Don't link to COUNTERPUNCH. It's a far-RW racist trojan horse (No Click On It)

[uhnope]

Last edited Mon Jul 27, 2015, 08:45 PM - Edit history (1)

Most DUers already know that Counterpunch has no credibility, but this new analysis is the final nail in the CP coffin. They draw you in with Chomsky or Amy Goodman but they mostly publish far-right, racist (white supremacist) authors.
ON EDIT: And clicking on CP gives them revenue so don't do it (Hat tip NuclearDem)
http://meldungen-aus-dem-exil.noblogs.org/post/2015/07/19/counterpunch-or-suckerpunch/

How ‘America’s Best Political Newsletter’ Mainstreams the Far Right

CounterPunch, which bills itself as ‘America’s best political newsletter’, offering ‘independent investigative journalism’, tends to figure quite prominently in the reading lists of left-leaning activists, who doubtlessly appreciate its consistent antiwar stance, its critical analysis on US economic and foreign policy and US-sponsored Israeli apartheid, and the regular contributions from such leading Left writers as John Pilger, Noam Chomsky, Paul Street, Jeremy Scahill, and Tariq Ali. Indeed, CounterPunch generally tends to be thought of as a Left media outlet. However, in writing for, and sharing articles published on, CP, Leftists are unwittingly helping to promote the agenda of the far right.
...
In addition to the authors relied on by CP for its left cred, ‘America’s best political newsletter’ also regularly publishes ‘independent investigative journalism’ by a wide variety of white supremacists, including Paul Craig Roberts, editor of the white nationalist website VDare, Ron Paul (who poses for photo ops with neo-Nazis and warns of ‘race war’), and Alison Weir, holocaust denier Israel Shamir, and that perennial saboteur of the Palestinian solidarity movement, Gilad Atzmon, author of the racist The Wandering Who.

Although there are some who have expressed concern on this problematic mix, when I have raised this issue in discussions with others in left activist circles, I have often found that it is dismissed as a triviality. In these discussions, the white supremacist contingent tends to be attributed to an unwillingness to bow to ‘political correctness’ or a mere desire to ‘piss off liberals’, and generally believed to be an insignificant deviation from an otherwise clear leftist editorial line, the sort of thing only an ‘ideological purist’ could get excited about.

My own research into the editorial practices at CounterPunch shows otherwise. Not only have white supremacist authors long been a fixture at CP; their ideology is shared by members of the editorial collective. All in all, it is entirely reasonable to say that the formation of a Querfront (an alliance between the far right and the left) is a longstanding project of the newsletter, consistently endorsed by the decisions taken by CP editors and their own stated positions.

READ IT http://meldungen-aus-dem-exil.noblogs.org/post/2015/07/19/counterpunch-or-suckerpunch/

[ericson00]

1. all the stuff on that site

particularly on the Middle East is garbage

[Octafish]

2. No, thank you. I don't need a censor. I can make up my own mind.

For instance, from 2010 (when a lot of wet-behind-the-ears asshats had never heard of CounterPunch

The Koch Empire and Americans for Prosperity (Pam Martens)

[uhnope]

4. it's not a hard concept. Don't link to FOX, STORMFRONT either

or any other poisoned source

[Octafish]

8. You should read more. CounterPunch gives you news and info you won't find anywhere else.

Did I tell you that you would agree with every article or author? No. You will learn a great deal at CounterPunch, such as this on the banksters:

The Paulson-Bernanke Bank Bailout Plan

by MICHAEL HUDSON
CounterPunch, Sept. 22, 2008

Saturday’s $700 billion junk mortgage bailout is the largest and worst giveaway since a corrupt Congress gave land grants to the railroad barons a century and a half ago. If it goes through, it will shape the coming century by giving finance unprecedented power over debtors – homebuyers, industry, state and local government, and the federal government as well.

SNIP...

I should add that the solution does not lie simply in creating a new regulatory system, much less a single regulatory agency. After all, it was at Wall Street’s command that the Bush Administration installed deregulators in all the key regulatory positions. This meant that regulations didn’t matter at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), at the Fed under Alan Greenspan, at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under Mr. Cox (after William H. Donaldson resigned when the White House would not let him regulate as much as he thought necessary) or at the Department of Justice under Bush yes-men such as Alberto Gonzales. Politics and people have turned out to be more important than the law. We have seen the Supreme Court scrap the Constitution in the 2000 election – with acquiescence from the Democrats, starting with Mr. Gore’s refusal to contest Florida.

To appoint a single regulator would prevent all other regulators – and law enforcement officers, attorneys general, the SEC and so forth – from enforcing honest financial policies in the event that an incoming president should appoint another Greenspan, Gonzales or other ideological extremist averse to the idea of applying existing regulations and honest laws. Under these conditions “consolidated regulation” would mean a free ride for crooks much like J. Edgar Hoover gave the Mafia under his tenure.

My alternative solutions are as simple as Mr. Paulson’s, but of course are quite different. The public interest does indeed call for maintaining the economy’s basic credit, money-transfer, credit card and depository checking and savings functions. But not under the current venal and predatory management practices. It is this management that has lobbied so hard for deregulation, and whose industry representatives have insisted so strongly to place extremist ideological deregulators into the economy’s major positions. Therefore, the Treasury only should buy junk mortgages at current market price. The losses should be taken in order to re-even out the wealth pyramid that has become so much steeper under the Greenspan-Bernanke ploys. The banks knew full well that these mortgages lacked underlying value. The price of making use of this borrowing facility is to forfeit all equity stock to the government. The Treasury should prohibit any financial institution that sells or swaps securities to the Fed from paying any dividends to shareholders or stock options and bonuses to managers. It also should give the government priority over other creditors. Otherwise, firms that have negative equity will benefit purely at public expense, using the money to pay dividends, bonuses and exorbitant salaries.

Second, we need to restore the Glass-Steagall separation of commercial banks from risk-taking investment banks, mortgage brokers and other financial-sector flotsam and jetsam. Break up the mergers between banks and casino sell-side financial and real estate institutions. Just the opposite is occurring: On Monday, Sept. 22, the financial universe was transformed by the announcement that Mr. Paulson’s Wall Street firm, Goldman Sachs, was transforming itself into a bank holding company. The casinos are to take over the banking system as big fish eat little fish in the present financial emergency. It looks like new giants are emerging, already larger than the government in terms of the magnitude of the debts they have run up – and certainly in their earning power. Indeed, who is to say that extracting interest from the U.S. economy will not emerge as the new form of taxation?

Third, re-write the bankruptcy laws to favor debtors once again, not creditors. This means reversing the current bankruptcy code sponsored by lobbies from the credit-card companies. The interests of the five million mortgage debtors faced with foreclosure and expropriation this year should rightly be placed above the interest (literally) of predatory creditors.

Fourth, sharply increase property taxes, shifting them back off labor and sales. We need to return to the classical idea of taxing unearned and unproductive income instead of adding to the price of labor and industry. What has been freed from the tax collector by the shift of taxes off property has not lowered the cost of housing and other real estate, or corporate costs of doing business. The income “freed” has ended up being paid to the banks as interest. The government still has had to raise money – but in the form of taxes that fall on labor’s wages and industry’s profits. So labor and industry now pay twice for what they formerly paid only once. They still pay the same overall amount of taxes, but also pay an equivalent amount of interest. The financial system is crowding out the government.

In the fifth place, we need to start discussing whether we really need a banking system that behaves in the way the present one does. In recent decades banks have made loans mainly to inflate asset prices by loading real estate and industry with interest-bearing debt. What if all banks were to be organized along the lines of savings banks, with 100% reserves. This is the Chicago Plan from the 1930s (currently revived by the American Monetary Institute, which holds its annual meeting this week in Chicago, by the way). This at least would go back to basics to provide a foundation from which to re-begin to discuss just what kind of credit the economy needs and what would be the best terms on which to structure financial markets.

CONTINUED...

http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/09/22/the-paulson-bernanke-bank-bailout-plan/

That was 2008, when we could've made the banksters put the money back. Instead, we bailed them out, including making AIG whole, 100-cents on the dollar, at a cost of millions who lost their homes and trillions from the US Treasury.

BTW: CounterPunch provides a forum for authors. That's also a lot different from Fox or Stormfront. From what I understand, they're filled with people who don't like to learn anything new. You know, uhnope, like censors.

[YoungDemCA]

25. What can we possibly learn from white supremacist authors?

Other than what sources to avoid at all costs?

[bravenak]

37. +1

[JustinL]

46. so Michael Hudson is a "white supremacist author"? n/t

[NCTraveler]

56. Please link to Michael Hudsons white supremacist writings. nt.

[MADem]

102. Or learning who thinks that kind of ugly, racist shit is worthwhile....? nt

[Oilwellian]

34. Michael Hudson is topnotch

I've always admired his work and he's not even a white supremacist.

[Ken Burch]

79. "I've always admired his work and he's not even a white supremacist"?

I realize you didn't mean it that way, but as written, that line wins the award for Worst Blurb in History

[Oilwellian]

91. Errr....

I was being facetious. Michael Hudson is published on Counterpunch, and according to the OP, that makes him a White Supremacist.

[MADem]

103. No, the OP says that there are way more wingnut/racist pigs posting there than there are lefties.

The lefties are bait to expose you to those hater kooks, in essence.

[kfreed]

158. Counterpunch - How crypto-fascists and white nationalists are infiltrating progressive circles

Political Research Associates:

By Spencer Sunshine, on March 5, 2015

"Crypto-fascists and pro-White separatists are entering and recruiting from progressive circles. This essay offers some guidelines for identifying and dealing with this growing problem.

For a printable brochure version, see bottom.

In the not-so-distant past, one had little problem identifying a White separatist. Generally, they came in two styles: white hoods and burning crosses, or oxblood Doc Martens and swastika tattoos. Both were usually shouting vulgar epithets about African-Americans, Jews, and LGBTQ folks. And their relationship with the Left was usually in the form of breaking either bookstore windows or activists’ bones—if not outright murder.1 Barring them from progressive spaces was an act of physical self-preservation—not a show of political principles in drawing a line against ideological racism and fascism.

Today, White separatists don’t always come in such easily identifiable forms, either in their dress or politics. A part of the White separatist and related Far Right movement has taken some unusual turns.2 Some fascists seek alliances with ultranationalist people of color—a few of whom, in turn, consider themselves fascists. New types of groups embrace White separatism under a larger banner of decentralization. For many decades, the Far Right has disguised or rebranded its politics by establishing front groups, deploying code words, or using other attempts to fly under the radar.3 As the years pass by, some of these projects have taken on lives of their own as these forms have been adopted by those with different agendas. Simultaneously, there is a revival of fascist influence within countercultural music scenes. And intertwined with these changes is a renewed attempt on the part of some White separatists to participate in, or cross-recruit from, progressive circles.

This essay was written after a multi-year collaboration with a number of anti-fascist activists; we have struggled to understand this new phenomenon and craft ways to deal with it. I will attempt to: explain why Far Right actors should not be allowed to participate in progressive circles, suggest criteria regarding where the line should be drawn in defining which politics are problematic enough to take action against, and offer suggestions on how to communicate with and encourage individuals who may want to leave those movements.

The Impact of the Far Right’s Presence on Progressive Circles

It can be tempting for progressive activists to ignore the presence of Far Right political and cultural actors in progressive spaces, particularly if they are not actively engaged in explicitly hateful and/or openly political organizing. This argument is heard almost every time a call for exclusion is made. Additionally, some people may ask why it is not adequate for organizations to simply declare that they are opposed to racism and fascism. Yet these are mistaken approaches; they underestimate the effect of Far Right groups and their ideologies, misunderstand how these groups often portray themselves, and don’t acknowledge that ideologies are propagandized and spread by real people."
- See more at: http://www.politicalresearch.org/2015/03/05/drawing-lines-against-racism-and-fascism/#sthash.ZTxLPqPG.dpuf

We might also take a closer look at that Ron Paul and Ralph Nader "Progressive - Libertarian Alliance" - so-called "progressives" rubbing shoulders with white supremacists:

Yeah, Libertarian Ron Paul is a a white supremacist: "Ron Paul's Neo-Confederate "South Was Right" Civil War Speech With Confederate Flag":

Could it get worse? It could: http://www.dialoginternational.com/dialog_international/2011/12/ron-paul-and-the-neo-fascists.html

Nader on Neo-Confederate Tom Woods' show:

Tom Woods, Libertarian white nationalist: http://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/guest-blogger-thomas-woods-southern-comfort

Also see PRA.org on Ron Paul and Tom Woods: "Behind the recent surge of nullification bills in state legislatures there is an ongoing battle for the soul of the GOP—and the future of the union itself. The nullification movement’s ideology is rooted in reverence for states’ rights and a theocratic and neo-Confederate interpretation of U.S. history. And Ron Paul, who is often portrayed as a libertarian, is the engine behind the movement."
- See more at: http://www.politicalresearch.org/2013/11/22/nullification-neo-confederates-and-the-revenge-of-the-old-right/#sthash.e7FdKZ2a.dpuf

By the way, this is not a progressive, it's a right-wing Libertarian con artist:

Glenn Greenwald, Unclaimed Territory:

"Friday, November 04, 2005
The reality of Latin American reaction to Bush

George Bush is here in Latin America this week, visiting Brazil and Argentina, and the standard reports of the American media are trying to depict a handful of isolated, juvenile socialist-organized "demonstrations" as some sort of sweeping, popular mass protest against Bush’s visit, thereby suggesting, yet again, that the Administration’s policies are flawed because people in other countries dislike Bush. As usual, the truth is vastly different than what the U.S. media is reporting (see UPDATE below) .

It is true that in this region (as is true for the U.S.), there remains a small, fervent band of left-wing fanatics with crazed enthusiasm for the worn-out, socialist/collectivist policies which have condemned millions upon millions of people throughout Latin America to poverty unimaginable to even the poorest Americans. These putative "mass demonstrations" in Argentina and Brazil are, in reality, nothing more than a few isolated spray-painting incidents of trite pacifist slogans in Brasilia, and a Cindy Sheehan-like "rally" of hard-core Socialists in Argentina led by an obese, Castro-idolozing, retired soccer player who found time away from his decade-old cocaine addiction to show up wearing an oh-so-clever t-shirt showing Bush's name spelled with a swastika."
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2005/11/reality-of-latin-american-reaction-to.html

He's STILL touring college campuses in the company of Ron Paul and Koch-funded white supremacist "constitutionalists" - The Libertarian "Liberty Tour":

[Octafish]

159. Liars and Paid Liars both stink up the place.

It's almost an ENIGMA, what the rich and powerful say. It's to hide what they do.



Case in point: One Neil Mallon Pierce Bush, son of then-president George Herbert Walker Bush and caught with his hand in a billion-dollar S&L cookie jar called Silverado Savings & Loan. Here's what Poppy did for his Number 3 Son:

How the Elite Talk in Code

EXCERPT...

A perfect example of code talk comes from a true master insider, George H.W. Bush, when his son, Neil, was caught red handed in the middle of the S&L crisis as a director of Sliverado Bank.

Did Bush lay out his cards and call in his operatives and say pull some strings, get my son out of this investigation (Remember Bush was president at the time.) No. Bush is too smooth. In his published collection of letters, All The Best, George Bush, he shows us how the heat is delicately taken off Neil. On page 449, there is this letter to Thomas Ludlow Ashley.

Ashley is a Yale University grad, and member of the secret society Skull and Bones along with Bush. Here's the letter:

The Honorable Thomas Ludlow Ashley
Association of Bank Holding Companies
Washington, D.C. 20005

Dear Lud,

Thank you for your good memo December 8th.

I would appreciate any help you can give Neil. He tells me he never had any insider dealings. He got off the Board early--long before I was elected President. The Denver paper apparently ran a very nice editorial about him on that. He is an outside director, and thus I guess has liability, but I can't believe his name would appear in the paper if it was Jones not Bush. In any event, I know that the guy is totally honest. I saw him in Denver and I think he is worried about the publicity and the "shame". I tell him not to worry about that but any advice you can give as this matter unfolds would be greatly appreciated by me. If it turns out there has been some marginal call, or he has done something wrong, needless to say there will be no intervention from his dad. But, I'm quite confident this is not true...

Warm regards,

George

Notice how smooth. No talk about getting Ashley anything for taking care of the matter. The nice touch about if Neil "has done something wrong", but the clear finish, he didn't.

CONTINUED...

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2009/07/how-elite-talk-in-code.html

When it comes to money and power, it really is a small world. We'd hear it more often, if only we were privy to the conversation.

When it comes to democracy, justice and freedom, We the People should be in on the discussion. And we should be fully informed. That leads the nation to make sound decisions.

As for Political Research Associates -- they are top notch, too.

[zappaman]

12. Yup, you sure do love Paul Craig Roberts, don't ya?

You post his stuff frequently.
Where is he on that list, my friend?

[Octafish]

15. I like what he wrote about Don Siegelman and the ''corrupt Bush administration.''

You might remember, you and SidDithers of DU tried to associate me with racists for bringing it up on DU.

Going to Jail for Being a Democrat: How Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman Got Roved

Once a popular governor of Alabama, Siegelman was framed in a crooked trial and sent to prison by the corrupt Bush administration.

By Paul Craig Roberts
CounterPunch, via AlterNet
March 2, 2008

Don Siegelman, a popular Democratic governor of Alabama, a Republican state, was framed in a crooked trial, convicted on June 29, 2006, and sent to Federal prison by the corrupt and immoral Bush administration.

The frame-up of Siegelman and businessman Richard Scrushy is so crystal clear and blatant that 52 former state attorney generals from across America, both Republicans and Democrats, have urged the US Congress to investigate the Bush administration's use of the US Department of Justice to rid themselves of a Democratic governor who "they could not beat fair and square," according to Grant Woods, former Republican Attorney General of Arizona and co-chair of the McCain for President leadership committee. Woods says that he has never seen a case with so "many red flags pointing to injustice."

The abuse of American justice by the Bush administration in order to ruin Siegelman is so crystal clear that even the corporate media organization CBS allowed "60 Minutes" to broadcast on February 24, 2008, a damning indictment of the railroading of Siegelman. Extremely coincidental "technical difficulties" caused WHNT, the CBS station covering the populous northern third of Alabama, to go black during the broadcast. The station initially offered a lame excuse of network difficulties that CBS in New York denied. The Republican-owned print media in Alabama seemed to have the inside track on every aspect of the prosecution's case against Siegelman. You just have to look at their editorials and articles following the 60 Minutes broadcast to get a taste of what counts for "objective journalism" in their mind.

The injustice done by the US Department of Justice (sic) to Siegelman is so crystal clear that a participant in Karl Rove's plan to destroy Siegelman can't live with her conscience. Jill Simpson, a Republican lawyer who did opposition research for Rove, testified under oath to the House Judiciary Committee and went public on "60 Minutes." Simpson said she was told by Bill Canary, the most important GOP campaign advisor in Alabama, that "my girls can take care of Siegelman."

Canary's "girls" are two US Attorneys in Alabama, both appointed by President Bush. One is Bill Canary's wife, Leura Canary. The other is Alice Martin. According to Harper's Scott Horton,a law professor at Columbia University, Martin is known for abusive prosecutions.

CONTINUED...

http://www.alternet.org/story/78407/going_to_jail_for_being_a_democrat%3A_how_alabama_gov._don_siegelman_got_roved

That's Alternet. Do you think they're rightwing nutjobs, too?

Maybe I missed it, but I don't rememember you ever posting anything in support of Don Siegelman, zappaman. Why is that?

[zappaman]

16. Thanks for confirming!

And no, I don't know why you promote the writings of racists on DU.

[Octafish]

18. I haven't confirmed shit for you. Nor have you shown where you posted once in support of Siegelman.

Says it all about you and your emoticon.

[zappaman]

20. Thanks for the re-confirmation, but it wasn't necessary.

We know you loves you some Paul Craig Roberts!

[Octafish]

21. More emoticons.

Nothing to back up your smear, zappaman.

[bahrbearian]

106. + 1000

[LanternWaste]

148. And if making up your mind is predicated in part on right wing and racist editorials

And if making up your mind is predicated in part on right wing and racist editorials, your mind will then be given all the credibility it in fact, warrants, regardless of the petulant and melodramatic cries of censorship..

(my apologies if my obvious lack of irrelevant block quotes to scroll through endlessly is considered bad form).

[Octafish]

149. No, just telling me to shut up is enough for me to see what kind of ''DUer'' posts, LanternWaste.

Thanks.

PS: If anyone could show where I post or support racist or right wing "editorials," they would. The fact they haven't should show even someone as intelligent as you that it's a lie.

[riversedge]

3. K and R--and thanks

[NuclearDem]

5. Who would've guessed a Putin and Maduro apologia rag would be home to racist pieces of shit?

[Ken Burch]

80. Excuse me, but Maduro has nothing in common with Putin and is not racist.

Nothing his administration has done has ever been bigoted.

[herding cats]

6. I wish I could rec your post a hundred times!

The sight is not one I will give a click to. That some people still use them as a source on Progressive sites hurts my heart. They're feeding our enemy and don't even realize what they're doing.

[freshwest]

7. VDare? Ugh! And PCR is an Infowars, JBS type. And unrepentant father of Reaganomics. Double Ugh. n/t

[SidDithers]

39. And he's being promoted, right in this thread...nt

Sid

[freshwest]

42. I know! Everytime I see it, I post this image:

Still says we need more Reaganonics, not less!

[SidDithers]

9. There are DUers who are big fans of Paul Craig Roberts and Israel Shamir...

And promote their work right here at DU.

I can't figure out if they don't care that those authors are racists and anti-Semites, or if they agree with the racism and anti-Semitism and hide it well.

Sid

[NuclearDem]

10. Posters who insist on linking to that shit after they've been told about it should be banned.

Hell, one's linking to a CP article in this very thread.

Makes you think...

[Octafish]

17. Calling me an asshole again?

Show where I support racists, homophobes and all the rest of the smears, NuclearDem.

[NuclearDem]

19. You must be confused, the word "asshole" appears nowhere in my post.

You're still the only one between the two of us that has called the other an asshole.

The white supremacist and otherwise bigoted nature of the writers you consistently post here have been pointed out to you constantly over the years.

I'm not going to waste anymore time discussing this with you.

[Octafish]

23. Never said it did. You must be used to putting words in other people's mouths.

That's a propaganda technique.

[zappaman]

24. Propaganda technique.

Like accusing someone of calling you an "asshole" when they did no such thing?
By the way, how did you even know that post, which just to be clear does NOT say "asshole", was about you?
Seems like someone has a guilty conscience...

[NuclearDem]

26. Coming from someone who literally just put the word "asshole" in my mouth

that's pretty rich, Octafish.

What I called you was someone who unrepentantly links to works written by white supremacists and bigots.

Note the absence of the word "asshole."

[jberryhill]

36. Getting an asshole in your mouth is no fun

Well, not my cup of tea anyway.

People should require consent for that kind of thing, at least.

[COLGATE4]

127. Well, among consenting adults, etc... nt

[jberryhill]

144. That's fine

I certainly understand different strokes for different folks.

[leftynyc]

49. You should delete this post

You accused the poster of calling you an asshole AGAIN when the word asshole was not in the post and then accuse of propaganda? Unless, of course, you don't care that you come off looking very badly during that exchange.

[MADem]

104. Absolutely--ND wins, OF comes off looking really bad, and JBerry gets a "Chuckles" prize for the

pithy remark....!

[REP]

50. Sigh.

[SidDithers]

40. I agree...nt

Sid

[G_j]

108. maybe people calling for people

they don't like to be banned, should be banned! that sort of arrogance smells bad...;

[NuclearDem]

109. It's about time something was done about it.

[n2doc]

11. So hard to keep up with all the places we aren't supposed to look at or post

Maybe DU needs a Ministry of Information to help keep us weak-minded proles away from badthought?

[NuclearDem]

14. Is there some reason you're interested in linking to a front for white supremacists?

Or do you have some problem with Counterpunch being exposed as such?

[MFrohike]

13. I love these threads

Fairly obscure, in a general sense, publications get the scarlet letter, but never mainstream sources like NYT or WaPo. You'd think that two of the most prominent newspapers that favor war and ending Social Security would get the blacklist, but it never happens. I have to wonder why that is.

[arikara]

29. It makes one wonder why

its ok to publish lies as long as they are classed as "mainstream". I will read what interests me thank you very much. I don't feel the need to agree with everything, and if the piece disgusts me I won't waste my time finishing it but at the age of 60 I don't need a nanny anymore.

[MFrohike]

31. Pretty much

I mean, I have yet to see jihad declared on WaPo or NYT and they employ notorious right-wing liars like Robert Samuelson and Thomas Friedman. I guess it's cool to advocate destroying any prosperity outside the elites as long as you're connected.

[dixiegrrrrl]

118. Ramen to that!

[2banon]

66. This!^^^^^^10000!

[Rex]

81. There is no wonder about it, everyone here has noticed that too and yet the narrative goes on.

You would think authoritarians would have something better to do with their time. Guess not.

[grasswire]

112. I, for one, don't like being nanny'd in any way.....

...by anyone, and will resist being told what to read and what not to read.

[Rex]

121. For me it is their obvious double standard they pretend doesn't exist.

If they were not such huge hypocrites, I might take a few of them seriously.

[G_j]

110. +1000

[JEB]

22. I have not seen this graphic elsewhere.

[Egnever]

41. Where did that come from?

[Recursion]

43. Probably because it's complete BS?

That chart compares teacher pay to the entire defense budget divided by the number of uniformed servicemembers, which is stupid.

Total US education spending is about $922 billion, or about $300K per teacher. Total US defense spending is about $652 billion, or about $310K per soldier. Note that we spend nearly half again as much on education as on defense.

Median public school teacher pay is about $50K (which is almost exactly the median household income); median pay in the military is less than half of that ($24K or so).

[Rex]

83. LOL! Ouch that gave them a sadz!

[WillyT]

27. Censorship Posts... This Early ??? - Wow !!!

They really are worried.

[Bluenorthwest]

35. Pointing out white supremacists is censorship?

The OP is not allowed to have an opinion? Why is that? It seems very much like censorship while saying 'that website is full of racists' sounds very much like free speech. You seem to have the two things confused.

[2banon]

68. Jeff Blankfort is NO White Supremacist! His name does belong on that list and should be

removed immediately. If not, then this OP has NO credibility!

[TacoD]

88. Here are some alternative viewpoints on Mr. Blankfort

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/29/988922/-Mondofront-Now-with-Gilad-Atzmon

https://jaffagate.wordpress.com/2012/03/05/official-speaker-at-occupy-aipac-linked-to-david-duke-questions-official-naarative-of-the-holocaust-2/

[Rex]

84. Well you know how the Outraged here are always that way about others that are outraged!

IMO, it is amazing their one trick pony still even gets any recs!

[KG]

28. I lulz'ed.

[Octafish]

30. BTW: The ''meldungen-aus-dem-exil.noblogs.org'' in the OP seems racist against Palestinians.

I know people from Palestine. They wouldn't appreciate knowing DU linked to this type of thing:

Love Me, I'm A Liberal Zionist

http://meldungen-aus-dem-exil.noblogs.org/post/2013/03/24/love-me-im-a-liberal-zionist/

Is the author anti-Arabic or anti-Palestinian? I can't tell from that excerpt. The website also links to Noam Chomsky, who writes in CounterPunch.

[NuclearDem]

32. Love Me, I'm A Liberal is a satirical song, Octafish.

Nice try, though.

[Octafish]

38. No nice try about it. Author smeared CounterPunch.

I don't know why. Perhaps because CounterPunch prints pro-Palestinian perspectives.

[NuclearDem]

54. You obviously missed the "parody/satire" tag on the website.

It's a satirical song. If you'd bothered to actually read it, rather than skim lookin for a ridiculous gotcha to somehow distract from Counterpunch's antisemitic and racist contributors, you would've figured that out.

A lot of people get fooled by satire.

[LittleBlue]

45. Nice catch

But until the Pallies find Gandhi,
You won’t find me joining their cause,
So love me, love me, love me, I’m a liberal.

These boycotts, divestments, and sanctions,
Do not help the cause of peace.
Can’t you see that the two warring factions
Need dialogue and not thought police.

Pallies? OP's link is racist.

[NuclearDem]

52. Love Me, I'm a Liberal is satire.

It was written to mock hypocritical liberals who held some social justice beliefs (mourning JFK and MLK), but mocked others (saying Malcolm X "got what he deserved&quot .

The author's rewording is aimed at liberals who want peace in the Middle East, but demonize and blame the Palestinians.

So basically, it's the exact opposite.

[Jim Lane]

33. An interesting contradiction in the linked article

In the course of her discussion of various ideologies, the author writes:

This worldview was usefully termed ‘conspiracism’ in Chip Berlet’s 1994 work Right Woos Left (RWL). Although Berlet himself is not immune to the sort of wooing from the right (and has been a vocal and dishonest defender, inter alia, of Engage propagandist David Hirsh), steadfastly refusing to apply his analysis to Zionist ideology and propaganda, his work remains worth citing as one of the best analyses of the Querfront phenomenon and its consequences, particularly in the US.

She then quotes from Berlet extensively.

Now, I'm not knowledgeable about Querfront or Engage or David Hirsh, but I can take one lesson from this passage. It's that, in the author's view, someone can be dishonest and obtuse on one subject yet insightful and worth quoting on another subject.

I consider Paul Craig Roberts a perfect example. He's written some things that I found very informative, and other things that are completely loopy.

If this is true of one individual, it's even more true of a website that publishes articles from different people. For example, are we now not allowed to cite anything in The New York Times, because it sometimes publishes opinion columns that are right-wing drivel? Well, like Counterpunch, it also publishes Noam Chomsky. (At least, it once published one letter to the editor from him. Given his scathing criticisms of the Times, he's probably not on its pages often, but Paul Krugman certainly is, and he gets quoted and linked to on DU a lot.)

One approach we could take is to emulate the Catholic Church and have our own Index Librorum Prohibitorum (List of Prohibited Books), although we'll have to update it to List of Prohibited Websites. But, c'mon, even the Catholic Church has outgrown that, having abolished the Index in 1966.

The other approach is that we apply some intelligence and critical judgment. This means that Roberts might sometimes be right and Krugman might sometimes be wrong. This lacks the comforting simplicity of the Index. Accepting such complexity, however, is how sensible adults deal with a complex world.

[LittleBlue]

44. Isn't Howard Zinn dead?

Hard to rectify not publishing him at this point.

Paul Craig Roberts a white supremacist?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

71. Yes, PCR is a white supremacist...

And a Republican who served under Reagan. Not someone liberals should want to associate with.

http://imagine2050.newcomm.org/2009/03/17/counterpunch-gives-platform-to-white-nationalism/

[MattSh]

92. So, I should stop thinking for myself because one person tells me to.

OK, dumbing down in 3, 2, 1...

[Dr Hobbitstein]

96. What?

That made absolutely zero sense. One person is a white supremacist so you should stop thinking? Non-sequitur much?

[Ghost Dog]

136. To what 'one person' do you refer

as a 'white supremicist'?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

138. Paul Craig Roberts

Which would be easily discernible if you actually read the subthread.

[Ghost Dog]

139. I see.

I have read some of Mr. Roberts's articles but have so far not come across any clear evidence of 'white supremicism'. Could you point to some, please?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

140. As I posted up thread.

http://imagine2050.newcomm.org/2009/03/17/counterpunch-gives-platform-to-white-nationalism/

[Ghost Dog]

142. Yes, I can see an association between Mr. Roberts and the ideology

referred to, via some of the outlets through which he publishes, but still no reference to any article by Mr. Roberts expressing such an ideology.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

143. He helped fucking start VDARE

Quit being so obtuse and defending a known white supremacist.

[Ghost Dog]

157. I observe.

A fool sees not the same tree that a wise man sees. - William Blake

[Karmadillo]

47. Lists! Yes! Please add the New York Times to our Index Librorum Prohibitorum.

http://www.ianwelsh.net/always-remember-the-nytimes-pushed-hard-for-war-in-iraq/

Always Remember, the NY Times Pushed, Hard, for War in Iraq
2015 MARCH 26
by Ian Welsh

The New York Times is beloved by many liberals, but I despise them. Part of my reason is their role in making the Iraq war happen. I was following it in real time and I remember how they pushed administration lies; the headlines of their articles on Iraq were almost always alarmist and the lead paragraphs were as well. Often enough, the truth would be buried in the equivalent of paragraph twelve.

For those not in the business, here’s the rule: Most people only read the headlines and you lose half of those actually reading past the headline incrementally per paragraph. Maybe the Times numbers are slightly better than that (probably because their headlines are truly atrocious and uninformative), but the rule is broadly true and few people are able to write long-form without losing their readers.

The Times is essentially reactionary. A look at their columnists and who they have chosen to be new columnists makes the point: Ross Douthat, the reactionary Catholic? David Brooks, master of the inane right wing observation?

I was reminded of this in the last few days by two articles listed at the very top of their daily newsletters:

“Saudi Justice, Harsh but Able to Spare the Sword“

…Such rulings have prompted comparisons to the Islamic State, which regularly beheads its foes and also claims to apply Shariah law.

But Mr. Yehiya was saved because of checks in the Saudi system on the use of harsh punishments.

more...

[NuclearDem]

53. Why are you guys so insistent on being able to link to white supremacists here?

It's already understood you can't link to RW sites like Fox and Breitbart on DU already, and nobody's telling you you can't read Counterpunch on your own.

Come down from that cross.

[delrem]

48. I like reading Counterpunch. Of course I choose the articles.

In a world bounded by the Ministry of Truth only articles agreeing with the sensibilities of the Inner Party are published and read.
That's a world where the whole world is "centrist".

Hey, here's an article by Pepe Escobar, reprinted by CTuttle at FDL (another object of wannabe internet censors, who're scared shitless of people having free access to information and opinion)

http://firedoglake.com/2015/07/23/the-eurasian-big-bang-how-china-and-russia-are-running-rings-around-washington/

That Putin gonna getcha, getcha, getcha!

[Ichingcarpenter]

51. counterPUNCH. noam chomsky....Links............LOL

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/05/22/the-value-of-noam-chomsky/


http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/02/28/on-academic-labor/


http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/09/10/an-interview-with-noam-chomsky-3/


I linked..............so your nazi thinking censorship tripe is just bullshit.



more links to counterpunch

https://twitter.com/natcounterpunch/status/616780547608588288

[Rex]

129. This is always a sad attempt to get people like Octa banned from this site

by the local authoritarians that love to make purge and banned lists. Why anyone takes them seriously anymore...nope, got nuthing. Have no idea why.

[polly7]

135. Authoritarians need to reaffirm for themselves occasionally their followers are still active and

working to carry out their very, very, very, very important mission. Their purge and ban lists are telling though, aren't they? All good progressives who despise right-wing nuttery.

[NCTraveler]

55. Spent some time reading articles there yesterday.

Some of them were really well written and took a different angle than the bullshit main stream media crap that would never be blacklisted here. Some of the racist garbage that has been spewed on CNN and no one is calling for them to be blacklisted. You are saying, that as adults, we should read the writings of dozens, if not hundreds of progressives. Chomsky, Goodman, Zinn.....

I'm not going to sit here and fight it, but whoever that author is has listed some people as right/white supremacist that simply aren't. I would go as far as to say, with the author including some of them as right/white supremacist, the author has a serious issue with conscience, integrity, honesty and ethics. You don't label people who aren't racists as racists. The author of this piece loses all respect from me for their ignorance and irresponsibility. Nice fucking "list."
What just made my no read list is the blog this came from.

[SidDithers]

60. Paul Craig Roberts, the first name on that list, is an anti-immigration white supremacist...

who has helped fundraise, and lovingly praised the website run by his good friend Peter Brimelow. That website is VDARE.

VDARE is named for Virginia Dare, apparently the first white child born in the US to English settlers.

Roberts should be as toxic as David Duke or Ernst Zundel.

But some DUers love him, and ignore (or agree with) his racist views, because they agree with his anti-US libertarian views.

Sid

[NCTraveler]

61. Other than not reading the author of this pieces tripe again.

I made no absolute comments with respect to the list. I am not disagreeing with you about Paul Crag Roberts and never claimed he was anything else.

The manner this is being presented would move almost every media outlet in the us from being used as a link here. It is attempting to link all who use counterpunch as being racist. A truly simplistic tactic to paint people as something they are not.

I did a search before posting a counterpunch article the other day. What I found was a mix or really good and really poor articles. Some of the good ones were well worth reading. Some were articles I never would have seen if it weren't for doing that search. I simply see no problem bringing them here. If someone keeps using a racist author, call them out on it. It's that simple.

[geek tragedy]

57. Counterpunch is definitely anti-Semitic and anti-American

It only publishes the white supremacists when their views coalesce.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

141. Anti-American? ROFL

What is this, 1952?

[Cal Carpenter]

58. Uh, they missed some authors,

or at least one - a very straightforward capital-L Leftist who has had at least a dozen articles posted on Counterpunch in the last year (Peter Linebaugh, per a quick site search). I wonder how many others they missed?

I'm not a huge fan of Counterpunch as a whole, and certainly not a fan of several of the authors who get posted there, but this article is not accurate starting with the so-called statistical analysis so...

[SidDithers]

59. Ooops, forgot to rec this thread...

Sid

[bvar22]

147. Oops. I forget to rec it too!

I would like for everyone to see DUs authoritarian pro-censorship fans all lined up in one thread.

[HickFromTheTick]

62. Wow , that's disturbing news indeed.....

Could someone please link to a particular article (or group of articles) that would illustrate or exemplify the white supremacist culture at CounterPunch? I've been there from time to time and never noticed it. I must be slipping. How disturbing to think that there is an ulterior motive behind an internet site that purports to promote democracy and free speech. So it's like a front for the Klan???? I notice a few Jewish authors there; doesn't that seem strange for a Klan-based site? Wait, there are a few black authors there and I would assume there are a couple gay authors there given the numbers. Odd indeed. I know that linking to a specific article might be seen as promoting the Klan, but in this context I'm hopeful that the end justifies the means.

[SidDithers]

70. Welcome to DU...

Sid

[2banon]

63. Please Remove Jeff Blankfort's name. He is Far Left, he's not RW. I know him personally.

GEt HIM OFF THAT COLUMN! RIGHT NOW!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

64. It doesn't take a PhD in Political Science...

It doesn't take a PhD in Political Science to make the common sense observation that the further you go on either side of the ideological spectrum the closer you actually get to those you ostensibly abhor.

[delrem]

72. The further you go from my perfectly centered views,

the more I abhor your extremist views!

But I *do* like Chuck Todd! He's so perfectly centered, moderate, status quo in all his wisdom.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

73. Todd is a dolt who couldn't complete college.

And straw men are highly flammable.

[delrem]

74. Now now, watch your language!!

There are indeed alert police out there. "Extreme", to them, is "disagrees with me".

My solution to Chuck Todd is I don't have a TV.

Here, some wisdom found as I mindlessly clicked links:

AMAZINGLY SIMPLE HOME REMEDIES

1. If you are choking on an ice cube simply pour a cup of
boiling water down your throat. Presto! The blockage will instantly remove itself.

2. Avoid cutting yourself slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold while you chop.

3. Avoid arguments with the Mrs. about lifting the toilet seat
by using the shower.

4. For high blood pressure sufferers: simply cut yourself and bleed for a few minutes, thus reducing the pressure in your veins. Remember to use a timer.

5. A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button.

6. If you have a bad cough, take a large dose of laxatives, then you will be afraid to cough.

7. You only need two tools in life - WD-40 and Duct Tape. If it
doesn't move and should, use the WD-40. If it shouldn't move and does, use the duct tape.

8. Remember: Everyone seems normal until you get to know them.

Daily Thought: SOME PEOPLE ARE LIKE SLINKIES. NOT REALLY GOOD FOR ANYTHING BUT THEY BRING A SMILE TO YOUR FACE WHEN PUSHED DOWN THE STAIRS.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

75. Please don't think I think that Beltway Wisdom is the center and that deviating from it makes ...

Please don't think I think that Beltway Wisdom is the center and that deviating from it makes one extreme...

And Chuck Todd is a uniquely banal analyst regardless of his ideology which I am not even certain he has one.

[delrem]

76. I don't think that!!!

My apologies if I came across that way!

I like your posts DemocratSinceBirth. You're smart and fighting the good fight.
When we disagree, I realize that I might be quite wrong -- at least on some aspects of whatever case I'm failing to make at the time. Also, I take into account that I don't have the personal stake in US politics that a US citizen (or resident) has.

Up here in Canada, I'm helping to rid the country of Harper -- election in Oct. '15, and I won't be complacent until he and his party are removed. That's a no-brainer. Nothing like the intra-party squabbles of a Dem primary.

[ozone_man]

65. Noam Chomsky and Amy Goodman

are anything but RW. I think you need to get out and read more.

[NuclearDem]

67. That's why they're listed under "left/progressive" in that chart.

[delrem]

77. Yah, under a blazing title:

Don't link to Counterpunch!

Babies? Bathwater? wtf is the difference: flush!

Enough with the wholesale censorship of the thought police.

(And on a side note, DU should by now have had enough with the guilt by association arguments, the wholesale condemnations a la "Some (self-described) Hillary/Martin/Bernie supporters on twitter said these abominable things, so all Hillary/Martin/Bernie supporters are abominable - so Hillary/Martin/Bernie is abominable!" type shit. Let's be adults and recognize others as adults, able to distinguish a penguin from a cockroach.)

eta: that last wasn't directed at you! It's a general comment about blanket condemnations, blanket judgements.

[uhnope]

69. think before you post

If you reread and rethink, you'll see the point -- CP attracts lefties with a little Chomsky and Goodman and then slathers RW racists all over the place

[ozone_man]

145. Most people can filter out what they find meaningful.

I'm thinking that DUer links to Counterpunch are going to be left leaning articles.

Should we ban book stores, because they have some books in them that you find objectionable?

[bvar22]

78. I'll make a deal.

You don't tell me what to read,
and I won't attempt to censor your posts here.

I've read Counter Punch for years,
and while I don't agree with all the authors posted there,
there are enough Libeals and Far Thinkers to make a visit to that site worth while.
Of course, you won't find much support for Free Trading, Pro-War Democrats, Drill, Baby Drill Democrats
but thats OK with me because I don't support them anyway.


Most people here are intelligent and discerning.
They do not need a Net Nanny telling them what is OK for them to read.....according to YOU.

You remind me of the old Catholic "Legion of Decency" from the 50s that issued a monthly list of movies and books Good Catholics should never be exposed to.

I will continue to use CounterPunch as ONE of my sources.


For those who would like more hard evidence,
go here an make up your own mind:
http://www.counterpunch.org/

[NuclearDem]

82. Putin certainly seems to think Russians need a net nanny.

Sadly, Russian state censorship isn't something you'll read about in Counterpunch, is it, bvar?

By the way, when can we expect little brother to spill the beans on big brother Putin?

[bvar22]

85. We have different opinions about what is happening in the Ukraine.

You post a transparent failed attempt at distraction.
Maybe you should post an OP instead of Hi-Jacking this thread.
There are many articles on Russia at CounterPunch....some FOR, and some Against.

I think YOU should research this for yourself,
but if you believe the OP and limit your reading to only the "approved" sources from the censors,
you will never become educated.

I read much that I don't agree with, some at CounterPunch, some at DU,
and your reply to me, of course.

[NuclearDem]

87. Counterpunch has anti-Russian articles like Fox has liberal commentators.

Completely token and hand-selected just so they can fool their viewers into believing that they're "fair and balanced."

The fact they employ that witless tool Mike Whitney says everything that needs to be said about that rag.

Likewise, the fact that you seem to believe that rag is somehow fair and balanced says everything that needs to be said about you on this issue.

[bvar22]

90. BS

No Text..... None needed for a string of baseless claims.

[polly7]

89. Scarey!!!

Counterpunch has been used here for years as there are many great progressive voices and articles there.

Maybe you should go down to your local library, pick out some books you disagree with and walk around carrying a big sign with your orders. Little children might obey.

[bvar22]

97. Better yet,

he could burn CounterPunch and all the others he doesn't like on the front lawn of town libraries.
Probably be a pretty big fire.

[polly7]

111. Oooooohhhh .... that would be awesome!

Get Fox News there to report on it ... twitter or tweet(?) it (I know nothing about Twitter) to every progressive/left-hating person and org he can think of. Facebook, too! Censorship is becoming so popular everywhere these days, he could be an instant hit!

[LeftishBrit]

93. I have always thought that Counterpunch is an unselectively anti-establishment site that includes

both left-wing and far-right sources if they are against current leaders and policies.

Much of the establishment does need to be opposed; but not by something even worse.

Certainly, some of the writers are frankly RW, e.g. Paul Craig Roberts and William Lind. Related to this, it has contained lots of global warming denial. It has also included some frankly anti-Semitic stuff by the likes of the Christisons and Gilad Atzmon. What is perhaps less well known is that it has included articles that are quite vile about Bosnian Muslims, and very dismissive of the Srebrenica massacre.

I would not have a blanket rule of 'not linking to Counterpunch' in that I would not object to a link to an article by Chomsky just because it was posted on Counterpunch. However, if an article or its author is right-wing and/or racist, it doesn't belong on DU. Oh, and Paul Craig Roberts is a scumbag.

[eridani]

94. Some racist articles on this week's sidebar

John W. Whitehead
The American Nightmare: the Tyranny of the Criminal Justice System

Henry Giroux
America’s New Brutalism: the Death of Sandra Bland

Charles Larson
The USA as a Failed State: Ta-Nehisi Coates’s “Between the World and Me”

Manuel García, Jr.
The Trump Surge and the American Psyche

Ishmael Bishop
Decentering Whiteness in the Wake of a North Carolina Tragedy

Greg Moses
Tale of the Eloquent Agriculturalist: Lament for Sandra Bland


Oh, wait.......

[msanthrope]

95. Israel Shamir is a disgusting anti-Semite, and was used as a source on this site to defend Assange.

[bvar22]

98. Assange needs no defense.

He has performed a great service for the World.
Of course, I can see that would piss off the Oligarchs and the Status Quo advocates.
Haven't you heard yet that we now live in a World Community,
at least in the minds of the Free Trading Clintons.

[msanthrope]

100. Why did Assange feel the need then to have his employee write such a disgusting defense?

Shamir is a WikiLeaks employee and when he chose to write his absolutely disgusting defense of Assange in counterpunch, it was obviously because of their close relationship. the absolutely filthy rape apologia that Shamir wrote is utterly indefensible.

[bvar22]

113. How do you know that Assange "felt the need to have his employee write..."

Do you KNOW this as a fact, or or you just making that up.
Please post links or support for your claim.
AS a supposed "lawyer" you should know better than to introduce unsupported guesses into evidence.

Cheers!

[msanthrope]

119. Dude.....this guy works for Assange....wouldn't Assange have fired him

had he written something he thought egregious? especially about two alleged rape victims? post links exactly for what? that Shamir is Assange's employee? everyone knows that.

[bvar22]

122. NOw you are posting hypotheticals, and facts not in evidence.

For someone claiming to be a lawyer,
you should know better.

[msanthrope]

125. what fact is not in evidence? what back is not in evidence? N t

[Blue_In_AK]

99. Very few publications or organizations

are "right" 100% of the time. I think we're all smart enough to read stuff and make our own judgments as to what to believe and what not to.

[MADem]

101. It's a Paulbotter's delight, is what it is! nt

[leveymg]

105. Counterpunch is a mix. You're wrong about 95perc

It appears you simply don't like or don't understand the Left and antiestablishment thought in general.

[JonLP24]

107. Who the hell are those links

This is Nixonian 101 right here


Nixon Is Gone, but His Media Strategy Lives On

Forty years after Watergate, presidential suspicion of reporters and attempts to keep the press at arm's length remain high.

Richard Nixon left the White House in disgrace 40 years ago this month, but the war he launched against journalists has continued under Barack Obama, George W. Bush, and other recent presidents.

Nixon’s resignation is remembered as a great victory for the media. Investigations by Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein, and other reporters helped expose the White House crime spree that caused the president’s downfall. Even though he lost his battle to remain in power, Nixon’s way of handling the press has prevailed in American politics. Intimidating journalists, avoiding White House reporters, staging events for television—now common presidential practices—were all originally Nixonian tactics.

Nixon would enjoy the frustration many reporters feel toward the Obama White House. This summer 38 news organizations sent Obama a letter protesting his administration’s obstruction of journalists. The news groups complained of officials blackballing reporters, delaying interviews until after deadlines had passed, and preventing staff experts from talking with journalists. For example, they said the Environmental Protection Agency refused to answer questions about the mishandling of hazardous waste despite repeated requests from reporters.


Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush, repeated many of Nixon’s arguments—protecting national security and executive privilege—to keep information about his administration secret. Bush bluntly told reporters he did not think they represented the public, echoing the adversarial relationship cultivated by Nixon.

The perpetually insecure Nixon was sure reporters were out to get him. After voters rejected his 1962 bid to become California’s governor, he accused journalists of being “delighted that I lost,” ignoring the fact that most of the state’s major newspapers endorsed him. “You won’t have Nixon to kick around anymore, because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference.”

Nixon read a summary of each morning’s news and then directed his staff how to respond, noting in the margins which reporters he liked and disliked.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/08/nixons-revenge-his-media-strategy-triumphs-40-years-after-resignation/375274/

Sounds like Saudi Arabia to be honest.

[grasswire]

114. epic fail for mendungen-aus-dem-exile blog...

......whoever the hell that is.

[Efilroft Sul]

115. This just in: Howard Zinn is still dead.

[tammywammy]

116. There are left/progressive authors on the site.

Regardless of where they get it from, any poster that links to authors such as Paul Craig Roberts, Israel Shamir, Wayne Madsen, Christopher Bollyn, or any other anti-Semitic, racist, or homophobic author deserves scorn and if they continually do so deserve to be banned.

So, if someone posts a thread with an article from CounterPunch with a left author that's fine. But no one would be linking to racist, homophobic or anti-Semitic author regardless of the source.

[bvar22]

123. Let them link to those homophobic or anti-semetic posts,

and then "educate" them on DU.
That way, everybody learns, and we don't have to take one person's word for it,
like the OP wants to do.

[tammywammy]

124. It doesn't always work

Octafish, for example, uses an article by Paul Craig Roberts because it supports his view on Don Siegelman. It has been pointed out multiple time that Paul Craig Roberts is anti-Semitic. His rationale is that the specific article isn't anti-Semitic.

I stand by what I originally posted:

Regardless of where they get it from, any poster that links to authors such as Paul Craig Roberts, Israel Shamir, Wayne Madsen, Christopher Bollyn, or any other anti-Semitic, racist, or homophobic author deserves scorn and if they continually do so deserve to be banned.

[zappaman]

128. +1

[bvar22]

130. Are his views about the illegal imprisonment anti-semetic?

Are you a fan of Karl Rove, and don't want his involvement in the illegal imprisonment of a Democratic governor exposed?
Seems like it.

[tammywammy]

131. Oh obviously, not wanting Paul Craig Roberts posted on DU means I just looooove Karl Rove.

Or more likely, I don't believe in giving anti-Semitic, racists or homophobic author any legitimacy. David Duke could come out and say he believe global climate change is a serious issue that needs to be addressed and though I would agree I still wouldn't fucking link to that piece of shit.

[JEB]

117. Just stick to the oligarch approved white bread corporate media.

That'll teach 'em. No further thought necessary.

[arikara]

120. Russia has net nannies

and we are expected to only link to white bread sources. What would be the name for that?

Btw, thanks for reminding me about counterpunch. I hadn't been there in awhile.

[JEB]

137. One of the best. Always thought provoking.

[Gothmog]

126. You are Wrong

[edhopper]

132. Shouldn't it depend on who wrote the article

rather than the articles source in this case?

[Faux pas]

133. Kickin'

[Major Nikon]

134. Calling out white supremacist websites is just like the Holocaust and is anti-Democraticy!

[NuclearDem]

146. And book burning! Don't forget book burning!

Index Librorum Prohibitorum!

[Octafish]

150. Because book burning is so funny it's satire or something.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027003793#post52

[NuclearDem]

154. What exactly are you on about this time?

[Warpy]

151. Oh, linking to articles by left wing authors is legit.

I'd probably add the caution to skip the comments.

But yes, they have shifted far right, probably because the far right is heavily promoting their pundits and sweetening the whole deal by offering them free content.

[shira]

152. Presumably, if Stormfront published far Left Progressives, then linking to Stormfront....

...would be 100% Kosher here at DU. Same as CounterPunch.



That's beyond disturbing & really bad news for Liberals who want to promote the Democratic Party, its candidates, and its political positions.

[tammywammy]

155. To some it seems like as long as that specific article isn't racist/anti-Semitic/homophobic

Then it's okay to link to such despicable authors. AND they'll defense the right to do it! It's censorship if you call them out for linking to racist/anti-Semitic/homophobic authors!

[NuclearDem]

156. The people crying censorship don't seem to understand how these sites make money.

Page clicks drive the site up in Alexa rankings, and ad revenue from visitors to the site pays the bills.

Which is a major reason we're not allowed to post entire articles; the original source needs the ad revenue to function.

Boycotting is not censorship.

[Tarheel_Dem]

153. +1. Looks like CP took the place of the crap that used to get posted here from wsws.