5 ms·

I have. And the poster is right: Adam Curry's other podcast (No Agenda) can accurately be described as right-wing propaganda. If you don't believe me, I challen

I have. And the poster is right: Adam Curry's other podcast (No Agenda) can accurately be described as right-wing propaganda. If you don't believe me, I challenge you to listen to the show for a week and find anything positive they might say about anyone who isn't a Republican in Trump's orbit.

nailer 6y ago
There's a massive difference between right wing and alt right
- dguaraglia 6y ago
  Is there, though? What are the main differences do you see between the alt-right 'platform' (as it were) and today's Republican party's platform?
  - nailer 6y ago
    Yes there is. Look up 'alt right'. The Republican party is not arguing for a white ethno state. Hell the democrats are led by Joe Biden who believes in segregation (see Biden's 'jungle' comments about school desegregation), by that standard they're more alt right than the republicans are.
    - nailer 6y ago
      Reference verifying above: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-racial-jungle-quote/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-racial-jungle-quote/
    - dguaraglia 6y ago
      Trump literally lost a court case because he wouldn't allow black people into his buildings [1]. But sure, let's talk about how Democrats are the real racists... [1]https://www.npr.org/2016/09/29/495955920/donald-trump-plagued-by-decades-old-housing-discrimination-case https://www.npr.org/2016/09/29/495955920/donald-trump-plague...
      - leahey 6y ago
        You forget Lincoln was a Republican. /s
      - nailer 6y ago
        > Trump literally lost a court case From the article you just linked, Trump did not lose the court case. Biden was literally pro segregation. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-racial-jungle-quote/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-racial-jungle-quote/
      - leahey 6y ago
        Other commenters are attempting to split hairs by pretending the consent decree the Trump Management entered in to (https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/FH-NY-0024-0034.pdf https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/FH-NY-0024-0034....) indicates they engaged in no wrongdoing. Reality is, they did plenty (https://vault.fbi.gov/trump-management-company https://vault.fbi.gov/trump-management-company). But, as you say, the game is to divert attention and dodge the issue -- as illustrated by the fact that you asked for a distinction between the modern GOP and alt-right and our friend here started talking about Biden.
    - leahey 6y ago
      Kind of makes the point whenever alt-right apologists need to look to comments from an opponent from 40 years ago to prove their guy, today, is aokay. Akin to how the GOP likes to point out where the Democrats were during Jim Crow. Speaks much more about where your party is in 2020 than anything else.
      - nailer 6y ago
        Not sure who is apologizing for the alt right, I haven't seen anyone doing this within these comments or elsewhere on HN. If it's you in your personal life, then you should definitely stop supporting the alt right - racism is evil. I'm aware you think being for segregation 40 years ago is acceptable. I reiterate: racism is evil even 40 years ago. Biden's comments about poor people vs white people were literally last year. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/09/us/politics/joe-biden-poor-kids.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/09/us/politics/joe-biden-poo... Racism is evil even in 2019.
        leahey 6y ago
        Ha. Boy, you make a lot of assumptions.
        nailer 6y ago
        It seems to think you believe pointing out Biden's support of segregation is bad. That's not an assumption, that's logic. It seems you making an argument about Biden being racist a while ago means he's no longer racist. Evidence suggests the contrary. That's not an assumption, that's logic.
        leahey 6y ago
        I made no such arguments. I'm not sure you know what logic means, though, so I forgive your mistake.
        nailer 6y ago
markkanof 6y ago
What your saying is just not true. I'm as certain as a third party can be that neither of them want Trump to be president. They follow where the media goes and take exception to the way much of the media bends the truth when they report on Trump and also spend all their time losing their minds about the tweets that he puts out rather than actually reporting about important issues. And here is the important part. They don't do this because they like or want to defend Trump, they do it because they want to point out the dishonesty in a lot of what passes for journalism these days. Their coverage is not all about Trump, they talk about all sorts of current events.
- dguaraglia 6y ago
  > They follow where the media goes and take exception to the way much of the media bends the truth when they report on Trump They didn't seem to care that much about right-wing media doing exactly the same during all of Obama's presidency. In fact, they regularly would regurgitate their talking points and promoted ridiculous conspiracy theories, including Birtherism. > They don't do this because they like or want to defend Trump, they do it because they want to point out the dishonesty in a lot of what passes for journalism these days. Then you would expect them to cover such dishonest media outlets as OANN, Fox News, The Blaze and Breitbart, right? And yet they've probably spent more time covering a single show (The View) than they have spent covering the full programming of all those outlets. They can claim they deconstruct media all they want, but they can't claim they have 'no agenda'.
- leahey 6y ago
  This is a combination of regurgitated mantras from the show and fan fiction. They defend Trump at every turn and only hold his feet to the fire for things like “Tweeting too much.” You need only look to the subreddit for the show to see those that fell off over the years owing to their alt right turn. Let’s not pretend this is some accusation you’ve never heard before. As the other replier said, they constantly and consistently repeated the Obama birtherism nonsense. Now they defend Trump. There is a throughline there, you just don’t want to see it.

nailer 6y ago

There's a massive difference between right wing and alt right

dguaraglia 6y ago
Is there, though? What are the main differences do you see between the alt-right 'platform' (as it were) and today's Republican party's platform?
- nailer 6y ago
  Yes there is. Look up 'alt right'. The Republican party is not arguing for a white ethno state. Hell the democrats are led by Joe Biden who believes in segregation (see Biden's 'jungle' comments about school desegregation), by that standard they're more alt right than the republicans are.
  - nailer 6y ago
    Reference verifying above: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-racial-jungle-quote/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-racial-jungle-quote/
  - dguaraglia 6y ago
    Trump literally lost a court case because he wouldn't allow black people into his buildings [1]. But sure, let's talk about how Democrats are the real racists... [1]https://www.npr.org/2016/09/29/495955920/donald-trump-plagued-by-decades-old-housing-discrimination-case https://www.npr.org/2016/09/29/495955920/donald-trump-plague...
    - leahey 6y ago
      You forget Lincoln was a Republican. /s
    - nailer 6y ago
      > Trump literally lost a court case From the article you just linked, Trump did not lose the court case. Biden was literally pro segregation. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-racial-jungle-quote/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-racial-jungle-quote/
    - leahey 6y ago
      Other commenters are attempting to split hairs by pretending the consent decree the Trump Management entered in to (https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/FH-NY-0024-0034.pdf https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/FH-NY-0024-0034....) indicates they engaged in no wrongdoing. Reality is, they did plenty (https://vault.fbi.gov/trump-management-company https://vault.fbi.gov/trump-management-company). But, as you say, the game is to divert attention and dodge the issue -- as illustrated by the fact that you asked for a distinction between the modern GOP and alt-right and our friend here started talking about Biden.
  - leahey 6y ago
    Kind of makes the point whenever alt-right apologists need to look to comments from an opponent from 40 years ago to prove their guy, today, is aokay. Akin to how the GOP likes to point out where the Democrats were during Jim Crow. Speaks much more about where your party is in 2020 than anything else.
    - nailer 6y ago
      Not sure who is apologizing for the alt right, I haven't seen anyone doing this within these comments or elsewhere on HN. If it's you in your personal life, then you should definitely stop supporting the alt right - racism is evil. I'm aware you think being for segregation 40 years ago is acceptable. I reiterate: racism is evil even 40 years ago. Biden's comments about poor people vs white people were literally last year. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/09/us/politics/joe-biden-poor-kids.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/09/us/politics/joe-biden-poo... Racism is evil even in 2019.
      - leahey 6y ago
        Ha. Boy, you make a lot of assumptions.
        nailer 6y ago
        It seems to think you believe pointing out Biden's support of segregation is bad. That's not an assumption, that's logic. It seems you making an argument about Biden being racist a while ago means he's no longer racist. Evidence suggests the contrary. That's not an assumption, that's logic.
        leahey 6y ago
        I made no such arguments. I'm not sure you know what logic means, though, so I forgive your mistake.
        nailer 6y ago

markkanof 6y ago

What your saying is just not true. I'm as certain as a third party can be that neither of them want Trump to be president. They follow where the media goes and take exception to the way much of the media bends the truth when they report on Trump and also spend all their time losing their minds about the tweets that he puts out rather than actually reporting about important issues. And here is the important part. They don't do this because they like or want to defend Trump, they do it because they want to point out the dishonesty in a lot of what passes for journalism these days. Their coverage is not all about Trump, they talk about all sorts of current events.

dguaraglia 6y ago
> They follow where the media goes and take exception to the way much of the media bends the truth when they report on Trump They didn't seem to care that much about right-wing media doing exactly the same during all of Obama's presidency. In fact, they regularly would regurgitate their talking points and promoted ridiculous conspiracy theories, including Birtherism. > They don't do this because they like or want to defend Trump, they do it because they want to point out the dishonesty in a lot of what passes for journalism these days. Then you would expect them to cover such dishonest media outlets as OANN, Fox News, The Blaze and Breitbart, right? And yet they've probably spent more time covering a single show (The View) than they have spent covering the full programming of all those outlets. They can claim they deconstruct media all they want, but they can't claim they have 'no agenda'.
leahey 6y ago
This is a combination of regurgitated mantras from the show and fan fiction. They defend Trump at every turn and only hold his feet to the fire for things like “Tweeting too much.” You need only look to the subreddit for the show to see those that fell off over the years owing to their alt right turn. Let’s not pretend this is some accusation you’ve never heard before. As the other replier said, they constantly and consistently repeated the Obama birtherism nonsense. Now they defend Trump. There is a throughline there, you just don’t want to see it.