We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
We all get things wrong. What makes this more worrying is simply that all these false narratives just happen to favor the interests of the left and the Democratic party. And corrections, when they occur, take up a fraction of the space of the original falsehoods. These are not randos tweeting false rumors. They are the established press.
And at some point, you wonder: what narrative are they pushing now that is also bullshit?
Is it deliberate political lying, or do they want to believe their own BS?
It is deliberate political lying to defend their shared ideology with the authoritarian democrats. Throw in the overwhelmingly authoritarian academic circle and you now know the state of American politics. The politicians and academia live primarily off the taxpayer. Biden BBB now wants to fund journalists. They want to complete the circle in that religion.
I find it laughable that Sullivan thinks the narrative has been proven false and the media has gotten it wrong. Not according to the media; the narrative they're pushing is that they got the narrative correct and everything they've said has been proven true. When they can put Adam Schiff on the TV to push his same old lies that it's a proven fact that Donald Trump colluded with the Russians, does that sound even a tiny bit like the media is suggesting they might have gotten it wrong?
While Sullivan comes close to describing the depth of the depravity of the corporate media but only close. He admits he relies on the corporate media for a lot but then asks how he can trust them. He obviously hasn’t really internalized what he has described for us.
Could that be because he’s still holding onto what he says “ought” to be? He calls Rittenhouse “reckless” and likely a “naive dangerous fool.” He also says that Rittenhouse was not a hero.
So a boy took time out of his life to try to clean up a mess that others created and still others allowed. Then he took up arms to help protect somebody else’s property. A BOY did that while “men” sat and not only did nothing but ordered other people to also do nothing. Was he supposed to stay home, watch a movie on TV instead? What would make him not a “dangerous fool?” What would make him a hero?
It seems to me that Sullivan is missing something very fundamental.
Agree. I chalked off Sullivan a couple of decades ago. Just one more grifter.
Crichton summed up America and its media very well.
“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”
– Michael Crichton (1942-2008)
Sullivan doesn’t include any of his own past in his denunciation of media and still uses “right-wing” as an insult. He’s as biased and hateful as the rest of his colleagues, but has a tiny bit of shame for their conduct but not his own.