Your points are flimsy, at best. Assuming people cannot change at all and evolve their views is silly. Acting like this show doesn't help move the overall discourse in the right direction is just dishonest.
what? they've talked about where they stand (particularly Saagar on China) - they've been quite off of the established message with Russia (unless you are saying they aren't saying what YOU want them too?) ... the fact that your small mind only sees a certain view as right is just as bad as anyone else doing so ... I look a several different views and piece it together knowing what the bias of each perspective is ... apparently you do not ;-)
Dude, your only response to this article and what I've said is "ignore the fact that they're funded by billionaires and neocons because I like their content".
I base what I think about someone by what the actual output of their coverage is ... which is the ACTUAL important thing ... I went at them hard when they suddenly started pushing nuclear because their sudden intense push took me off guard ... I don't look at who pays their affiliates because they are just affiliates and BP pays THEM for their contributions not the other way around ...
there is no gotcha here sweetie ... focusing on one thing is lopsided and stupid ... and doesn't show you anything but what you want to see - I go by the actual product personally and I've been quite satisfied with most of it - you have your own biases in your coverage that tint how you present things that have NOTHING to do with your funding unless you only tell your audience what they WANT to hear cuz they fund you?
seriously - try again - this is still mostly shit flinging from what I can tell ;-) .. the proof ALWAYS lies in the product when it comes to commentary ... financing only comes into play if you can PROVE what is said = being paid to say it
Dude, your entire argument is "ignore the problems w/ these people, such as taking money from shady people and repeating Neocon talking points, because I like their content".
People like you would prefer it if the Left just sold-out and didn't stand for anything.
Your reading comprehension is so bad that you actually think I like their content. It's the same as neocons resorting to calling people "traitors" and "Saddam apologists" for not believing the WMD lie.
nope ... I see shit posting mostly based on personal biases - who pays who what is only a piece of the puzzle and bias has MANY reasons other than being paid to hold a view - an understanding of human psychology tells you that ... this is attributing malice without concrete evidence which is just as bad as the accusations made ... the big picture is what matters in the end but that is lost in this article in favor of shit flinging for status purposes (something far to prevalent these days) - the influence accusations must be much more pointed to be actual issues - everyone has biases held for a myriad of reasons - claiming you know exactly what another persons reasons are is just plain bullshit unless it's cut and dried - we often don't even know our own reasons even when we're sure we do - so there is really no way to know another's without it being quid pro quo ;-)
If you really think that the fact that Breaking Points is taking money from and associating w/ billionaires and Neocons isn't a conflict of interest at the minimum, or that Saagar isn't towing the Establishment line on China while Krystal won't push back on it, you're a fucking moron.
"Neocons isn't a conflict of interest at the minimum, or that Saagar isn't towing the Establishment line on China while Krystal won't push back on it."
This shows you are still stuck in some kind of false reality where you equate being anti-China with neocons. Yes neocons are anti-China, and so is the entire democrat party including the squad and Ilhan Omar and AOC, and also left media outlets like Democracy Now, Jacobin, Majority Report, etc.
Krystal doesn't push back on anti-China rhetoric not because she supports neocons, but because she covers for the squad. Ultimately that is the Krystal Ball /David Sirota/ Ryan Grim / Democracy Now / TYT/ Majority Report/ Abby Martin/ niche. They will give a symbolic token of adversarialism once in a blue moon to remain credible with their base of left-wing democrat-socialists, but they will always fall back in line when it matters. They will also attack real leftists the moment they step out of line or when the DNC sees them as a threat. I could give example after example.
Funny how in this entire screed, you didn't mention Saagar or his anti-China rhetoric. Maybe because you realized your argument would fall apart if you mentioned him. You're still trying to run interference for Breaking Points' anti-China hawkery.
I checked to see if you ever responded, but now i think i realize that you confused me with the previous commenter. That would explain why i was so baffled by your response anyway.
You've done nothing but complain that we shouldn't criticize Breaking Points because you like their content, and now you're actually agreeing w/ the criticism we're levying against Breaking Points. You literally contradicted yourself and didn't even realize it.
Not the $49,000 figure you posted from an earlier article.
2) You claim that Krystal Ball proclaims a generic message in first book Hijacking The Democratic Party-- but actually, the bool highlight's much more than just a generic message her message is that Capitalism with a UBI is the only solution to economic income inequality. You also missed the entire first chapter where Ball falls all over loving Biden and how she down plays he is so called problematic past positions. https://leontrotsky.substack.com/publish
3) Finally you forget to mention that The Young Turks including your favorite guy Jimmy Dore interviewed Krystal Ball on her Hijacking The Democratic Book. and he clearly didn't read it because if he had read her book he would have seen that Ball doesn't really believe in anything he says he cares about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sikkksZb9Y
That is a huge issue with all alternative media And notice how they don't actually ask any questions about her book or anything else she has to say her Biden Love.
Thank you for this. It confirms what I've heard on Breaking Points.
Just sad... Have fun never winning
Does it require billionaire backing to win?
Your points are flimsy, at best. Assuming people cannot change at all and evolve their views is silly. Acting like this show doesn't help move the overall discourse in the right direction is just dishonest.
So what, we're just supposed to ignore the fact they're getting funded by billionaires and neocons?
People like you are why the Left is failing.
Your comments make me think you either completely missed the point of the article or didn't even read it.
So what, we're just supposed to ignore the fact they're getting funded by billionaires and neocons?
People like you are why the Left is failing.
And your comment just missed the point of the article.
This is why the left will NEVER succeed ... OMG - these people have some money and talk to people I don't like ... that means they're trash .. grow up
Do you really not see the problem with so called "independent" media figures being funded by Billionaires, shady think tanks and the Israel lobby.
Not to mention the fact that they're pushing the Establishment line on issues like Russia, China and Syria.
what? they've talked about where they stand (particularly Saagar on China) - they've been quite off of the established message with Russia (unless you are saying they aren't saying what YOU want them too?) ... the fact that your small mind only sees a certain view as right is just as bad as anyone else doing so ... I look a several different views and piece it together knowing what the bias of each perspective is ... apparently you do not ;-)
Dude, your only response to this article and what I've said is "ignore the fact that they're funded by billionaires and neocons because I like their content".
Are we really just supposed to ignore their funding by billionaires and Neocons because you don't like it being brought up?
People like you are why the Left is failing.
I base what I think about someone by what the actual output of their coverage is ... which is the ACTUAL important thing ... I went at them hard when they suddenly started pushing nuclear because their sudden intense push took me off guard ... I don't look at who pays their affiliates because they are just affiliates and BP pays THEM for their contributions not the other way around ...
there is no gotcha here sweetie ... focusing on one thing is lopsided and stupid ... and doesn't show you anything but what you want to see - I go by the actual product personally and I've been quite satisfied with most of it - you have your own biases in your coverage that tint how you present things that have NOTHING to do with your funding unless you only tell your audience what they WANT to hear cuz they fund you?
seriously - try again - this is still mostly shit flinging from what I can tell ;-) .. the proof ALWAYS lies in the product when it comes to commentary ... financing only comes into play if you can PROVE what is said = being paid to say it
Are we really just supposed to ignore their funding by billionaires and Neocons because you don't like it being brought up?
People like you are why the Left is failing.
no, you are why the left has failed for the past 30 years
Dude, your entire argument is "ignore the problems w/ these people, such as taking money from shady people and repeating Neocon talking points, because I like their content".
People like you would prefer it if the Left just sold-out and didn't stand for anything.
Your reading comprehension is so bad that you actually think I like their content. It's the same as neocons resorting to calling people "traitors" and "Saddam apologists" for not believing the WMD lie.
All I'm getting from you is "ignore the fact that they're getting money from billionaires and Neocons because I like their content".
Did you just completely miss what the article's point was?
nope ... I see shit posting mostly based on personal biases - who pays who what is only a piece of the puzzle and bias has MANY reasons other than being paid to hold a view - an understanding of human psychology tells you that ... this is attributing malice without concrete evidence which is just as bad as the accusations made ... the big picture is what matters in the end but that is lost in this article in favor of shit flinging for status purposes (something far to prevalent these days) - the influence accusations must be much more pointed to be actual issues - everyone has biases held for a myriad of reasons - claiming you know exactly what another persons reasons are is just plain bullshit unless it's cut and dried - we often don't even know our own reasons even when we're sure we do - so there is really no way to know another's without it being quid pro quo ;-)
Are we really just supposed to ignore their funding by billionaires and Neocons because you don't like it being brought up?
People like you are why the Left is failing.
If you really think that the fact that Breaking Points is taking money from and associating w/ billionaires and Neocons isn't a conflict of interest at the minimum, or that Saagar isn't towing the Establishment line on China while Krystal won't push back on it, you're a fucking moron.
Notice the frame here:
"Neocons isn't a conflict of interest at the minimum, or that Saagar isn't towing the Establishment line on China while Krystal won't push back on it."
This shows you are still stuck in some kind of false reality where you equate being anti-China with neocons. Yes neocons are anti-China, and so is the entire democrat party including the squad and Ilhan Omar and AOC, and also left media outlets like Democracy Now, Jacobin, Majority Report, etc.
Krystal doesn't push back on anti-China rhetoric not because she supports neocons, but because she covers for the squad. Ultimately that is the Krystal Ball /David Sirota/ Ryan Grim / Democracy Now / TYT/ Majority Report/ Abby Martin/ niche. They will give a symbolic token of adversarialism once in a blue moon to remain credible with their base of left-wing democrat-socialists, but they will always fall back in line when it matters. They will also attack real leftists the moment they step out of line or when the DNC sees them as a threat. I could give example after example.
Funny how in this entire screed, you didn't mention Saagar or his anti-China rhetoric. Maybe because you realized your argument would fall apart if you mentioned him. You're still trying to run interference for Breaking Points' anti-China hawkery.
Also, why the fuck did you include Abby Martin?
I checked to see if you ever responded, but now i think i realize that you confused me with the previous commenter. That would explain why i was so baffled by your response anyway.
i don't even know how to respond to this. If you have a learning disability or something, it's fine, no shame; just let me know.
You've done nothing but complain that we shouldn't criticize Breaking Points because you like their content, and now you're actually agreeing w/ the criticism we're levying against Breaking Points. You literally contradicted yourself and didn't even realize it.
Your comments can literally be boiled down to "ignore the fact that they're funded by billionaires and neocons because I like their content".
No. We're not going to forget that just because you like their content or bringing it up makes you uncomfortable.
This article has some factual errors in it concerning the PHP and Krystal Ball
1) The PHP Actually donated $95,658 to candidates according to https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/people-s-house-project/C00639997/candidate-recipients/2018
Not the $49,000 figure you posted from an earlier article.
2) You claim that Krystal Ball proclaims a generic message in first book Hijacking The Democratic Party-- but actually, the bool highlight's much more than just a generic message her message is that Capitalism with a UBI is the only solution to economic income inequality. You also missed the entire first chapter where Ball falls all over loving Biden and how she down plays he is so called problematic past positions. https://leontrotsky.substack.com/publish
3) Finally you forget to mention that The Young Turks including your favorite guy Jimmy Dore interviewed Krystal Ball on her Hijacking The Democratic Book. and he clearly didn't read it because if he had read her book he would have seen that Ball doesn't really believe in anything he says he cares about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sikkksZb9Y
That is a huge issue with all alternative media And notice how they don't actually ask any questions about her book or anything else she has to say her Biden Love.