mozz

Yes, I understand what they are claiming Reuters is doing. I am saying that as far as I can tell, it isn’t true (the current headline bears no resemblance to the sanitized version OP is claiming), and I’m wondering why OP is saying that it is.

It looks to me like Reuters edited the headline to take out the idea that Israel says it was targeting militants, because although it may be true that Israel said that, it's become clear that it wasn't true, so there was no reason to repeat it in the headline. OP is saying Reuters did the opposite of that edit, and I'm asking them to clarify, which they so far don't seem to feel like doing.

News organization sometimes also do A/B tests where they show different headlines to different people to see what gets the most clicks. Unsure if Reuters does this but I know some others do

This is a fascinating assertion (as pertains to respectable news outlets like Reuters that drop a little note into place when they edit a headline for the exact reason that they don't want people to get the sense they're being shifty with what they're presenting - I am sure there are news websites that do it but I would be very surprised if any of the mainstream print news outlets that have web presences do it)

What on earth are you talking about

Here's the current Reuters front page:

Go check it

Where are these headlines and over what timeframe are you saying that they evolved to the current presentation?

(It never fails to blow my mind how a certain contingent of users manages to combine "being anti-Israel" with "being objectively wrong". Those two concepts are so naturally opposed to each other that it is genuinely a little mysterious to me how they manage to bring them into concordance.)

Inb4 pretending to get confused and claim that I am pro-Israel, which I am not.

I think the more that Trump does to bring reality to people’s experience of him that he is a piece of shit, the better.

You want people in these city governments (which surely includes some number of Trump supporters) to say hey this guy really fucked us - not the Hispanics or the Democrats or some abstracted enemy that we’re on board for him fucking with, but us, and what’s up with that.

At the time that Carlin was saying this, it was probably a lot more accurate than today. The parties were pretty indistinguishable for a lot of the 80s and 90s, and then after that the Democrats got significantly better in some cases, and the Republicans went straight off the edge into wanting to kill anyone different than them or who wanted to stand in their way.

I agree with you on the free time but I don’t think cops with bedbugs are likely to do any less policing, or be any nicer to the people they encounter

• Zee shell
• Sue dough
• Ess ess aych
• Sequel
• Jif
• Double U double U double U dot

They left the best part out of the headline

Business Insider reports that, in addition to the $5 million, Lindell will also have to pay the guy’s attorney fees. A federal judge has ordered Lindell to pay Zeidman $4,508 in attorney fees. Zeidman had initially sought as much as $12,800 for approximately 16 billed hours, but the judge ruled that some of Zeidman’s legal discovery requests were “overly broad”

Yeah, that's fair; I apologize. I think I just got hung up on the phrase "printing money." But yeah I was a dick I am sorry.

Okay, so you don't know. Here's a very in depth article about it -- briefly summarized, most of the idea that Biden printed money or caused inflation or pain for working people is pure outlandish fantasy. But, his explicitly working-class-friendly policies (summarized here) did "cause inflation" to a certain extent -- basically, by keeping people employed and eating, they were able to bid up the price of goods, which spread the pain of the Covid recovery (pretty much limited to the singular year 2022) across the entirety of the economic spectrum when inflation was going to happen anyway. But that's a good thing, and a very rare reaction for a US policymaker to have. And again, that inflation was actually in the final analysis near the bottom of what other countries experienced anyway.

IDK man. You're right that I was being condescending about it. But I think your analysis is completely wrong, and I think that explicit propaganda which looks very similar to what you were saying is very damaging to the politics of this country.

Let me try a different way, more polite: If I got you wrong and you were trying to say what I said above, then sure, I apologize. If I had you pegged right and you were just claiming that Biden was printing money because that's a fun thing to say, then I stand by it.

How much money did Biden print? Why didn’t it have any impact on inflation before or after 2022? Why did he do it, and what was the alternative?

(There actually is a sense in which what you’re saying has some validity, but I think most of what you’re saying is inaccurate and I am curious if you know the sense in which it is true, or are just saying that Biden printed money because that’s a fun thing to say. And I wasn’t saying Trump doing it meant Biden didn’t; that was just by way of contrast with Biden’s actions which in no way were printing money to solve problems, to any degree that I’m aware of.)

pouring money into the economy/printing like we have undoubtedly had some impact on inflation.

See this is the kind of stuff I'm talking about

It's easy to hear it and just nod your head like yeah, printing money, pouring money into the economy, makes sense, Biden bad

Except it's just a bunch of nonsense. Trump printed a bunch of money and then poured it into the economy (including, quite literally, around a trillion dollars of just out-and-out "I lied on the form and got away with it" Covid aid fraud). That's part of why we had the huge post-Covid inflation. Biden, in contrast, raised corporate taxes by trillions of dollars, and then spent it on (poured it into) the economy. That's why the US economy is doing better than most first world countries inflation-wise, either at this point, or in total aggregate, and why we saw wage growth that for the most part kept pace with the huge bump of inflation which we certainly did get in 2022.

It can be both

That sort of normal, positive influence on American society by personal example and just kind of being a wholesome person, and not a big piece of shit, used to be a pretty common thing, even inside some of the lower levels of official politics

Then Reagan got involved and it’s been all downhill since then, to the point that now someone who is trying to do good things is this kind of outlandishly precious gem that people can barely believe is possible (and yes totally in heard of within the Republicans)