Talk about a Trump card!
Ohhh, the Five of Cups. Not good:
The Five of Cups is associated with sadness, loss, despair, and loneliness.
Reminds me of the days when the wax-Nancy consulted an astrologer in order to provide advice to the dumbfuck.
I know we should use quotes around the “News” portion of Fox “News”, but is that sort of entertainment segment common on other new shows? We don’t watch any news channels so I don’t have any sort of indication of what is typical. The most I see of cable news is at airports and relatives houses and I try not to pay attention.
I proudly watch MSNBC. It is mostly opinion, though afaIct they do not outright lie. They also call out Democrats and other progressives that screw up. No, they don’t hire psychics either. Well, I’ve never seen it. They are pretty serious.
Rachel Maddow may be delivering opinion, but her level of research and citation is quite breathtaking.
There’s a vast difference between ‘bias’ and ‘factual accuracy.’
I used to watch Amy Goodman regularly. “Democracy Now,” IMHO, is another example of a journalist/program/outlet whose ‘bias’ is clear, but whose facts are rock solid.
But this is clearly a profound digression from the OP 
Yes, she is totally my favorite news person. I like Lawrence O’Donnell too.
MSNBC is our go-to. It’s on right now as I type this. Yes, they have an obvious editorial bias. Fortunately, they are anchored to facts.
One of the reasons I stopped watching CNN was that they had too many segments where they had point-counterpoint “debates” where one side was a GOP hack vomiting baseless talking points. They often ended up as shouting matches. I welcome different perspectives, but I prefer they come from serious people, tethered to reality.
I don’t know if that’s still CNN’s shtick, but if it is, no thanks.
I can’t even watch MSNBC anymore. They have constant polls about Biden losing and I just can’t stomach it.
Not always. See Failed Fact Checks.
I didn’t read through all the fact checks, but of the two “pants on fire” assessments, one was chuckleheaded math (embarrassing, but not a deliberate lie) and the other resulted in an apology the next day.
I don’t hold them to a standard of perfection. I do expect them to consider facts to be critically important, unlike Fox et.al., and I believe they do.
Yeah. BIG difference between “makes mistakes” and “constant, purposeful lies.”
Trump supporters assure me that CNN’s fuckup wrt Nicholas Sandmann is exactly the same in every single respect as Fox News’s role in The Big Lie.
You can’t reason a person out of a belief that they didn’t use reason to hold in the first place.
–Jonathan Swift
Another doozy: Rachel Maddow making the claim that a new Ohio law "requires women seeking an abortion to undergo a “mandatory vaginal probe.”
These examples don’t remotely put MSNBC in the same class as Fox News with its rampant misrepresentation and outright falsehoods. But pious statements about how progressive icons are “anchored in facts” make me queasy.
To me it’s the difference between being an actual journalist and not being one.
Journalists make mistakes and bad decisions. But they at least have standards they’re trying to follow.
Maddow was at best sloppy in her read of the bill. She said it mandates a trans-vaginal ultrasound. Nope. It mandates a trans-abdominal ultrasound.
She should have clarified it with an apology, and she apparently did not. But this is not in the same universe as the vile mythology conjured up on Fox. And you do you, but my threshold for “anchored to facts” does not include never fucking up, ever.
And yet there are states that have enacted or considered such laws.
fe.”20
B. TYPES OF MANDATORY ULTRASOUND LEGISLATION
Among the many mandatory ultrasound bills and laws that require a
transvaginal ultrasound, there are four apparent degrees of specificity in the
language used. First, and most explicit, a bill in Alabama specifically
mentions transvaginal ultrasounds. Second, a 2013 bill in Indiana refers
exclusively to medical abortions, like those performed through oral
administration of termination medications such as RU-486. This bill would
require both a pre-abortion ultrasound and a post-abortion ultrasound.21
Third, Idaho’s bill does not use the words “vagina,” “vaginal,” or
“transvaginal,” but does acknowledge that multiple ultrasound techniques
exist.22 And finally, the legislation from Pennsylvania,23 Texas,24
Kentucky,25 Virginia,26 and North Carolina27 all refer generally to an
ultrasound requirement and would, in practice, often require a transvaginal
ultrasound in order to comply with the legislation, because according to the
Guttmacher Institute, 88% of abortions occur in the first twelve weeks of
pregnancy (the first trimester), and almost 62% occur in the first nine
weeks.28 During these weeks of a pregnancy, an abdominal ultrasound
would likely be ineffective due to the position and small size of the embryo.
Thus, this legislation essentially would require the majority of, if not all,
women seeking abortions to submit to transvaginal ultrasounds.29
This does not sound even remotely like Swift’s phrasing – it’s far too modern in its use of idiom. I’ve read a lot of Swift (especially Gulliver’s Travels, which I’ve re-read multiple times), and I am pretty familiar with Swift’s means of expression. This ain’t it.
I turned to the Quote Investigator, which looked into this. Long story short, Swift expressed the same idea, but in 18th century phrasing. It’s been mutating ever since. As he originally expressed it:
You can read all about it here:
Apologies, Cal. I was quoting a guy – Jonathan Swift – that I knew from college. No relation.
I always wondered if the words were legitimately his.
[thanks for the correction. I shall strive to commit it to memory]