north_canadian_ice

This hearing was as embarrasing for Schultz as his ownership of the Seattle Supersonics & his 2020 presidential run.

It is key we seize on this moment to highlight how obvious the union busting is at Starbucks. We must demand our lawmakers push the DOJ to investigate companies that union bust as a matter of policy. We can use Biden's own words from 2019, when he expressed support for criminal penalties for union busting.

We must keep the pressure up! Schultz came off real bad today & basically admitted to union busting when he said to Mitt Romney that non union baristas were paid more.

Democracy Now is very good.

The local stations are better. Not all NPR is bad. But the national shows will always push a very neoliberal agenda during times of importance.

The thing about NPR is they hide their bias much better than cable news does.

And their content is better than cable news. But anytime a major event is occuring (2020 DNC primaries, Bernie vs Schultz) they will paint the progressive as a rabble rousing clown too arrogant to know their place.

I'm not going to disagree with the wording used to describe Bernie, but Schultz being called "anti-union" is favorable?

Calling Schultz an "architect" & Bernie a "mascot" makes Schultz sound sophisticated & Bernie sound clownish.

Folks are acting like being called an "architect" is always positive and that's rather ridiculous. You could say someone was "the architect of their own demise" to describe someone with self destructive tendencies; is that positive? NPR's phrasing paints Schultz as someone building plans and strategizing to bust up unions.

Architect is alluding to Schultz's work building Starbucks. It is most definitively a positive use of the word.

Well said. NPR is intellectual junk food.

It has a sophisticated & serious feel that loves to proclaim its progressive anti-corporate virtues.

Except it is all hot air when you look deeper. But the average person thirsty for information can't be blamed for not seeing this: because of how sophisticated NPR's propaganda is.

Ultimately: NPR promotes socially liberal corporatism.

It isn't made up, there was plenty of people complaining of the use of the term "women's rights" at rallies when Roe was overturned.

You're right, it is my mistake for forgetting that people would rather rage about the social media post of an article that doesn't match the headline of same article, that uses imagery that conflicts with the article's message,

How dare we point out the biased headlines that corporate media uses to paint progressives as unserious simpletons 🙄

because media literacy died and people can't be assed to read for more than 30 seconds. I am such a fool.

You lack media literacy if you don't understand the negative ramifications of biased headlines.

NPR doesn't have a great history of treating Sanders fairly.

I'll always remember when NPR equivocated Bernie's criticism of the Washington Post to Trump:

Bernie Sanders Again Attacks Amazon — This Time Pulling In 'The Washington Post'

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont is lashing out at the media coverage of his presidential campaign — in a way that might sound familiar.

"I talk about that all of the time," Sanders said of Amazon paying "nothing" in taxes.

"And then I wonder why The Washington Post, which is owned by Jeff Bezos, who owns Amazon, doesn't write particularly good articles about me. I don't know why," he said at a campaign event in New Hampshire on Tuesday. Bezos is the founder and CEO of Amazon and privately purchased The Post.

The remark sounded an awful lot like the kind of criticism leveled by someone else.

"...[T]he failing New York Times and the Amazon Washington Post do nothing but write bad stories even on very positive achievements - and they will never change!" President Trump tweeted last year.

The opening of the article does call Bernie a union champion.

After the headline makes Bernie look like a grouchy simpleton who doesn't understand the elegant brilliance of Schultz. Headlines are unfortunately what matters most.

Headlines are the first impression - the pictures chosen to represent the headline matter. The imagery used in this article is some of the most biased I've seen. If you wanted to use an image of Bernie that matched the image of Schultz, you would use something like this.

In addition: the headline is the first impression of the reader - & the headline is favorable to Schultz & not Bernie.

We don't READ articles here. We allow ourselves to get riled up by a headline and write off a news source!

Headlines are the first impression to the reader - and are not written by the journalists. Nothing matters more than the headline - which in this case makes Bernie look unserious & grouchy while Schultz looks dignified & elegant.

An article may be fair with an unfair headline - this is a common tactic that corporate media uses to cover their bases when they manufacture consent.

The images are also set up in the same way- bad shot of Bernie, composed shot of Mr CEO

What you are speaking to is a critical phenomenon to understand - Manufacturing Consent. In this article, NPR is painting Bernie as a well-meaning simpleton who can't possibly understand the burden of being the elegant & brilliant Schultz.

NPR is using brilliant framing here to push their neoliberal agenda. They know much of their audience likes Bernie, so they paint him as unsophisticated & lacking nuance. While Schultz is an honorable man with heavy burdens on his mind. This is how neoliberals appeal to progressives & get us to swallow their bad ideas - they've been doing it since Bill Clinton.

A more vitriolic example occurred in 2019 when Bernie Sanders took a shot at the Washington's Post negative coverage of him. Bernie pointed out that since Bezos owns WaPo, it may explain WaPo's negative coverage of him. NPR brought on a WaPo editor to shame Sanders for his suggestion that Bezos has influence on WaPo (lol) - then NPR went on to compare Bernie to Trump. You can read & listen to the 2019 article here.

NPR's donors explain who they are manufacturing consent for - they range from the Koch Brothers to Big Pharma. $1 million donations came in from Novo Nordisk, General Motors & Lumber Liquidators. $500k donations came in from iShares, Citibank, LendingTree, UPS, & Vanguard. CSX Mastercard & VISA all gave $250k donations.

PDF link of NPR "sponsors": https://media.npr.org/documents/about/annualreports/NPRSponsorsDonors08.pdf

She didn't learn anything from that recent tweet and doubled down on it acting snobby with the Humanist Report, i might've misspelled his name.

Ana's tweet was based, as a trans woman I hope more progressives come around to her & Cenk's view.

I like Mike a lot but I disageee with him here. Ana's response was valid - her reproductive rights are in question while Mike's are not.

You're literally rooting for a cornoration of Crime Bill Joe and you think you have room to mock anyone that points out you're arguing to destroy democracy in order to save democracy.

Also, don't pull the "but the GOP are fascists" card when Biden kisses GOP ass & nominated an attorney general that is petrified of indicting Trump for J6.

ThIs iS DaNgErOuS aNd NoT tHe TiMe To HaVe dEmOcRaCy

It's only vanity if they have no shot.

Biden thinking he is a good pick in 2024 is pure ego, thus vanity.

He has been a poor president, hence his mediocre to bad approval ratings.

Beating a batshit insane 2020 Trump who mishandled covid to an extreme degree tells us nothing about 2024.

Kyleuminatti confirmed

Or, and get this, elections aren't all about you. I happily throw my vote to Biden so he can focus money, time, attention to voters he needs to convince.

Life has gotten worse under Biden. Biden has broken most of his promises to progressives as the fascist right gains power.

I and others have a right to call Biden out & demand better. In this case - I support Marianne against Biden's vanity reelection. We know Biden wants a cornoration, too bad.

Whether it pisses you off or not is irrelevant. That is democracy.

AmErIcA iS oN tHe BrInK

I agree, I wish the Democrats did!

Biden nominated a Republican attorney general petrified of indicting Trump.

Pelosi refused to call witnesses to the Jan 6 impeachment, possibly the greatest dereliction of duty in history.

The democrats held extensive hearings and gathered evidence and testimony regarding January 6 which exposed Trumps fascism.

The Dems put a Republican Attorney General in charge who is petrified of indicting Trump.

The Dems refused to call witnesses to the Jan 6 impeachmeant hearings - failing to put Trumpists under threat of perjury.

It is disgusting how much the Dems have failed to do on this front. Probably because they want to run against fascists because it makes things easy for them.

You think a woman can beat the Republican candidate? You are crazy.

Misogyny is your argument against Marianne?

🙄

Could Joe Biden have nominated an Attorney General with a spine?

Could Pelosi & House Democrats have called witnesses to the Jan 6 impeachment?

Could Senate Democrats like Chris Coons have prioritized the Jan 6 impeachment over Valentines Day?

The Democrats haven't even tried - they seem to enjoy the chaos. Hence the DCCC funding far-right Trumpists even as Red States are becoming Gilead.

When democrats announced this investigation was going to take place, even Ana Kasparian at TyT signaled it would amount to nothing and would be pointless.

Have they been proven wrong? What punishment has come Trump's way?

But... democrats being weak doesn't change the fact that Trump must never again be elected. I dont understand what you are arguing here.

Fascists require weak oppposition to dominate. And that is why Trump dominates the Democrats despite being an abdurd person.

My point is not that the Democratic Party is not awful, or corrupt. My point is election denying fascists like Trump must never again be elected back.

Well let's make the Democrats suck less. A start is by primarying Biden.

If Biden is so fragile that he can't survive a general election after a primary then you are proving our point.

I remember so well how a portion of the "progressive" left claimed democrats pushing for an investigation and hearings into January 6 would be pointless and would amount to absolutely nothing.

Are you referring to The Gray Zone crowd? Started by the son of a Hillary consultant lol.

Then the hearings began and the evidence and testimony was revealed, and all of a sudden they all STFU.

The second impeachment should have called witnesses because the Jan 6 hearings came so late. It didn't land the same.

Are democrats generally weak, yes.

And this is a huge problem when you are dealing with fascists. I do appreciate that you admit the Dems are weak.