whaletail

I'll watch the video - and respond - as soon as I can.

You're like an Fox News has been America's dominant political media presence for two decades. And they have been much more aggressively partisan than their supposed left wing peers, MSNBC included. The number of ex-Fox News employees in Trump's current administration is unprecedented, and I'm not even sure whether Hegseth is the most ridiculous example. No wonder the dipshit can't even begin to do his job (his unsecured text chats during the Iran missile strike being the most egregious) Regarding the examples of "MSM corruption" cited in this thread, only the 60 Minutes edit is even suggestive of left wing media partisanship, and I haven't watched that video yet. I'll comment on it more definitively this afternoon. As mentioned previously, the ABC and CBS settlements actually illustrate this administration's concerted effort to silence its critics however possible. The underlying facts of neither case are indicative of media partisanship, and despite your claims to the contrary, context matters. Meanwhile, the Dominion v. Fox News defamation trial actually exposed the exact sort of corruption you mention. While consistently, and continually claiming on-air that Biden stole the 2020 election, pundits including Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson and Jesse Whatever (among others) acknowledged in emails that they knew such claims were patently false. They knew Trump's stolen election claims were complete bullsh!t, and constantly mocked him in emails to each other, while unashamedly lying to the American public every night. I do agree that individual investigative journalists are almost universally left leaning, but they have no incentive to lie in the manner you claim. Not only are the legal teams at CNN, NYT et al. extremely cautious, their owners certainly aren't left leaning. Finally, the American public seems to be much more centrist than left leaning, with at least 30-40% are firmly on the right. Given those demographics, why would any media outlet act against its own interests in the manner you claim?

You're right we lost. But at least we're not welcoming our own ruination. When they shovel sh^t down all of our throats, at least we're not trying to convince ourselves it's chocolate. You're covered in sh!t, convinced you're on their team.

So the merger was just background noise, eh? Nothing to see there? All you're proving is that Trump and his cronies are using the government to try and silence anyone and anything they disagree with. I'm not sure why you're okay with being sh&t on by your own government like a battered wife, but jesus christ man, gain some self respect.

Interviews are always edited, and I've never seen any evidence that 60 minutes edited hers to improve her political outlook. If you can provide credible evidence suggesting otherwise, please post a link, but the above isn't it.

Context matters. CBS settled b/c Trump personally intervened to block their merger. As soon as they settled, he allowed it to go through. His defamation claim was considered spurious by every credible legal pundit I've heard from, and was obviously an attempt to subvert free speech. Also, did he win the ABC case or settle? Regardless, George Stephenopoulos calling him a rapist (instead of someone found civilly liable for rape, isn't exactly continually and maliciously falsifying reports for political advantage. It's a technicality. But guess who Trump isn't suing, because he knows they can't be bought or bullied? The NYT reporters, authors of Lucky Loser, who forensically analyzed his tax records, then exposed him as the snivelling dipshit/liar he's always been. They destroyed the fat f*ck, with receipts, and not a peep in response.

Although she wrong about the ability for the vaccinated indivuals to spread covid, Maddow wasn't maliciously falsifying anything for political advantage. Vaccinated people are overwhelmingly less likely to become infected, or pass on covid, than the invaccinated. She didn't fully understand the science, and shouldn't have spoken with such certainty, but exhorting viewers to get vaccinated is helpful, not malicious. Nonetheless, as a publicly progressive pundit, she needs to be above reproach, and I hope she corrected her mistake in a later broadcast.

Please enlighten me.

He wasn't calling you a Nazi, moron. He cited the circumstances surrounding Anne Frank's death to highlight the fact that one needn't directly murder someone to be responsible for their death.

What news sources, other than maybe Fox News (see Dimension v. Fox News for an egregious example), have been shown to continually and maliciously falsify their reports for a political advantage?

I've not been a track fan for that long, and have been so spoiled by runners like Ingebritsen, Faith Kipyegon, Yomif Kejelcha and Beatrice Chebet, et al. taking it out quick, setting WRs etc., that I haven't learned to love tactical races yet. I'm also not a huge Hocker fan. I was rooting for Graham Blanks to make the 5000 team, and as a huge Grant Fisher fan, I was already annoyed he was outkicked in the 10K. When Hocker outkicked him in the 5, and Blanks had obviously been dropped, I was like wait, wait, how's Hocker the only race winner to hold a lead this weekend? After Nuguse and Hoey had already blown up after leading their respective races, I figured Hocker would be next, but no, he drops to P7 only to storm back like Kejelcha on EPO and win the damn thing. As an aside, a tactical race I did enjoy was the women's 5K, as I've always thought there was a good chance Shelby was innocent, and to see her lose 4 years, come back coaching herself, and still pullout the W was validating. They're surely testing her constantly now, so I think it's fair to assume she's at least clean these days. That she lost 4 of her prime years, is now in her early 30s, without even a coach, yet still performs at nearly the same level she was at when suspended suggests that either PEDs weren't helping her the way they usually do, or she wasn't on them. Between her current performance, her background as a small town Iowa girl made good, and the fact that she apparently wouldn't even wear super shoes prior to being banned (she supposedly viewed them as cheating), it's hard to imagine her searching out PEDs by herself, then being comfortable injecting them. It sucks we'll probably never know the truth. /soapbox As for swimming, I never even though about pool lane dividers being an odd addition to competitive swimming, but maybe they're a safety issue? Or maybe they're more meant to orient swimmers, and help them traverse the pool efficiently. Without them, it'd be a lot easier to accidentally swim at an angle (especially when back stroking), which would look unprofessional at best. Then again, when runners get bunched up, some have to run outside lane 1, and we consider being able to avoid that a valuable skill. Why should it be any different for swimmers?

I've never seen anything like it! Last year's Olympic 1500m final wasn't even as special, to me, as seeing Brazier comeback to win yesterday, and look like he'd never been away. I was almost in tears. I assumed he was done with the sport, and athletes rarely make it back from that sort of irrelevance. Mind, the 800m has also evolved mightily since 2019, when he set the American, and WC record, in the World final. From 2022, when no one broke 1:44 until late summer, to last year, when Bryce Hoppel broke Brazier's American record, running 1:41.6 in the Olympic final (and only finishing 4th). Now you have to be near WR pace to win Diamond Leagues, let alone World Championships. Not only did Brazier it back (and in three godd@mn months), he set a new PB and won the damn race. Whether he medals at Worlds or not, he'll be relevant in Tokyo. And a 16 year old kid, who only began running in middle school, somehow finishes a tenth back. Even crazier, the kid's final lap was fastest in the field by a full second, and his final 200 would have placed in the Texas state meet! This kid may have the fastest kick in the world, and that means a world record in the near future isn't hyperbolic thinking! As you mention, Lutkenhaus may well have run even faster in a faster race. His kick was there when he was running 1:50 last year, and it was still there when he ran 1:47. He still had it when he ran 1:45 in June, and somehow, he still had it yesterday, when he ran 1:42.27! At Worlds, Emanual Wanyoni (Kenya) and Marco Arop (Canada) will almost certainly run a similar first lap to yesterday (49 low), on their way to 1:41 low (or maybe even 1:40 high). If Lutkenhaus' legs can handle a slightly faster third 200m (the first half of the final lap), and he closes as he has been, he'll be with them at the end. Not that much different than Jax and PJ looking like the class of their age groups last year, then suddenly beating NCAA champs a few months ago, and finally beating World Champs a few weeks ago. Viewed from a practical perspective after-the-fact, these performances surely reflect the world class coaching and training environments now available to young athletic prodigies, but seeing them happen in real time is still absolutely mind boggling!

After my parents decided I was too small to play football anymore, I 'ran' cross country to get in shape for wrestling. For obvious reasons, here was some overlap at the top of both sports, but something like pole vault would have been better. I'm not sure I was ever athletic enough to safely compete in something like that (unless I'd been doing it since I was a toddler), but the body control alone would be really helpful for wrestling. You can always run on your own.

At the US Track & Field National Championships (World Team Trials), Cooper Lutkenhaus, a 16 year old sophomore finished 2nd in the men's 800m final, and will compete at the World Championships in Tokyo next month. He'll apparently be the youngest Team USA world teamer in history, and may be the most talented American middle distance runner since the great Jim Ryun 60 years ago. Incredibly, he ran a 1:42.27, knocking 3s off his own U18 and U20 World Record (set last month at the Texas state meet). He's now the third fastest American ever, and only 1.4s off the world record (David Rudisha - Kenya - 1:40.9, set in the 2012 Olympic final). Mind, a few months ago, his personal best was a 1:47.x. Blisteringly fast for a high schooler, for sure, especially one who only started running competitively in 7th grade, but not world class. 1:42.27 would have won every World Championship final to date, as well as every Olympic final until last year. As an aside, he even managed to make Donovan Brazier's incredible comeback victory a sidestory. Brazier, the 2019 World Champion and one-time American record holder, only returned to racing in June, after injuring his achilles tendon at the 2021 Tokyo Olympic Trials. Injured until earlier this year, he was widely believed to be essentially retired until suddenly returning this summer.

I'll read the article when I have a minute. But whether he was warned about a coming ice age in high school (is he serious?), or not, the science surrounding climate change is consistent. Antarctic ice melt and ice core sample data (not to mention 100+ years of temperature records) illustrate our climate has been warming since the mid 17th century. So far at least, the author agrees. Although correlation doesn't indicate causation, it's certainly interesting that the warming timeline begins with the Industrial Revolution and accelerates in lockstep with our fossil fuel consumption. Science has also consistently demonstrated the mechanism by which fossil fuel burning might heat up a planet with our atmosphere (through the depletion of atmospheric ozone, increased carbon dioxide production, and subsequent greenhouse effect). A mechanism that matches our own atmospheric observations. But frankly, who cares whether we're wholly responsible, merely a contributor, or somehow, completely innocent? Certainly not the consequences, which we're only just beginning to experience (e.g. wildfires and hurricanes are suddenly becoming much more common, and much more destructive). And the author's 'gotcha' comments about incorrect predictions? Early predictions about Antarctic ice melt and ozone depletion were wrong. What he neglects to mention? That the predictions were actually way too optimistic.