Skip to main content

Home/ History Readings/ Group items matching "Fox" in title, tags, annotations or url

Group items matching
in title, tags, annotations or url

Sort By: Relevance | Date Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
14More

Why American capital will vote R in 2020 - The Washington Post - 0 views

  • The book’s starting premise is acknowledging the mid-2000s slowdown in labor productivity growth in the advanced industrialized economies. There are lots of debates about why there was a productivity slowdown and whether it can be reversed.
  • Mother Jones, connects the contributions made by wealthy donors to the GOP and their push for the 2017 tax cut
  • In a polarized political climate, secular stagnation will encourage America’s economic elite to tilt further rightward in the coming decade, even though the Republican Party will continue to drift in a populist direction, supporting new barriers to international trade and migration.
  • ...11 more annotations...
  • In the past, economic elites might have been comfortable with a market-friendly approach from left-leaning parties. In the future, that comfort will fade, because both the political space for a moderate left approach to governing and the economic growth generated by such an approach appear to be shrinking
  • Between accommodating economic populism from the left and nationalist populism from the right, plutocrats will opt for the latter. Populist nationalism will not generate greater economic growth, but it does lead to redistribution that favors owners of capital.
  • They do like the tax cuts, light regulatory touch and business-friendly judiciary, however. Equally important, they like it a lot more than anything that the left is offering them
  • here are three stories over the past month or so that support the arguments made in the chapter.
  • This volume asked a different question: What happens to the U.S. political economy if the slowdown is the new status quo?
  • As Rep. Chris Collins said at the time, “My donors are basically saying, ‘Get it done or don’t ever call me again.
  • From the time the tax bill was first introduced on Nov. 2, 2017, until the end of the year, a 60-day period, dozens of billionaires and millionaires dramatically boosted their political contributions unlike they had in past years, giving a total of $31.1 million in that two months,
  • Second, Ben White wrote in Politico about the wariness that Wall Street feels toward the Democratic presidential candidates. His opening sentence: “Top Wall Street executives would love to be rid of President Donald Trump. But they are getting panicked about the prospect of an ultraliberal Democratic nominee bent on raising taxes and slapping regulations on their firms.”
  • Finally, the New Yorker’s Jane Mayer came out with a long story this week on the unholy marriage of Trump and Fox News. An aside in that story was the ways that Murdoch has personally profited from having an ally in the White House:
  • All of this suggests that high-net-worth individuals and cash-rich corporations are very likely to back Trump come 2020
  • In a low-growth environment, it will be very difficult for the Democrats to offer them anything appealing.
6More

The sorry state of Murdoch media - The Washington Post - 0 views

  • The Wall Street Journal editorial page is a different matter, however. The move from grudging defense of a Trump presidency to full-blown, Fox-like rationalization has been ongoing since Trump won the nomination.
  • The Journal editorial page was long thought to be the crown jewel of fiscal conservatism — a staunch defender of open markets, legal immigration and economic freedom. Internationally, it was anti-communist and supportive of U.S. leadership in the world.
  • Jay Rosen of New York University tells me via email, “From my perspective the Oct. 25 editorial was an important event because it combines so effectively with this development, in which the Journal reporters were told to stand out by their greater willingness to give Trump the benefit of the doubt — greater, that is, than the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, Politico, Bloomberg and others in their peer group.” He continues, “The implicit appeal is not to impersonal and timeless standards of veracity but to an ideological position that, according to the newsroom editors, the others guys have taken while the Journal does not.” He argues, “This is an attempt to give intellectual respectability within the news tribe to ‘the enemy of the people’ attacks. The editors were saying to their reporters: Okay, maybe not enemies of the people, but they’re acting like enemies of Trump! We don’t do that.”
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • “The news staff and the editorial pages do operate more independently than people assume, but it’s the combined effect we should look at,” Rosen says. “The news side gives him the benefit of doubt, the editorial pages endorse an extreme position in which Mueller cannot fairly investigate. The signal to what used to be called establishment Republicans is: There are no institutionalists among us any longer; it’s tribalism all the way down.”
  • The perceived shift in the Journal’s editorial board, not unlike the further decline into journalistic insanity at Fox, is symptomatic of the intellectual rot that has eaten away at the right, and at the Republican Party specifically. On the right, years of bashing liberal media turned from criticism to paranoia and a sense of victimhood. The Clinton bogeyman became so exaggerated that anything Trump did became “not as bad as Hillary.” The rise of a worldwide populist movement suffused with nativism left conventional Republican outlets and politicians racing to catch up to the mob, running to defend Trump and his movement, whatever the cost and whatever intellectual gymnastics were necessary.
  • Bill Kristol observes, “As political movements go, American conservatism has been relatively principled and idea-driven. That’s served America well. But the survival of such a conservatism — one that would resist authoritarianism, nativism and demagoguery — is now very much in question.”
25More

How Early Humans Handled Aggression - The Atlantic - 0 views

  • Richard Wrangham, who has come up with some of the boldest and best new ideas about human evolution
  • he enters a debate staked out centuries ago by Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (among other philosophers), and still very much alive today: how to understand the conjunction of fierce aggression and cooperative behavior in humans.
  • Why are we so much less violent day-to-day within our communities (in pretty much all cultures) than our closest primate relatives, chimpanzees, are within theirs? At the same time, how is it that human violence directed toward perceived enemy groups has been so destructive?
  • ...22 more annotations...
  • Wrangham’s 2009 book, Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human, pursued a very different hypothesis. Based on archaeological evidence, he made the case that our ancestors mastered fire much earlier than most of us had believed—perhaps closer to 2 million rather than 800,000 years ago—which changed everything for them
  • In his 1996 book, Demonic Males, co-authored with Dale Peterson, Wrangham recapped this and other evidence to draw a dire portrait of humanity (the male version) as inherently violent by evolutionary legacy. Here was vivid support for a Hobbesian view of human nature, rooted in genetics.
  • his two previous books, which explore the opposing poles of behavior. Renowned for his meticulous fieldwork, especially with chimps in Uganda’s Kibale National Park, Wrangham showed just how common chimp brutality is.
  • He also applies his evolutionary logic to studies of a wider array of animals. He dwells in particular on some marvelous experiments that explore the taming of wild foxes, minks, and other species by human-directed artificial selection over many generations.
  • fire extended the day into the night. Given how important we know conversations and stories told around the fire are to human hunter-gatherers, it’s easy to see how this process could have accelerated the evolution of language—an essential ingredient for less physically aggressive interactions
  • evidence has steadily accumulated that humans, from early on in their development, are the most cooperative species in the primate world
  • classic work on chimps has been complemented by new studies of bonobos, our other close relative. No more removed from us genetically than chimps are, they are a radical contrast to them, often called the “make love, not war” species. Some of our nonhuman kin, such fieldwork has revealed, can live and evolve almost without violence.
  • he pursues yet another ambitious hypothesis: “Reduced reactive aggression must feature alongside intelligence, cooperation, and social learning as a key contributor to the emergence and success of our species.”
  • “I walked around Auschwitz. I could feel the chimera at its best and worst.” Violence and virtue, he recognizes, are not opposites but powerful, not always reliable allies. “So much cooperation,” he notes of the smoothly operating human machinery of mass murder—“it can be for good or bad.”
  • cooking made possible a much more diverse diet
  • Enter the bonobos, to whom Wrangham turns as he considers how diminished aggression may have been selected for in the evolution of humans
  • they separated from chimps 1 to 2 million years ago, and were isolated south of a bend in the Congo River. Female bonobos form strong coalitions—partly based on sex with each other—that keep a lid on male violence. The “trust hormone” oxytocin is released during female sex: You could say that the partners are high, in both senses of the word, on trust. Because females run things, males don’t attack them, and even male-on-male violence is extremely limited. Bonobos also display the other traits common to the domestication syndrome, which suggests—as in the case of the foxes—a broad genetic dynamic at work.
  • He has learned that over many generations, ecological realities create species-specific behavior. In the case of bonobos, he suggests, a lush habitat in which they were protected from competition with either chimps or gorillas gave them the luxury of decreasing their own reactive aggression
  • Central to his argument is the idea that cooperative killing of incurably violent individuals played a central role in our self-domestication
  • our ancestors killed men who were guilty of repeated acts of violence. Certainly all-male raiding parties have operated in some groups of humans, seeking out and killing victims in neighboring villages
  • They serve as a form of capital punishment. Wrangham cites a number of examples of anthropologists witnessing a group of men collaborating to kill a violent man in their midst.
  • My own two years with the !Kung point to a more robust possible selection process for winnowing out aggression: female choice. Women in most hunter-gatherer groups, as I learned in the course of my experience in the field, are closer to equality with men than are women in many other societies. Evolutionary logic suggests that young women and their parents, in choosing less violent mates through the generations, could provide steady selection pressure toward lower reactive aggression—steadier pressure than infrequent dramas of capital punishment could. (
  • Wrangham has nonetheless highlighted a puzzle at the core of human evolution, and delivered a reminder of the double-edged nature of our virtues and vices.
  • Such breeding efforts, Wrangham notes, have produced “the domestication syndrome”: a change in a suite of traits, not just the low reactive aggression that breeders have deliberately singled out
  • Half a century and thousands of fossil finds later, we have a far more complete—and also more puzzling—view of the human past
  • As data pile up, so do surprises
  • In 1965 a remarkable book—Irven DeVore’s collection Primate Behavior (which led me to study with DeVore)—made what then seemed a radical claim: We will never understand our origins without intensive study of the wild world of our nonhuman relatives. A handful of scientists, including Jane Goodall, set up tents in distant jungles and savannas. Following monkeys, apes, and other creatures in their habitats, these scientists turned their notes and observations into voluminous, quantitative data.
45More

Why Words Matter - The Bulwark - 0 views

  • Some liberals and progressives replied that the word was irrelevant
  • The scatological vulgarity of this comment from a famous germaphobe was part of its racism.
  • He finds African countries disgusting, and finds people who come from them disgusting, and said so in a way that “poor and unhealthy countries” wouldn’t have captured.
  • ...42 more annotations...
  • Swear words are swear words for a reason, and the urge to show that one is sophisticated and anti-puritanical sometimes leads to the false conclusion that they’re just words like any other, and don’t communicate anything special. They do, and it did.
  • Just ignore his words.
  • I have a hard time believing that anyone really thinks like this as a general proposition. Certainly conservatives who spent the postwar era reciting the mantra “ideas have consequences” didn’t think the words that carried political ideas were impotent
  • More recently, conservatives over the last ten years seemed to attribute totemic powers to words like “radical Islamic terrorism”—or, for that matter, “Merry Christmas.”
  • With his words threatening to subordinate the collective self-defense commitment of NATO
  • People put up with being ruled, and those who carry out the ruling on others’ behalf put up with taking orders in light of their beliefs about legitimacy and political reasonableness, beliefs that depend on prior speech and persuasion.
  • Norms rest on beliefs which rest on persuasion, and institutions rest on norms.
  • Hannah Arendt treated political speech as the core of her special sense of “action,” the chief way in which we shape and constitute our life together.
  • one particular kind of Trump’s speech, his especially outrageous and transparent lies, are words that have shaped the world: demonstrations of power, attempts to undermine the existence of shared belief in truth and facts.
  • Words are so central to international affairs that they get their own special professional and legal category: diplomacy. We hope that speech, if it does not draw countries closer together, will at least allow clear communication about interests, demands, and the possibility of war.
  • A large part of the population begins with a tribal sense of what team they’re on, which side they support, but relatively little information about the substantive policy views associated with that
  • Trump undermined the most longstanding pillar of American foreign policy.
  • America’s closest allies now have to believe that its treaty commitments are up for grabs in each election, and have to plan accordingly.
  • Coercion is expensive, and the in the postwar West the US has often been able to get its way without violence, as the widely-trusted anchor state in an order with a lot of perceived legitimacy
  • This is true in security, where the US is able to shape the world order to an outsized degree, cheaply, because of its network of alliances.
  • And it’s true in economics; the US benefits from the use of the dollar as a reserve currency, the international willingness to hold US debt, and the global system of trade that it created.
  • They leave because they hear and understand that they’re not wanted.
  • Trump called on Congress to allow Cabinet officials to “remove federal employees who undermine the public trust or fail the American people,” i.e., to fire civil servants on grounds of political disagreement, ending the century-old rule of a professional and apolitical civil service that stays on as political appointees come and go
  • Trump saying it matters. House Speaker Paul Ryan echoing the call for a “purge” at the FBI matters. Fox News’ constant public delegitimation of the civil service matters
  • Immediate policy outcomes mainly have to do with coercion: who is taxed, regulated, expropriated, imprisoned, deported, conscripted, what wars are fought, who is kept out of the country by force of arms.
  • immigration enforcement is a domain in which there’s a lot of discretion on the ground
  • Trump’s demonization of immigrants and celebration of ICE change policy de facto. Trump’s words have sent the message of “anything goes” to ICE  and “you should be scared” to those who might be vulnerable to ICE. Both messages have been heard. ICE has become so aggressive in its tactics that a federal judge described it as “treatment we associate with regimes we revile as unjust, regimes where those who have long lived in a country may be taken without notice from streets, home, and work. And sent away.”
  • it also matters more broadly for the character of the American state and bureaucracy. By discouraging professionals and encouraging politicization, Trump is already changing the civil service by his speech.
  • the Republican and conservative rank and file now have an unusually direct, unusually constant source of information about the things that people like us are supposed to believe and support. I think that we can see the effect of this in the rapid and dramatic swings in reported Republican opinion on questions from free trade to Russia policy
  • Trump’s stump speeches and unhinged tweets, and Fox News’ amplification of them, are changing what Republican voters think it means to be a Republican. He doesn’t speak for them; how many of them had a view about “the deep state” two years ago? He speaks to them, and it matters.
  • The delegitimation of the basic enterprise of independent journalism is something else, and something new to the US
  • In their important new book How Democracies Die, the political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt point to the delegitimation of the independent press as one of the key warning signs of a genuine would-be autocrat.
  • We don’t know how far Trump will be able to go in his attempts to suppress the media, but we know that he’s persuaded millions of Republicans to let him try.
  • Trump has successfully communicated to his voters that being on their team means not being on the FBI’s team. He’s changed what being a Republican means.
  • And he’s trying to change what being an American means
  • It’s also the power to channel and direct the dangerous but real desire for collective national direction and aspiration. Humans are tribal animals, and our tribal psychology is a political resource that can be directed to a lot of different ends
  • all those presidents put forward a public rhetorical face that was better than their worst acts. This inevitably drives political opponents crazy: they despise the hypocrisy and the halo that good speeches put on undeserving heads. I’ve had that reaction to, well, every previous president in my living memory, at one time or another. But there’s something important and valuable in the fact that they felt the need to talk about loftier ideal than they actually governed by
  • In words, even if not in deeds, they championed a free and fair liberal democratic order, the protection of civil liberties, openness toward the world, rejection of racism at home, and defiance against tyranny abroad. And their words were part of the process of persuading each generation of Americans that those were constitutively American ideals.
  • When he tells us that there are “very fine people on both sides” as between the Klan and their critics, he turns the moral compass of American public discourse upside-down. He channels the desire for collective aspiration into an attempt to make us worse than we are.
  • a norm that was built up through speech, persuasion, and belief can be undermined the same way. Trump’s own racism, his embrace of white nationalist discourse, and his encouragement of the alt-right over the past two years have, through words, made a start on that transformation.
  • Much the same is true of his demonization of political opponents, from “lock her up!” chants on the campaign trail and telling Hillary Clinton that “you’d be in jail
  • In the long term, it tells a large portion of the country that it is patriotic and virtuous to reject political disagreement, to reject the basic legitimacy of the views of the majority of the electorate.
  • The business of prioritizing procedural norms, the rule of law, alternation in power, and electoral fairness is psychologically difficult
  • stating the norms out loud—in the U.S., affirming that they are central to the American system—helps to balance out the authoritarian and populist temptation
  • what populists and authoritarians do is to make a virtue out of the inclination to love our in-group and hate the out-group
  • As with his embrace of white nationalism, Trump’s equation of opposition with crime and treason isn’t just “norm erosion,” a phrase we have seen a lot of in the last year. It’s norm inversion, aligning the aspiration to do right with substantive political wrong
  • “Ignore the tweets, ignore the language, ignore the words” is advice that affects a kind of sophistication: don’t get distracted by the circus, keep your eye on what’s going on behind the curtain. This is faux pragmatism, ignoring what is being communicated to other countries, to actors within the state, and to tens of millions of fellow citizens
26More

Donald Trump's Words Are Reshaping American Politics - The Atlantic - 0 views

  • Do the president’s words matter?In Donald Trump’s first year in office, there has been a surprisingly widespread effort to argue that they do not. Liberals and moderates occasionally insist that the media and the public should shift their attention from the president’s vulgar statements to the real policy work happening at federal agencies.
  • The upshot seems to be: Ignore the words, heed the substance.
  • But Trump’s words are his substance. “Politics is persuasion as well as coercion,” the political scientist Jacob Levy wrote last week, rightly arguing that Trump has “changed what being a Republican means.”
  • ...23 more annotations...
  • through persuasive insistence. On issues as diverse as the alleged dangers of immigration and the nature of truth, Trump’s words have the power to cleave public opinion, turning nonpolitical issues into partisan maelstroms and turning partisan attitudes on their head.
  • Years ago (even months ago) it would have been absurd to imagine “law and order” Republicans souring on the FBI; or that the party of Reagan and Bush would turn on the NFL, America’s most orgiastically patriotic sport.
  • In 2014, about 60 percent of both Republicans and Democrats said the FBI was doing an "excellent" or "good" job. Last year, their views forked: Republican approval of the agency fell by about 10 points, while Democratic opinion improved by a similar margin.
  • And yet, because Democrats have become more pro-immigrant under Trump, a record-high share of Americans now say "immigrants strengthen the country.”
  • Trump evinces not a Midas touch, but a Moses touch—an extraordinary talent for planting a stake in the ground and dividing the landscape before him.
  • In mid-2016, 20 percent of both Republicans and Democrats considered Russia an “ally” or “friendly.” One year later, Republicans were more than twice as likely as Democrats to say the same.
  • Immigration had for years been a marginal political topic, especially when compared with issues like jobs and terrorism. But Trump effectively recast immigration as a question of American identity and national security.
  • The construction of a wall along the Mexican border, once a fringey scheme, became the centerpiece of the GOP presidential candidate’s agenda. Today, three-quarters of Trump supporters say that “building the wall” should be the highest priority of his presidency
  • Less than 20 percent of Republicans said they had unfavorable views of the NFL in the summer of 2017. But their disapproval had more than tripled by October, after Trump blasted players for kneeling to protest police violence during the national anthem
  • It's tempting to downplay the power of Trump's words by saying their influence is “merely” shifting public opinion. But that's not quite right. First, there’s nothing subtle about Republican voters clutching nativism, the far-right right clutching Nazism, or Democratic voters radicalizing in defiance of the president.
  • Trump’s “mere” words could starve his party of moderate legislators, while encouraging Democratic candidates to embrace more liberal positions to distinguish themselves as distinctly anti-Trump.
  • Second, Trump’s rhetorical posture has some real policy implications. Though he hasn’t yet signed any major legislation on immigration, his harsh stance on undocumented workers empowered the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency to increase arrests by 40 percent in his first year, often to shocking effect
  • And his constant disparagement of experts who refuse to parrot his policies has sucked the talent out of several government agencies, notably the State Department.
  • Trump’s refusal to accept critical information as true—from his denial of Russian interference in the 2016 election to the “alternative facts” about his inauguration size—has demolished the right’s faith and trust in a free press. Three-quarters of the GOP now say that news organizations make up anti-Trump stories.
  • Even worse, a January study found that nearly half of Republicans believe that accurate stories that “cast a politician or political group in a negative light” are “always” fake news. Trump, along with Fox News, has given his supporters the license to self-deport from reality.
  • Trump’s obsession with building and broadcasting an alternative ledger of facts has made epistemology the fundamental crisis of his term
  • In its first month, the administration invented or mainstreamed a new vocabulary of mendacity—e.g., fake news, alternative facts—and within 10 months, Trump made more than 1,500 false or misleading claims, according to The Washington Post. That’s roughly six lies, exaggerations, or omissions per day
  • No legislation, no executive order, and no official speech has caused this shift. It is the president’s words, delivered often via Twitter and amplified on Fox News, that have exploded the very notion of a shared political truth.
  • The insistence that Trump’s words don’t matter isn’t incidental to the GOP’s broader strategy. It is the strategy—to quarantine Trump’s most noxious rhetoric and proceed apace with traditional Republican governance.
  • The idea that a president’s words don’t matter is a deeply ahistorical position. And that’s particularly true for the GOP
  • Perhaps Republicans don’t treat Trump as a typical Republican president because, in a very real sense, Trump is not really the president. Instead, he has become a kind of nationalist identity guru for the new American right.
  • an anonymous White House source all but acknowledged this strategy, telling Axios that the president would spend 2018 seeking “unexpected cultural flashpoints,” like the NFL’s kneeling controversy. The White House sees Trump’s principle talent as the ability to activate cultural resentment among his supporters, encouraging them to redefine their identity and values around a nativist anger.
  • Politics is downstream from persuasion, and law is downstream from language.
1More

Opinion | What Have the Elites Ever Done for Fox? - The New York Times - 0 views

  • TUCKER: All right, but apart from capital financing, deregulation, access to global markets, a stable and predictable regulatory and legal environment, I.R.A.s and 401(k)’s, talented immigrants, global cities, good food, universities that are the envy of the world, record-making growth and a world in which there’s almost no chance of my children being conscripted to fight a war, what else have the elites done for us?
3More

Tory and Labour MPs to force Brexit delay if May's deal is voted down | Politics | The ... - 0 views

  • The Labour MP Chuka Umunna, who is campaigning for a second referendum said: “The stark reality is that the principal way of stopping no deal – which is a distinct possibility – is by getting an extension of the article 50 process. The EU is clear – they will grant an extension to allow for a people’s vote, not for further negotiation, so committing to a people’s vote is the way to stop no deal.”
  • Meanwhile figures have emerged showing the government has spent more than £4m on consultants to help prepare for leaving the bloc. This includes almost £1.5m on Boston Consulting Group, which in 2016 warned that “a protracted period of uncertainty and volatility seems very likely on many dimensions, including on growth, trade, investment, interest rates, and financial markets”
  • In an interview with the Sunday Times, the trade minister, Liam Fox, put the chances of Brexit being cancelled altogether at about “50-50” if parliament votes down Theresa May’s deal. “If we were not to vote for that, I’m not sure I would give it [Brexit] much more than 50-50,” Fox, a leading supporter of leaving the EU, told the newspaper.
2More

Senate Judiciary Approves Bill To Protect Special Counsel Robert Mueller : NPR - 0 views

  • Four Republicans, including committee chairman and bill co-sponsor Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, voted with committee Democrats to advance the controversial legislation. The bill would allow Mueller or any future special counsel 10 days to apply for expedited judicial review if he or she were fired from an investigation. It would also require the attorney general to provide a report to Congress if a special counsel is appointed or removed and detailed information if the scope of an investigation is changed.
  • In a Fox News interview on Thursday, President Trump suggested he was closely watching the Mueller investigation and could intervene. "And you look at the corruption at the top of the FBI, it's a disgrace. And our Justice Department, which I try and stay away from, but at some point, I won't," said Trump.
3More

What is wrong with these people? - The Washington Post - 0 views

  • Fox News’s business model is built on promoting crackpot ideas and airing hateful rhetoric that feed the anger and resentment of its base. That means tearing down genuine heroes who challenge the Great Leader Trump. They are utterly comfortable voicing obnoxious slurs, revealing a stunning lack of human decency. They are superstars in the right-wing ecosystem, not in spite of their crass, bigoted views, but because of them.
  • There is something dark and twisted at the core of the Trumpian political movement and philosophy (if you can call it that). You don’t get criticized, let alone fired, for perpetuating hurtful conspiracy theories (about Seth Rich’s death, President Obama’s birth certificate or McCain’s captivity) or for voicing hateful views.
  • In short, not all of Trump’s followers and enablers are bad people, but in the Trump universe, bad people sure do flourish.
8More

Tucker Carlson says white supremacy is a 'hoax' - The Washington Post - 0 views

  • Carlson argued that white supremacy is a fake crisis cooked up by Democrats as a campaign ploy. “It’s actually not a real problem in America,” Carlson said, adding later, “This is a hoax, just like the Russia hoax. It’s a conspiracy theory used to divide the country and keep a hold on power.”
  • violence tied to far-right ideologies have killed roughly as many Americans since 9/11 as al-Qaeda and the Islamic State combined.
  • The president has often called Hispanic migration an “invasion” — language echoed in a manifesto police believe the accused El Paso shooter posted online decrying a “Hispanic invasion of Texas.”
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Carlson has regularly said similar words. He’s used “invasion” rhetoric nine times on his show this year, according to liberal watchdog group Media Matters for America, including describing a surge of migrants at the southern border as “an invasion, and it’s terrifying.
  • Carlson has also warned that immigrants could “replace” Americans — an echo, critics say, of the “Great Replacement,” a conspiracy theory that also motivated the deadly March attack in Christchurch, New Zealand that killed 51 people at mosques.
  • Carlson framed his argument around the idea that few Americans belong to explicitly white supremacist groups, like the KKK.
  • But experts say white supremacist mass killers are more likely today to be radicalized in online forums like 8chan, where the alleged El Paso killer reportedly posted his manifesto, than at organized rallies with white hoods
  • FBI Director Christopher A. Wray said the agency had arrested about 100 domestic terrorism suspects in the previous nine months, and most were tied to white supremacist beliefs.
9More

Did a New York Times article inspire Trump's 'back to work' plan? | US news | The Guardian - 0 views

  • At the start of this week, as millions were following US government advice to combat the coronavirus pandemic by physical distancing and staying indoors, Donald Trump abruptly declared that people needed to soon return to work.
  • The policy of returning to normal, nearly all epidemiologists warn, carries a threat of catastrophe: of allowing the virus to spread just as the measures proven to curb it are starting to work.
  • On Sunday, the Fox News host Steve Hilton railed against the idea of long-term social distancing. Hilton claimed “working Americans” will be “crushed” by an indefinite work shutdown. Hilton mused that there could be a situation where “the cure is worse than the disease”.
  • ...6 more annotations...
  • The idea of sending people back to work and restarting the economy had been floating around last weekend, propagated by two opinion pieces in particular. One was written on Medium. Another, published two days before the Hilton show, was an opinion piece by David Katz, a former director of the Yale-Griffin Prevention Research Center, which was published by the New York Times. Given the reach of the New York Times this piece, headlined Is Our Fight Against Coronavirus Worse Than the Disease?, attracted huge attention.
  • In time, people would develop immunity to the coronavirus, and in the meantime, damage to the economy would be minimized, Katz opined.
  • Katz’s piece was shared widely among conservatives, including by Fox News host and informal Trump adviser Pete Hegseth. The article served as a handy tool for conservatives advancing the argument that the economy shouldn’t be sacrificed for coronavirus containment.
  • “Dr Katz’s efforts on behalf of public health during this pandemic are uncompensated and born from a sense of duty and commitment to public health,” a spokeswoman for Katz told the Guardian. She pointed to a post Katz wrote on LinkedIn following the criticism, where he stresses how damage to the economy is also a massive public health issue.
  • He said: “The other thing is, low risk doesn’t mean no risk. We don’t know the natural history of the disease well enough to say: ‘Everybody under 65 is A-OK and ready to go back to work.’”
  • The concept of trading off self-isolation for returning to normal to help the economy has also been pushed by Trump’s cabinet including, his economic adviser Larry Kudlow, who on Tuesday told reporters: “Public health includes economic health.”
4More

Trump's late conversion to reality leaves out his supporters - The Washington Post - 0 views

  • Trump’s late conversion to reality has left behind one group of Americans that will be difficult to convince: his own supporters. Their alternative-facts diet has left them intolerant of anything the government and the media feed them.
  • An alarming new poll from NPR, PBS NewsHour and Marist shows that the number of Republicans who believe the virus is a real threat has actually fallen over the past month, from 72 percent in February to just 40 percent now. A majority of Republicans now say the threat has been blown out of proportion — more than double the 23 percent who said so last month.
  • Only 30 percent of Republicans plan to avoid large gatherings (vs. 61 percent of Democrats), a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll found just before Trump proposed such limits. Republicans were half as likely to say they were rescheduling travel and a third as likely to stop eating out at restaurants.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • After encouraging his Fox fan base for weeks to scoff at the virus, Trump now finds that his presidency, the U.S. economy and countless lives depend on him convincing them otherwise.
2More

Fact check: A list of 28 ways Trump and his team have been dishonest about the coronavi... - 0 views

  • Trump said on Fox Business: "You know in April, supposedly, it dies with the hotter weather." He told state governors: "You know, a lot of people think that goes away in April with the heat -- as the heat comes in. Typically, that will go away in April." And he said at a campaign rally: "Looks like by April, you know, in theory, when it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away. I hope that's true."
  • As of mid-September 2014, World Health Organization (WHO) researchers reported that there was an estimated fatality rate of 70.8%. But the rate "fell later in the epidemic with lessons learned in improving treatment," said Julie Fischer, associate research professor in the Department of Microbiology and Immunology at Georgetown University and director of the Elizabeth R. Griffin Program. Still, even at 70.8%, death was never guaranteed for infected people, as Trump suggested.
19More

How false hope spread about hydroxychloroquine to treat covid-19 - and the consequences... - 0 views

  • President Trump has repeatedly touted the anti-malarial medications hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine as that much-needed solution.
  • Scientists have since pointed to major flaws in those original studies and say there is a lack of reliable data on the drugs. Experts warn about the dangerous consequences of over-promoting a drug with unknown efficacy: Shortages of hydroxychloroquine have already occurred, depriving lupus and rheumatoid arthritis patients of access to it. Doctors say some patients could die of side effects. Other potential treatments for covid-19 could get overlooked with so much concentration on one option.
  • Raoult’s findings helped bring the theory to the United States. However, scientists have since discredited the trial, pointing to major flaws in the way it was conducted. The journal that published the study announced on April 3 that it did not meet its standards.
  • ...16 more annotations...
  • A large portion of activity online at the end of February and early March appeared in French and centered on a study published by French researcher and doctor Didier Raoult.
  • Yet before the record could be set straight, the hypothesis spread widely on U.S. social media.
  • The faulty research then appeared in the Gateway Pundit, Breitbart and the Blaze. It ultimately made its way to Fox News, first appearing on Laura Ingraham’s program on March 16. Fox News shows hosted by Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson went on to promote the drugs and continue to do so.
  • On March 19, Trump first mentioned hydroxychloroquine at a White House news briefing. DiResta’s analysis showed that the following week, the claim started to spike in the United States, with 101,844 posts on Facebook. Starbird reports Trump’s first mention set off a surge in attention, seeing tens of thousands of tweets per hour in late March.
  • Trump again spoke about the drugs at news conferences on April 3, 4 and 5. Mentions on Twitter skyrocketed on April 6.
  • scientists say there is only “anecdotal evidence” on the drugs. To a layperson, that may not sound bad, but it’s actually an insult in the scientific community.
  • Anecdotal evidence refers to people’s personal stories about taking the drugs and has no basis in scientific data. It’s akin to a Yelp review.
  • t there’s very little evidence that we actually have that this has a clinical benefit, which is kind of bad for something that’s being very heavily promoted. We should probably have some data and some science behind it.”
  • Asked whether chloroquine was a possible cure for covid-19, Janet Diaz of WHO told reporters on Feb. 20 that the organization was prioritizing other therapeutics: “For chloroquine, there is no proof that that is an effective treatment at this time. We recommend that therapeutics be tested under ethically approved clinical trials to show efficacy and safety.” A few weeks later, both chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine were included in a mega-trial WHO launched.
  • The Food and Drug Administration granted an emergency use approval to distribute millions of doses of the drugs to hospitals across the country on March 29.
  • Luciana Borio, the former head of medical and biodefense preparedness at the National Security Council, criticized the FDA’s EUA announcement and has called for a randomized clinical trial of the drugs.
  • “I think that it was a misuse of emergency authorizations of the authority that the FDA has. Because it gives this credence that the government is actually backing, and it’s so common for people to equate that with an approval,” Borio said.
  • When asked whether any of the completed studies have provided substantial evidence that the benefits of the drugs outweigh the risks, Borio responded, “Not at all. No study was done in a way that would allow that conclusion.”
  • Over the course of only a few weeks, posts online, the media and politicians turned chloroquine from an unknown drug to a “100% coronavirus cure,” misleading the public on its effectiveness and engendering unintended but negative consequences.
  • Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine as treatments for covid-19 are not yet backed by reliable scientific evidence. In a pandemic, it’s important for everyone to follow the lead of scientists. Rumors on the Internet are the least reliable source of information. And politicians are not qualified to provide scientific advice, despite even the best intentions.
  • In particular, Trump’s incorrect comments on the drugs and his role in advocating for their use, based on minimal and flimsy evidence, sets a bad example. His advocacy for this unproven treatment provides potentially false hope and has led to shortages for people who rely on the drugs. The president earns Four Pinocchios.
8More

Opinion | In the American South, a Perfect Storm Is Gathering - The New York Times - 0 views

  • On March 30, when Mr. Lee issued an executive order shutting down nonessential businesses, he stopped short of requiring Tennesseans to stay home. “It is deeply important that we protect personal liberties,” he said, ignoring tens of thousands of health professionals who argued that nothing less than a stay-at-home order would save this state from disaster. And not just this state.
  • Out of fear of what Tennessee’s delays might mean for their own populations, Fort Campbell, a U.S. Army base that straddles the Tennessee-Kentucky border, restricted travel to Nashville.
  • Andy Beshear, the Democratic governor of Kentucky, urged his citizens not to enter Tennessee: “We have taken very aggressive steps to try to stop or limit the spread of the coronavirus to try to protect our people,” Mr. Beshear said. “But our neighbors from the south, in many instances, are not. If you ultimately go down over that border and go to a restaurant or something that’s not open in Kentucky, what you do is you bring the coronavirus back here.”
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Most Southern states, like Tennessee, did not expand Medicaid, and in those states a perfect storm has gathered force.
  • What does it mean to live though a pandemic in a place with a high number of uninsured citizens, where many counties don’t have a single hospital, and where the governor delayed requiring folks to stay home? Across the South, we are about to find out.
  • Finally, on April 2, Mr. Lee acknowledged epidemiological reality and issued a stay-at-home order. The rest of the red-state governors will also capitulate to reality before this is all over. But the time for decisive action has long since passed, and their delays, like the president’s, will end up costing thousands of lives.
  • Viruses are not partisan. Science itself is not partisan. Nevertheless, Covid-19 has become a partisan issue here in the South because our governors have followed the lead of both the president, who spent crucial early weeks denying the severity of the crisis, and Fox News, which downplayed concerns about the pandemic as Democratic hysteria.
  • That’s why every governor who has issued a deeply belated shelter-in-place order is a Republican.
8More

Who will be held accountable for Trump's nonsensical ideas? (Opinion) - CNN - 0 views

  • In the midst of the greatest health crisis in living memory, the doctor responsible for helping to find a solution, a vaccine, says he was removed for challenging the nonsensical ideas of President Donald Trump about hydroxychloroquine. Dr. Rick Bright, head of the vaccine program, says he lost his job for demanding Trump's ideas be subjected to rigorous testing. Bright was dismissed as the director of the US Department of Health and Human Services' Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority and demoted to a role in the National Institutes of Health.
  • "What do you have to lose?" Trump asked Americans during an April 4 news briefing, as he urged anxious viewers to take the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine -- which we now know could lead to more deaths -- for Covid-19.
  • Another grievous error would have added to the long series of presidential missteps along this road, mistakes for which neither Trump nor his acolytes and promoters, including Fox News -- which offers a megaphone for every manner of Trump outrage -- never apologize.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • "It's just a feeling," he explained as he promoted the drug from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention headquarters. I'm a "smart guy." Trump said he had ordered 28 million doses; he wrongly claimed the US Food and Drug Administration approving hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19 treatment. People rushed to buy it, creating shortages for those who needed it to treat diseases like lupus.
  • Trump's actions and words could all but ensure that that's precisely what happens. And his accomplices at Fox News will magnify the harmful impact of wrongheaded decisions. We will all pay the price, and they will never apologize. They will never admit they got any of it wrong. It will be left to the American people to reach a verdict -- and proceed accordingly.
  • One hesitates to blame individuals -- politicians or celebrities -- for the killings executed by a virus. But the inescapable fact is that the message from Trump, Hannity and others in right-wing media made it easier for the virus to carry out its deadly mission.Will anyone be held responsible for the egregious misinformation?
  • Now, a US Veterans Health Administration study found Covid-19 patients who took Trump's "game changer" drug were more likely to die than those who didn't. In the study, 27.8% of those who took it died, compared to 11.4% who did not. A study in France was stopped to prevent worse damage. The same happened with a Brazilian study.
  • Just when we thought President Donald Trump might be inclined to tamp down his impulses to suggest unproven and dangerous cures for Covid-19, Thursday's nightly performance brought an even wilder parade of ideas from the President. Perhaps we should consider injecting disinfectants, Trump posited, prompting the maker of Lysol to issue an urgent warning, "under no circumstance should our disinfectant products be administered into the human body (through injection, ingestion or any other route)."
10More

Trump claims Lincoln got better press treatment as he ups Covid-19 death estimate - CNN... - 0 views

  • After admitting US coronavirus deaths could hit 90,000, President Donald Trump is bemoaning his own plight -- complaining that he has been treated worse by the press than Abraham Lincoln.
  • "I am greeted with a hostile press the likes of which no president has ever seen," Trump said at the Fox News town hall Sunday night.
  • Trump was speaking at the time of a widening divide between states that are opening economies and others that are warning of premature declarations of victory amid soaring tensions fomented by weeks of coronavirus lockdowns.
  • ...7 more annotations...
  • His statement was classic Trump, not just in his audacity of comparing himself to the man many historians rate as the greatest president, but in his tendency to make every issue -- even in the midst of a national tragedy in which tens of thousands of Americans have died -- about himself.
  • I used to say 65,000 and now I'm saying 80 or 90 and it goes up and it goes up rapidly," the President said at the memorial, a glorious and spectacular backdrop for the Fox News show that an image-making campaign manager could not have bettered.
  • But if states like South Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Texas that are opening can provide a blueprint for the "new normal" that will be American life until a vaccine is found, they could point the way to a broader recovery and speed economic rebounds.
  • The reopening -- albeit with many restaurants and businesses at reduced capacity -- will also provide a new challenge for the White House,
  • States like New York and Maryland -- which have plateaued at fairly high levels from Covid-19 -- are warning that easing restrictions too quickly could be disastrous.
  • "My gut says the weather is going to warm, people are bored, people want this over. They see the numbers going down. They can take false comfort,
  • US deaths from Covid-19 are racing toward 70,00
11More

The Trailer: I signed up as a Trump supporter, then a Biden supporter. Here's what happ... - 0 views

  • The point of the Trump app, social media accounts and Web TV was not just to keep me informed — it was to replace some of the news I might be getting from other outlets. “Forget the mainstream media,” went one ad that played at the start of the daily Trump video broadcasts. “Get your facts from the source.” 
  • On the app was a world where the president's agenda was so obviously successful that the media and Democrats had to lie and smear to cover it up.
  • Trump video content was varied but reliable.
  • ...8 more annotations...
  • “War Room Weekly” would deliver updates on campaign organizing and messaging. “Triggered!” brought Donald Trump Jr. together with special guests, for a free-flowing conversation about unfair treatment of conservatives. Shows hosted by presidential daughter-in-law Lara Trump or former Fox News host Kimberly Guilfoyle, Trump Jr.'s girlfriend, had segment/commercial/segment formats that felt just like cable TV. 
  • Much like swaths of Fox News or the president's increasingly favored outlet, One America News, the shows mixed information about the Trump record with denunciations of a mainstream media that they said refused to cover it fairly.
  • I had more company watching Trump content than I did watching Biden content
  • Trump's campaign has 29 million followers on Facebook, while Biden's has less than 2 million.
  • In some ways, the Biden campaign is years behind on this kind of engagement
  • By this point in the 2012 campaign, Obama's team had established a popular video series in which deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter shared good news and debunked Republican attacks. There's no such block-and-tackle effort from the Biden social media experience
  • Biden's broadcasts didn't really discuss media coverage, which isn't surprising; polling shows that Democratic voters trust mainstream news outlets, and Republican voters don't. The result was that Trump campaign content was more involving, and even gripping, something easy to imagine as a cable TV program.
  • Biden campaign content was not. The Democrat is belatedly staffing up to grow his online presence, but the result may look like what I saw this week: two campaigns operating in different realities, in different tones, with their voters consuming information that the other side will never see.
« First ‹ Previous 121 - 140 of 586 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page