seaQueue,
@seaQueue@lemmy.world avatar

Good, this is exactly how our mainstream media should treat people who treat politics as a joke. We’ve spent way too long treating bad faith actors like they deserve to be taken seriously. We should’ve been doing this for the last 30y.

m3t00, (edited )
@m3t00@midwest.social avatar

saw his speakership on FtN sunday rambling some crap about DT getting reelected. click yeah, no. his brain is toast glad my OTA TV doesn’t get all them fancy pay news channels. NN commercials during local news is close as I get

damnthefilibuster,

She didn’t “burst into laughter”. She guffawed. What the heck is wrong with these headline writers?

paddirn,

Next headline: “Internet users are frothing at the mouth and OUTRAGED at CNN!”

teuast,

“Grassroots OUTRAGE as CNN BLATANTLY MISREPORTS FACTS”

body of article recounts that margaret brennan chuckled a little bit… on cbs

drdabbles,
@drdabbles@lemmy.world avatar

Politician DESTROYED by… Headlines like these are always garbage, and a red flag for potential readers. Scroll on by and don’t reward their behavior.

Album,
@Album@lemmy.ca avatar

They know that people won’t repost an article with an accurate headline to social media.

That’s why social media isn’t really a good way to educate yourself on complex issues.

By the time it gets to you it’s been through several stages of trying to create profit and so only the engaging but misleading shit gets through.

Just this example: lemmy -> the daily boulder -> youtube -> cbs face the nation -> original reporting -> the actual events

IntangibleSloth,
@IntangibleSloth@lemm.ee avatar

You just slammed that headline!

misterundercoat,

Headlines reeling after devastating comment.

OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe,

Millenials and Headlines, who killed who? More at 6

Pregnenolone,

It’s called the Daily Boulder. That’s about all I need to know about its quality of journalism

ElderWendigo,

Synonyms. The definition of guffaw is literally to burst into laughter. What the heck is wrong with you?

Ghyste,

Holy Christ that site is unreadable garbage.

And McCarthy is a piece of shit.

StinkyDave,

I agree. More ads than info.

three,

lmfao lookup this crazy new tech called an adblocker

__ghost__,

Firefox + ublock while you can homies

BossDj,

I accidentally opened it on the wrong browser and NOPED over to Firefox real quick. This site looks like satire with the comical amount of ads

Zellith,

Technically bursting into laughter. But I think it goes against the spirit of the phrase!

Zeppo,
@Zeppo@sh.itjust.works avatar

CNN had some ridiculous text implying it was Democrats, something like “McCarthy submits bill to avert shutdown, but it will require help from Dems”, as if Democrats were trying to shutdown and not Republicans.

PeleSpirit,

CNN is R’s friend and has been for awhile. They’ve been moving the Overton Window quite successfully by saying it’s the D’s (CNN) against the R’s (Fox), which is entirely disingenuous. I know it’s working because a friend of mine that grew up Republican says he watches/listens to both to stay centered.

seahorse,
@seahorse@midwest.social avatar

Lol CNN is like center right at best these days. Back before the 2020 election I was telling my shrink about my worries for the futures of the people of the US and he for real told me to watch some CNN. He wasn’t kidding. That’s what libs watch to feel informed.

Kerrigor,
Kerrigor avatar

Pretty detached from reality, aren't you. CNN is Republican-placating garbage

seahorse,
@seahorse@midwest.social avatar

Wut? I agree with you.

Kerrigor,
Kerrigor avatar

You said "That’s what libs watch to feel informed."

We don't watch CNN it's garbage

seahorse,
@seahorse@midwest.social avatar

Well, my shrink is very much a liberal and watches it. So does my dad who is liberal.

downhomechunk,
@downhomechunk@midwest.social avatar

John Oliver and npr tell me everything i need to know about the world.

JoeBigelow,
@JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca avatar

Liberalism is center left at best

seahorse,
@seahorse@midwest.social avatar

Bunch of libs in here down voting us lolol

Clent,

The issue isn’t the liberals is that you fell for the right wing propagandist telling you what a liberal is.

It’s not authoritarian is any way. The right doesn’t get to define us.

Neither do you.

Thats authoritarian. Check yourself.

seahorse,
@seahorse@midwest.social avatar

Anti-fascist, anti-racist, anti-capitalist makes a leftist.

needthosepylons,
@needthosepylons@lemmy.world avatar

For the life of me, I can’t begin to understand what Americans call liberals. Is it left? Fat left? Center right? Every people I talk to seem to have his/her own definition.

Aceticon, (edited )

There are multiple axes in politics, not just the Left-Right axis, and Liberalism sits in a different axis which is roughly Freedom-Control.

This is why you have both leftwing and rightwing authoritarian ideologies: they’re both on the Control side of the second axis but on opposite sides of the first ones.

In the US Liberals and Libertarians are on the Freedom side of the second axis, with the Libertarians quite to the Right on the other axis and the Liberals to the left of them but maybe not quite left of center (see below).

You see, the axis aren’t totally independent: whilst being leftwing roughly means defending “The greatest good for the greatest number”, being Liberal means defending that “People should be able to do what they want and be with whomever they want”, things which are aligned with each other in the Moral sphere but not at all compatible in the Economic sphere because maximizing the quality of life for the greatest number is totally incompatible with massive resource hoarding (i.e. the ultra wealthy), taking advantage of economic bottlenecks and other imperfections to extract rents and so on - or in other words, maximizing life outcomes for the many requires minimizing freedom of doing certain things, which affects a minority of people, or in other words, it requires some amount of Control.

It’s not by chance that Liberals never go against Wealth Discrimination (were people are literally treated differently depending of wealth) which is the largest, most intense and widespread form of Discrimination and is even the means in the US via which the greatest pain is inflicted on the people the Liberals claim to defend (for example, the single biggest way in which every minute of every day the average African American suffers is through the effects of being poor, said being poor because of having been born from poor parents in a poor neighbourhood with inferior schools and far fewer opportunities that people born in more middle class neighbourhoods: historic race-related factors put them there but it’s Wealth Discrimination that both keeps many there and inflicts them pain, often quite literally every minute of their lives - as even the quality of one’s mattress and one’s dwelling depends on wealth).

Further, there is quite a lot of hypocrisy in the supposedly freedom loving types in the US, both Liberals and Libertarians: they never challanged the economic structure we have which forces people to execute tasks they do not want to do to get value tokens which are the only way they have to provide for their basic human needs, because in this economic structure almost all of them are born landless in an environment where they can’t just claim land were they can provide for their own needs (such as by growing their own food and building a place to live in), so very few are born Free and only few of those not born Free actually achieve a position where they are trully free (i.e. don’t have to do anything they don’t want to do merelly to survive). Libertarians and Liberals are not actually Freedom-loving in the general sense, rather Libertarians love Freedom For Themselves, whilst Liberals split into two groups, those seeking upside maximization for themselves via the group (i.e who were born with the genetics that have them classified in a group deemed as “should be helped” so are just pursuing Personal Upside Maximization under the cover of “it’s for the group”) and those who want Only The Freedom For Others That Does Not Risk The Priviledges I Was Born With (i.e the scions of the well off middle class, who are happy with anti-discrimination as long as they can still enjoy the positive wealth discrimination they get from being born far more well off than most people) which isn’t really wanting maximal freedom for the greatest number but rather a controlled and controllable “freedom” for others than doesn’t negative impact their own superior position.

needthosepylons,
@needthosepylons@lemmy.world avatar

Thank you for the detailed explanation, even if I understand it’s debated!

Aceticon, (edited )

Well, my fine detail interpretation of US-style Liberals and Libertarians might be a little off as I’m neither American nor lived there and outside the US, those who call themselves Liberals are openly Neoliberals (in the US that is maybe implied since in that country there’s at most a handfull of elected politicians who aren’t full-on neoliberals) whilst there really isn’t such thing as “I should be free of government interference and paying any taxes at all” types (i.e. my understanding of what a Libertarian is) in Europe, probably because for centuries all land has been owned, so there is no such thing as a “live by yourself” rugged individualist.

Also note that there apparently are more axis in Politics than those two and I’m not an expert in the matter: I just like to get people thinking on the idea that Left-Right is an hypersimplified take on politics, probably the result of the false dichotomy pushed by both the Press and Politics in the flawed Democracies with voting systems rigged to maintain power duopolies (such as the US) - IMHO, the idea that “only Left vs Right matters” is an post hoc Logic-sounding explanation concocted to make it seem that having at most 2 (sometimes not even that, depending on the electoral circle) electable choices (even though one looks around and the combinations of opinions on all maner of subject on society and economics is nearly infinite) is normal and natural and hence systems reducing viable choices to 2 have “real choice” and are “democratic”.

I’ve lived countries with Proportional Vota and I live in countries with voting systems similar to the US and things are very very different not just in Politics but even in terms of how people cooperate in Society when there are lots of real viable choices versus when there are only 2 options who usually are aligned in things like Economic structure and how Power should be divvied (so political discussions there are not about Power and Wealth but rather about about Morality only) - I would, any day, take the consensus and cohalition politics of The Netherlands over Britain’s “two sides who agree over how to allocate Wealth and Power and make a massive loud circus over Morality to cover up that their style of management of the country is pretty much the same”.

Doug,

It used to mean far left to a lot of people

It often means far left to far right people

It often means center right or further to far left people (which is a segment you’re most likely to encounter online for various reasons)

Not everyone was made aware of the changes so understanding is all over the place, but it’s become derogatory for both ends (I guess they do agree on something)

TheTetrapod,

Sorry, you don’t seem to understand that almost everyone here considers themselves left of liberal. Lib is a dirty word in these parts.

Clent,

Sounds like a lot of morons in these parts. The discourse I’ve had with people here is stronger indicator though.

It’s all very sus.

Feels like right wing agitators trying to sow seeds of doubt amongst the left.

Occamsrazer,

It seems like “lib” is considered right wing on Lemmy. I’m still trying to figure it out. But really right wing or left wing depends on where you stand.

Doug,

The Lemmy perspective is that lib is, at best, just barely left of conservative. If I had to guess it probably stems from the “neolib” moniker.

Off of Lemmy lib and left remain fairly interchangeable in a whole lot of circles so it can get really confusing.

To make matters worse there are sizable segments (like hexbear) that will do their best to make you feel like crap if you call yourself the thing you think fits but means a wildly different thing to them.

The terms aren’t standardized but you might be an asshole if you don’t know what to use and where. Good luck I guess

PeleSpirit,

He’s not a lib, he’s a non-trump republican trying to see both sides.

NewNewAccount,

That’s what libs watch to feel informed.

By what definition of “lib”?

DragonTypeWyvern,

By the definition of liberal.

Doug,

Pretty sure everyone already knew what lib was short for.

Maybe define the term and not the abbreviation. A lot of people still understand liberal to mean left wing as it was used most of their lives.

DragonTypeWyvern,

They’ve got Google and Wikipedia.

Doug,

Neither of which offers the connotations being used here.

If you wanna be unhelpful you can just stay quiet. If you wanna be an ass take it somewhere else.

someguy3,

This is McCarthy’s thanks.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • politicus@midwest.social
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • tacticalgear
  • khanakhh
  • Youngstown
  • rosin
  • slotface
  • everett
  • vwfavf
  • ngwrru68w68
  • kavyap
  • ethstaker
  • mdbf
  • magazineikmin
  • megavids
  • Durango
  • modclub
  • InstantRegret
  • osvaldo12
  • GTA5RPClips
  • normalnudes
  • anitta
  • cubers
  • tester
  • cisconetworking
  • provamag3
  • Leos
  • JUstTest
  • All magazines