Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Blue Nation Review is a propaganda site [View all]merrily
(45,251 posts)116. Not at all. See Reply 109 and the entire subthread, starting around Reply 45, especially 105
where the bs about Bernie running as a Dem for money from the DNC or state parties finally hit the fan--after your multiple dodges along the way--so you tried to change the subject and claim I was the one dodging.
And please do have every bit of the great day your role in this subthread earned you, or have a good day, which would be the opposite of what your role in this subthread earned you. Your choice.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
185 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
lol, yes a site which is "a reliable defender of and advocate for" one of our top Dems = propaganda.
PeaceNikki
Mar 2016
#2
"Sale Of Blue Nation Review Gives Hillary Clinton Camp Its Very Own Media Outlet"
arcane1
Mar 2016
#6
You do realize that Sanders voted against DOMA based on a states' rights argument
annavictorious
Mar 2016
#178
Explain the difference between what Peter Daou does and what Joseph Goebbels did.
revbones
Mar 2016
#51
Fer chrissakes, that YOU demand to be told the difference makes your mission here pretty obvious.
blm
Mar 2016
#118
It seems like some sites advocate for Clinton and some sites advocate for Sanders. N/t
gollygee
Mar 2016
#3
Didn't. But JPR is not run by anyone on the payroll of the DNC or Bernie of anyone else.
merrily
Mar 2016
#23
Is it, outside your own mind, I mean? I named the two largest, the ones most people here post on
merrily
Mar 2016
#24
Yes, one of the differences is on DU both Bernie and Hillary supporters can post and promote their
seaglass
Mar 2016
#44
No, they're all propaganda. People risk a ban or hide here if they say they will not vote for
merrily
Mar 2016
#52
This is a site to promote Dems. Any Dem who can get enough votes to be the nominee of the party
seaglass
Mar 2016
#93
As I said, this is a site to promote establishment Dems. And I already explained why I excluded JPR.
merrily
Mar 2016
#97
Kind of like Bernie supporters can post all the time on hillaryclintonsupporters.com?
LiberalArkie
Mar 2016
#55
Did I say that? The Hillary supporters site is similar to the Bernie supporters site, I don't
seaglass
Mar 2016
#94
When i see you and your friends call out your fellow Sanders supporters for using right wing
hrmjustin
Mar 2016
#15
Are you ok with rw material being used here to attack a democratic party candidate?
hrmjustin
Mar 2016
#58
I take this as I don't care about rw WV sources being used to attack Hillary but how
hrmjustin
Mar 2016
#69
Bnr has been used on this site for a long time. It has been accepted for what it is.
hrmjustin
Mar 2016
#81
"Propaganda site" is the Bernie-or-Bust term for "anything not owned by Rupert Murdoch".
DanTex
Mar 2016
#18
Actually, he's a Democrat, not that facts matter much in Hillary-bashing circles.
DanTex
Mar 2016
#30
Seems to be whatever he gets money to be. Used to hit the Clintons from the right, now he works
merrily
Mar 2016
#45
You made up a quote and falsely attributed it to Sanders to deflect from my post about Brock.
merrily
Mar 2016
#60
Um, no, I don't. That's merely something else you made up to deflect from Brock.
merrily
Mar 2016
#63
He gave an interview where he said just that. And actually Brock didn't change for money,
DanTex
Mar 2016
#64
Then you should link to his actual words with context. Brock SAID what he changed for. Why should I
merrily
Mar 2016
#70
Try for a more intelligible first sentence, please. And when was Bernie a Republican again?
merrily
Mar 2016
#72
If I knew what the hell it was supposed to mean, I could probably fix it. As it is, I don't, or
merrily
Mar 2016
#80
It simply meant that, yes, I have seen the context of the remarks. It's clear what he meant.
DanTex
Mar 2016
#82
Please stop telling me what I supposedly know and what is supposedly clear to me. Making that kind
merrily
Mar 2016
#86
Media coverage of his run from shows like MTP. No wonder you didn't want to link.
merrily
Mar 2016
#95
Absolutely false and not supported by the story you linked. Neither MTP nor DNC is funding him.
merrily
Mar 2016
#98
Which whole Democratic infrastructure that the DNC pays for has been supporting Bernie again?
merrily
Mar 2016
#100
Multiple posts that make up stuff, make no sense, only to end by changing the subject again!
merrily
Mar 2016
#109
LOL! Dodge. You know, if I supported Bernie, I would at least know how I felt about his economic
DanTex
Mar 2016
#114
Not at all. See Reply 109 and the entire subthread, starting around Reply 45, especially 105
merrily
Mar 2016
#116
See Reply 116 I can understand why someone who got owned as badly as you did wants to change the
merrily
Mar 2016
#127
You could just say yes or no instead of pointing in circles. Or you could keep dodging...
DanTex
Mar 2016
#128
You will then provide us with an objective list of approved source materia
LanternWaste
Mar 2016
#29
Oh, please with the victim cards. Bernie got called a motherfucker and the jury voted to leave.
merrily
Mar 2016
#47
And? What Hillary supporters post here about Bernie and his supporters W/O EVEN A RW SOURCE is sick.
merrily
Mar 2016
#89
The problem is that Hillary followers think anything negative is a right wing lie nt
revbones
Mar 2016
#151
Why? Because they are Democratic or because they support Clinton? This is a Democratic board.
seabeyond
Mar 2016
#65
Of course it is the Democratic perspective. You do not like it so define it as propaganda.
seabeyond
Mar 2016
#110
No it is not a bit ridiculous. When Hayes talks about Sanders, we do not yell... Propaganda,
seabeyond
Mar 2016
#115
Oh, I guess I must've missed it when Cenk sold TYT to one of the campaign's super-PACs
revbones
Mar 2016
#129
I have no problem with BNR. I like them poking Cruz and Trump with sharp sticks.
Lucinda
Mar 2016
#123
That!! We need to keep calling out the hypocrisy but really is tiresome since there is so much. nt
Jitter65
Mar 2016
#139
There are plenty of sites shilling for Hillary that are not owned by her super-PAC
revbones
Mar 2016
#153
"propaganda"? Can you back up that accusation. where has that site misrepresented any facts? Or
Bill USA
Mar 2016
#155
Other than what I posted, I don't feel your question warrants further information.
revbones
Mar 2016
#156
in other words you can't back up your statement that BNR traffics in propaganda
Bill USA
Mar 2016
#157
YOU have made an empty charge. It is up to you to prove it. To do this you have to show
Bill USA
Mar 2016
#177
as I said. you made the charge. it's up to you to prove it. You cannot back up you charge so
Bill USA
Mar 2016
#182
Anyone doubting the veracity of the claim can just look at the home page of BNR
revbones
Mar 2016
#168