New York Times' Credibility Is In The Toilet

Now that the election is over, a lot of people are saying that the media and polls failed us. 

They predicted one thing, but were completely wrong. 

However, it wasn't only their predictions of a sweeping Trump loss that were incorrect, but also that their biased, schlock journalism was professionally and ethically wrong!

Over and over again, I read the harshest of criticisms of Donald Trump, especially from the New York Times--endless rantings about him week after week:

From Nicholas Kristof:

- Trump's actions are heinous

- Trump is a misogynist and sexual predator

- Trump is a charlatan

- Trump is a crackpot

- Trump is a shallow egoist who uses people

- Trump is for pariahs like ISIS, North Korea, and KKK

- Trump is mean

- Trump is a liar

- Trump is a racist

From Frank Bruni: 

- Trump rants

- Trump makes corrosive conspiracy theories

- Trump is sickening

- Trump and his people are pathetic

- Trump is a narcissist

- Trump is irredeemably sexually perverse

- Trump is crude

- Trump is unfit

- Trump is unpatriotic

- Trump is hot-tempered 

Does the New York Times really call this journalism, and do they expect people to pay for this one-sided nonsense?

It used to be we could go to an esteemed newspaper like the New York Times and get real investigative journalism, and a real analytical and balanced approach to issues--we could learn something and be better off for it. 

But unfortunately it seems that the New York Times became exactly what it feared the most--it became biased, bigoted, and hateful. 

The articles over and over again were full of shameful name-calling, insinuations, and coaxing people that they needed to vote for one candidate over another. 

It wasn't just an endorsement before the election, it was a barrage of months of superficial and venomous, hate-filled spew and characterizations by liberal journalists against a conservative party candidate--irrespective of what his true capabilities were and hope that he could bring to reinvigorate this nation. 

Of course, candidates should always be condemned for any bias or stupid things they may explicitly or implicitly do or say, but that is an opportunity to set the record and candidate straight, not unilaterally take them out back and shoot them, while giving the other candidate a free ride on corruption, collusion, and lies. 

Over time, people saw right through it, and it became clear that the media was absolutely biased, divisive, and trying to fix the election results for one candidate. 

The damage to the credibility of the media is done, and before readers renew their next subscriptions, they need to vote with their wallets with the same internal deliberation and soul searching as for their candidate. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

New York Times' Credibility Is In The Toilet

After The Election Hypocrisy

So after the election yesterday, once the results were in, the after shocks were apparent in downtown, Washington DC and across the nation.

- There were quiet spaces set up for people to "console" themselves and each other. 

- There were signs like this to change the rules and the system, and abolish the electoral college.

- There were more nasty grams between family, friends, colleagues, and strangers on Facebook and Twitter.

- There were protests and riots.

- There was American flag burning.

- There was yelling, cursing, and crying.

Of course, I understand that the election was an upset to half the population (actually, maybe over half of the popular vote).

And I certainly agree with people who are against bigotry and racism--these are things that should ALWAYS be condemned in no uncertain terms!

However, while trying to take the moral high ground, there is plenty of bigotry and hate to go around--such as branding other people as racists (even if they are not so), calling tens of millions of people "deplorables," and stating that they are unequivocally "unredeemable." 

Similarly, while attacking one candidate for his sexual banter and (possibly) conduct, the husband of the other candidate was himself impeached from the presidency for his infidelities.  

And no matter how big a feminist our beliefs, rather than falsely blaming an unjust "glass ceiling," in her concession speech yesterday, the candidate should have done a mea culpa and acknowledged perhaps a very understandable "corruption ceiling" that put the brakes on her own trust, likability and electability.

Reminiscent to condemning the violence at the Trump rallies, the hypocrisy of it all, was when it become known that the operatives of the DCN themselves, in Project Veritas, were the ones actually sparking and doing the violence.

Further, one candidate was ruthlessly denigrated for even suggesting that there was election fraud going on, even while indeed town hall questions were being passed from the media by the DNC's own chairperson to the other candidate and the prior chairperson was fired from the DNC's actions in their rigging the primary against Bernie Sanders who would have had a decent chance at actually winning "the whole enchilada."

But what happened to everyone committing to accepting the results of a free and fair election in a democracy--is that only if YOUR candidate wins?

Whether it's with hate, name-calling, violence, and sore losing...maybe there is a lot of bad behavior along with "calling the tea kettle black" going on. 

While we call for the "orderly transitions" of power in Egypt, for Britain with Brexit, and elsewhere in the world, perhaps our leaders should hold ourselves to similar standards of conduct here. 

It's time to STOP the HATE, BIGOTRY, AND VIOLENCE on all sides, and come together to do something positive for this country.

The national security and welfare of the country is at stake, but even more so, the soul of it is still mired in corruption and lies of a very ugly election. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

After The Election Hypocrisy

Vote to Have A Say

People vote to get representation in political office for what they believe or want. 

- Gun Rights
- Abortion Rights
- Civil Rights
- Social Entitlements
- International Engagement
- Strong Defense
- Low Taxes 
- Etc. Etc. Etc.

But now, cities like Los Angeles that are looking to boost voter turnout want to offer cash prizes. 

The cash prize "might include a prize as high as $50,000."

Nice (not!)--head to the polls like you do to buy a Powerball ticket. 

Votes, like love, is not something that should be bought.

For those fortunate enough to live in a free country, voting is a special right where everyone can have a say and influence the world around them. 

Instead of focusing on handing out rides or money to go and vote, maybe instead we should create awareness of what a great opportunity it is to live in a  democracy and be able to chart our own course rather than live like so many around the globe under the rule of dictators and tyrants.

Voting is a great privilege for those who care to stand up and make a difference by going to the polls, voting is not an ATM machine. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Vote to Have A Say