The dirty commies on the Seattle Times editorial board want to break up media conglomerate Time Warner:
The government is not going to do it
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
Blethen is right about one thing: There’s too much concentration of ownership and control of U.S. news media. Somehow we need to find a way to loosen the grip of GOP Propaganda, Inc.’s stranglehold on the so-called “liberal media.” You know — the “liberal media” that for years was wilfully blind to the Bush administration’s lies and corruption, and shamelessly shilled for the selfish economic interests of the nation’s richest 2%. Frank Blethen and his counterparts across the country — including ultra-conservative newspaper owners like Richard Scaife and the not-so-Rev. Sun Myung Moon — must be amused when wingnuts call their publications “Pravda” or “Workers Daily World” as they laugh all the way to the bank.
Mr. Blethen’s political agenda follows his personal agenda, so sometimes he’s not consistent from a policy point of view.
Goldy, I think you are missing the forest for the trees here. ANYTHING that brings big media consolidation to the public’s attention is a good thing. Suprising, hypocritical and possibly self serving that it’s the Times, but good nonetheless.
As RR notes in 1 above, GOP has ruthlessly exploited the media corporations. For example, denying White House access to reporters who publish stories critical of the Bush usurpistration. In other industries, this is generally a bad thing, but in the media industry, it’s possibly aiding the current failure of democracy.
so here’s a question, is it okay for them to be inconsistant, if they’re right this time?
Goldy, what planet are you on?
A seattle left wing newspaper of course is anti free market!!!
free market isn’t a lifestyle silly. leftists are for the free market when the free market does the job. in certain fields the free market is inherently destructive, however. of late, this effect can be seen in military contracting, health care, and public media.
RightOn,
The Seattle Times endorsed W in 2000, lest you forget.
robert
ok, but man, between that crap in the local news, sports where you can’t tell where the mens leagues are (rant, why do i get scared when i see some story that Tennessee is #1 when its womens not mens and who cares), Nicole, Danny, former gasbag Godden, Balter.
I find the Weekely equally liberal, but free.
I would expect a wingnut like “righton” to diss on any publication that fails to repeat the lies he wants to hear.
roger,
thanks for jumping in to defend the honesty and quality of any seattle paper. Give us your standard 20 posts of saying nothing…
and/or anyone wanna try and defend the SEattle Times? I mean compared to NY Times or WSJ, not to my weekly reader.
I forgot to add Jerry Large to list of dimbulbs in the times..
9
Go ahead and attack me any time you like, righton. Coming from you, it’s a compliment. There’s a saying in the animal kingdom that you can judge a rabbit’s character by who his detractors are.
9
“anyone wanna try and defend the SEattle Times”
This is ridiculously easy to do. If you compare the Seattle Times with Free Republic, Drudge, Stefan’s shitty little blog, or any other right-wing megaphone, Blethen’s rag starts to look good.
WSJ? (kind of silly to compare to free publications)
The lefties didn’t notice that a few weeks ago, the Internal Revenue Service released data on tax year 2003. They show that the top 1 percent of taxpayers, ranked by adjusted gross income, paid 34.3 percent of all federal income taxes that year. The top 5 percent paid 54.4 percent, the top 10 percent paid 65.8 percent, and the top quarter of taxpayers paid 83.9 percent.
Kerry & Kennedy have an effective tax rate of 12% and they are as good at tax-dodging as they are at tax-spending.
my Favorite brush w/ the Seattle times commies…
I tried to put an ad to rent a house. I wanted a nice one, was new to area so didn’t know exact neighborhood. I wanted roughly, “nice house in nice neighbrhood”
They rejected cuz they say that was code for encouraging discrimination.
stupidos
HowieinSeattle said: “Mr. Blethen’s political agenda follows his personal agenda, so sometimes he’s not consistent from a policy point of view.” – Isn’t that what you loony lefties decry about right thinking induviduals?
So I ask who said this: “Today’s terrorist is tomorrow’s friend.”?
Progressive Al Sharpton.
18…Was that Al “Tawana” Sharpton??? [hehe]
John425:
A classic example of lying with statistics. Right wing conservatives seem to be very good at this. Over the last couple of years I’ve seen George Will doing it, Rush Limbaugh, and any number of right wing blogs linked to each other.
The problem with your statistics is that you’ve conveniently left out the fact that the people in the top 1% who are paying the 34% of taxes also have the most income. The last time I looked at this, the distribution was slightly progressive. The top 1% paid a slightly greater percentage of taxes than their percentage of income. I also looked at the time series of progressivity, and the Bush tax cuts were strongly reducing the progressivity. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were gone altogether by now.
In my opinion taxes should not be based on wages and salaries at all, but rather on wealth. Figures on wealth are hard to get at the IRS web site, but if we looked at taxes paid by wealth I believe we would find them to be very regressive.
Ronsch @19
In my opinion taxes should not be based on wages and salaries at all, but rather on wealth.
Then you would be wrong, IMO. Taxes should be based on your income. Income is the money you receive on a yearly basis. If you happen to hold property, you have to pay those taxes in order to have schools. Money made by you for sale of taxable property can be taxed if there is profit for you (is that not called Capital Gains?). So, what’s the problem?
@ 16
As someone who decries pointless PCism, I want to defend the Times on that one. “Nice neighborhood” could be a lot of different things, and what someone thinks is nice could be different for different races/ethnicities/orientations. Also, there are Federal housing laws that they must follow, which are no joke.
I’ll take this one:
“Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.”
-FDR
marks @20:
Why should taxes be proportional to income? Government operates mainly in the interests of the wealthy. It’s a constant struggle to get the government to do things for workers. But when it comes down to something good for workers but bad for the wealthy the government nearly always (maybe always) takes the side of the wealthy. So I think they should pay for it. I especially think they should be paying for the Iraq war. What exactly is that war doing for American workers except killing off their children in the military serving there?
Belltowner, re times and ad
They were stupid then and you “PC” stupid now. How in the hell do you say, “I hate slums, don’t want to live with Burien white trash”……but instead get misread for discrimination
I know my Indian, Black, and Chinese neighbors all sought out a nice neighborhood.
Yipes.
@8
Evidently what righton means by “free market” newspaper is one you get free instead of paying 50 cents for it.
Ronsch @23
Government operates mainly in the interests of the wealthy.
You and I operate under a different modus operandi.
It’s a constant struggle to get the government to do things for workers.
Ya know, I get a very good paycheck, and yet…man…if I were a Gov’t worker, I would be livin’ large…
But when it comes down to something good for workers but bad for the wealthy the government nearly always (maybe always) takes the side of the wealthy.
You must be the proper spokesman for us working klass…
So I think they should pay for it.
Sure, why not. They are US citizens that you and I can’t give a shit about…
I especially think they should be paying for the Iraq war. What exactly is that war doing for American workers except killing off their children in the military serving there?
Don’t worry. Have a cool drink…Grape, or Cherry?
My son is in that “unjust” war…Whether I end up as Cindy Sheehan depends on reality, not the ridiculous…
@117
“Isn’t that what you loony lefties decry about right thinking induviduals?”
No. What we decry about rightwing nut individuals is:
You’re pro-war
You’re pro-torture
You’re corrupt
You lie
You steal
You’re anti-environment
You’re anti-science
You’re against workers
You’re against poor people
You’re racists
You’re hypocrites
You’re draft dodgers
18
Does that mean Bush is going to appoint Terry Nichols to a cabinet post?
Or maybe Bush is going to appoint Nichols to run disaster relief for FEMA?
Roger
I thought you were the smarty pants around here. Do you steal the Wall Street Journal? I pay for it, and its worth it.
Goldy,
How long in purgatory? S’up to you, G-man….
28
Nah, he’ll appoint him director of the ATF.
There’s nothing in WSJ of interest to me. I get all the information I need for investing from my broker, on line, or at the public library. BTW, WSJ is available at libraries, for those who can wade through the arcane details of who is currently under investigation by the SEC, etc.
If WSJ is the only publication you read, you don’t know a goddam thing about Washington state, King County, or Seattle government and politics; or, for that matter, about national politics or any other politics.
Ignorance is bliss
a) Local news pretty one sided and journalists are weak/sloppy
b) Shark and others highlight the left wing nonsense (even rick anderson at weekly does that well too)
c) WSJ has awesome national political coverage. You could skip your latte and buy one at any QFC, if you wanted exposure to good writing and more truth than you’ve seen in a month of sundays.
Concerning the ad for the “nice” house: Federal anti-discrimination laws are in effect here. Newspapers can get in big trouble for running ads that appear to discriminate. The Times was just trying to not get in trouble with the Feds.
The Wall Street Journal? Pfffft.
Noone trusts Wall Street. Analysts live in a world of their own where Costco is bad.
Prospero;
Who does “nice” discriminate against?
Thedealdlyshoe
Ever read the WSJ? Maybe Dorothy Rabinowitz who blew apart the phony sex scandal in Wenatchee? Their Op ed page?