unusually pro-Israel US president, is imaginary, because neither of those ever happened.
The Times is just leaning hard into the most right-wing end of US politics that doesn't fall completely into Naziism, in both cases, as they usually do with most things and particularly since 2022 when the new guy took over.
Interestingly enough, a lot of the tactics are a lot the same as what happened in 2016:
I mean, you want to talk cork-screwed logic. Did you not notice that none of the clips you posted are NYT?
My explanation is far simpler: The Times' is too wrapped up in the smell of their own farts to notice when they've lost the thread.
also:
Why do you insist on lying about something that is so easily verifiable?
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/i-am-zionist-how-joe-bidens-lifelong-bond-with-israel-shapes-war-policy-2023-10-21/
Biden was the most pro-Israel senator of all time. Why are you trying to lie about this? Its like, his senatorial legacy. We all knew this about Joe Biden in 2008, 2012, 2016, 200. Its not even new news. Its old, well established fact about how Biden conducted himself in congress.
What a bizarre thing to try and lie about.
Biden’s support for Israel is unconscionable. They’re committing an active genocide and he’s arming them while they’re doing it.
What I said wasn’t that any of that wasn’t happening. It was that that stuff is all very usual for US presidents. Coups and killings, drone strikes and starving kids. It’s all what they do. Every US President since Carter has voiced their full throated support for Israel for decades, as the whole time they have slaughtered and starved, made apartheid and taken land.
Biden’s actually highly unusual in that he made sanctions on settlers, pushed hard for a cease fire, tried to provide aid, and paused weapons shipments. None of that, to me, means he deserves any credit. He should be snatching Netanyahu and taking him to the ICC, and landing US troops to shoot IDF members in the face if they try to go around killing anybody. But, pretending that he somehow represents a downward departure from the norm for US leaders is to me unsupported by the evidence. US leaders fuckin love war crimes by our allies.
You can represent what I just said, or why it is that the NYT clearly loves Israel and hates Biden, any way that you want, say I am lying, whatever. But that’s how I feel about it.
Ok, thanks for the context I think I understand better what you are trying to say. I understand now I think the nuance you are trying to create with this opinion. However, this is in disagreement with historical context, such as the camp David accords. The US has been far more heavy handed with Israel in the past and not supported or condemned their actions. I dont think that takes away from the spirit of your point however.
I would just offer that you try and draw the conclusion you are making more clearly because it really looked like you were trying to suggest that Biden wasn't the most pro-israel politician of all time, when its like, extremely well documented thats who the guy is. The point being that Israels current actions are so equally un-precedented that even the most pro-Israel politician of all time cant "just go along" with them.
Do you know what the pro-Israel politician who is his opponent in the current election wants to do in Gaza?
Or how the pro-Israel politicians in congress reacted when he paused weapons shipments?