WaPo is a corporate propaganda mill...

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

I'm more likely to use their articles as toilet paper, might be worth more that way.

Ever since they tried to ratfuck Sanders over his activism photos they can go die, they are dead to progressives

[riversedge]

1. Oh you have a sad?

[JoePhilly]

3. Some Sanders supporters prefer ...

... RW sources.

[Bluenorthwest]

11. WaPo reported 147 FBI agents investigating Hillary, I paid no mind to it because as the OP says they

are hacks who report and later research if they are called out on their fictions. Is it your assertion that WaPo was correct about the 147 Special Agents? Or was that their only error? I see them smearing both our candidates with falsehoods.

[JoePhilly]

13. My point is many Bernie supporters ...

... will immediately take as fact any attack on Hillary and from absolutely any source.

And many of them won't care if it's debunked because that's not the point.

The goal is to make as much negative noise as possible.

[Bluenorthwest]

15. My point is about the WaPost being guilty of smearing both Democratic candidates with lies.

My point is that I agree with the OP and any sane Clinton supporter should also agree after that demonstration of their lack of professional ethics and skills in the publishing of all of that fiction about Hillary Clinton. A cursory search of DU will present many threads and hundreds of posts from Clinton supporters objecting to the WaPost and characterizing them in much the same way the OP does, correctly as gossip merchants and publishers of rumors with agenda.

I can't even follow your circuitous verbiage which seems intended to make the WaPost's poor standards into some sermon about the flaws of Bernie supporters. Washington Post lied about Bernie, so fuck them. Washington Post lied about Hilary, so fuck them. Washington Post lies and then defends those lies, so fuck them. Every single day, do not trust them nor build opinion based on what they are claiming to be facts.

It's amazing to me that a paper that has been so incredibly unfair to both Democratic candidates has any fans here or anyone who wants to distract from the rat fucking they are involved in.

[SheenaR]

17. Yet your side blissfully cites Blue Nation Review regularly n/t

[beam me up scottie]

27. Your side cited Stormfront, tomato bubble, other anti-Semitic sites and red baits on a daily basis.

And many of them won't care if it's debunked because that's not the point.

The goal is to make as much negative noise as possible.

Both sides use questionable sources but some are MUCH worse than others.

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

4. No just a friendly reminder...

Some people seem to have forgotten because I saw some WaPo smears posted here

[Skwmom]

2. All you need to do is let people know it is owned by Amazon's Sweatshop King and people understand

the game and that it is a propaganda tool for corporate candidates.

It saves a lot of time in debunking false articles.

And the appalling conduct of Jonathan Capehart with the full support of the Washington Post also exposes the Washington Post for the trash propaganda tool that it is.

[riversedge]

5. Hitting on the messenger is an old Rovian trick. My bet is that you love the WPOST when

they have delightful articles about Sanders.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. Hillary supporters have at least 147 reasons to mistrust WaPost....

The Washington Post’s revealing blunder: Their screwup over the FBI’s Hillary probe is a great example of why Americans hate the press

Post gets played by Republicans looking to sink Clinton by wildly exaggerating the number of agents probing her
http://www.salon.com/2016/03/31/the_washington_posts_revealing_blunder_their_screwup_over_the_fbis_hillary_probe_is_a_great_example_of_why_americans_hate_the_press/


Edited to add a quote from you!!! Here you are complaining about people who posted from WaPo when it was bashing at Hillary:
"And several of those MisInformation articles were brought to DU--
gleefully. over and over-with hundreds of REC's."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511608380#post7

and edited again, here is you citing WaPost today...after castigating others for doing the same and just after they smeared Hillary about the 147 agents!!!!!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511629537




Situational ethics are not ethics at all.

[riversedge]

18. I know--fact is they hit on both Dems. I did not say

I was pleased with the post. They hit on opportunities to hit both Dems. That was my point.

[Bluenorthwest]

20. No you characterized criticism of WaPost as a Rovian trick.

Sorry, you typed what you typed and it is the opposite of the stance you took on WaPost when they were critical of Hillary. Yet you use their links critical of Bernie all the time. They bash both candidates with lies, as the OP says and yet their defenders in this thread are all Hillary supporters. Defending the paper that lied about 147 FBI agents investigating her. Because today's subject is that same paper's lies about Bernie.

You and the other Hillary supporters should join me and the OP is condemning the Washington Post. But that's not what you are doing.

[riversedge]

23. Of course I would hit on the post when

they hit on Hillary.

Sanders fans are good at starting petitions.--in this case to condemn the WPost. I will sign.

[Bluenorthwest]

24. That's no defense at all. Your actions are your own.

I've made my point here. Thanks for being the case in point.

[Skwmom]

25. Spare me. The Washington Post is about as much a news organization as Fox News. n/t

[Nye Bevan]

29. And yet some of the very best DUers still cite it as a source

when they like its stories.

This one for example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511092070

[noretreatnosurrender]

6. They've been dead to progressives

for quite some time. This isn't anything new.

[DanTex]

7. We get it, Bernie fans prefer the Washington Times.

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

8. *Yawn*...

We use sources like Thom Hartmann, The Young Turks, Secular Talk, Humanist Report, Huffington Post, Inquistr, Democracy Now...

v

[riversedge]

19. and the Wash Times also

[SidDithers]

22. And the Washington Free Beacon...

which has been used lots around here in the past couple months.

Sid

[SusanCalvin]

32. Sorry, doesn't follow.

I'm sure there's some kind of logical fallacy I don't remember the name of here.

[BernieforPres2016]

9. Jonathan Capehart would have been fired for that smear by any reputable publication

Last edited Sat Apr 2, 2016, 08:22 PM - Edit history (1)

in the days when newspapers were family owned, valued their reputations and had ethical lines that reporters and opinion columnists could not cross.

[G_j]

14. yep nt

[Skwmom]

26. How in the heck can they teach ethics in journalism classes anymore? It doesn't seem to exist. n/t

[SusanCalvin]

31. OMG yes.

Every time I see him, I want to throw something at the TV.

[LexVegas]

10. ...

[dana_b]

16. yes, true. But I wouldn't use it as TP

because we would never buy it.

[SidDithers]

21. Awww...

You have a sadz?

Sid

[Cali_Democrat]

28. "they can go die"

Why would you wish death on anyone?

That's not very progressive of you.

[SusanCalvin]

30. Yes. And water is wet. nt

[betsuni]

33. Really?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511625662

[WhiteTara]

34. under the bus with WP

the bus is really big now.