MiscreantMouse

  • 11 Posts
  • 86 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 24th, 2023

help-circle




  • Lol, I’m not hoarding anything, just trying to get you to actually think critically about the problems inherent in your approach. And yep, I’m being smug, because you refuse to think seriously about your responses, while getting all huffy because someone dared to point out how unworkable the easy answers are. But calling me names totally strengthens your position though, good job there.

    You keep mentioning ‘total revolution’ as the obvious solution, and I would like you to think about why that is. I think we need big structural changes if we want to claw back anything approximating a democracy. You keep saying I won’t give you a solution, and it’s baffling to me that you can’t get there on your own, but if you need spoon-feeding, imo one of the most fundamental things we need do is go back to taxing the wealthy fairly, in order to pay for social services. gasp

    It’s just boggling to me that you apparently can’t even begin to see taxes as something that would help the poor, rather than hurt them, a perspective I’d suspect you’ve picked up from our deeply biased news media. Turns out, instead of making the poor sell their plasma, we should actually be making billionaires sell their yachts and vacation homes.



  • Hey man, call me an asshole if it makes you feel better, I’m just pointing out the problems as I see them, and the giant gaping holes in your suggestions. Widespread political corruption isn’t something we can safely ignore. The public can’t crowdfund journalism in a sustainable way, unless they get a substantial increase in disposable wealth.

    That’s the world as it currently exists.

    One Koch donation is worth more than the locals can ever give to local journalism, and most local outlets are just Sinclair Broadcast Group in a rubber mask anyway. But sure, be angry that you can’t fix it by parroting a facile solution, that really helps us get there.

    In response to your edit:
    You’re so close to getting it omg. Keep trying. It’s almost like this is a problem that’s been considered before, and had a solution. How could we ensure a public service is publicly funded? Should our poorest even be selling their plasma to pay taxes? That almost sounds like a whole other problem… If only we had a way to regulate these things. But of course, we can only consider solutions within a capitalist model, cuz 'merica, so obviously there’s no solution.


  • Because you’re obviously struggling, what I’m saying that objective & effective journalism is vital to informed decision-making in a democracy, and we’re not getting it because journalism in the US is run as a business¸ which imo will always end with media focusing exclusively on whatever makes them the most money, irrespective of the truth. If we want real journalism we need to view it, and fund it, as a public service. The problem is systemic, and our news media will continue to fail us until the system is rectified.



  • Ah yes, clearly we should simply accept that corruption is endemic, unavoidable really, and expect our press to ignore it.

    Tale as old as time, I’m sure it’ll work out fine.

    They have more important things to focus on anyway! Like Hunter Biden’s laptop.

    And of course, Journalism’s collapsing payment model is entirely the public’s fault. Just give them more money you lazy bums!








  • Holy moving goalposts batman!

    OP:

    Apparently that’s not what he’s standing up for. They’re not the right religion. When Republicans make decisions, [that seem] irrational or against their normal behavior. Always assume there’s bigotry tied to it.

    In your first response you wrote:

    Not saying you’re wrong, but the article gives absolutely no evidence that this is the case.

    So I provided a press release quoting the AG’s anti-muslim bigotry as evidence.

    Your response:

    This doesn’t really show his preference for any other religion, though. In fact, he specifically used the word “compelled” when talking about Catholicism.

    So I provided further evidence of his religious preferences.

    Your response:

    So what if he only wants reading proficiency so kids “can read the bible at home with their family.”? Bigotry aside, he’s doing what he’s supposed to be doing.

    I indicated that the point in the post you originally responded to is pretty well supported by the evidence…

    Your response:

    So? He’s not trying to jam that religion into classrooms.

    I’m done, please keep better track of your point in the future



  • I mean, he’s a protestant evangelical, so he’s not a big fan of catholicism, but alongside his fearmongering about muslims, he definitely shows plenty of preference for his particular religion. Here’s another quote from the press release:

    “I would prefer we focus on reading proficiency so they can read the Bible at home with their family. That’s where religion is best taught: in homes and in churches, with the loving guidance of parents and pastors”

    I’m certainly glad he’s fighting these religious charter schools, for whatever reason, but I think it’s silly to pretend his motivations are anything but bigotry and bias toward his favorite sect.