Of course they are.
I'm having a hard time thinking of a major American news institution at the moment that doesn't deserve to have a sledgehammer taken to its goddamn knees.
this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2025
61 points (94.2% liked)
politics
24382 readers
2844 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Just from the context, let me guess - he opposes zionist oppression and murder and theft of Palestinian land, right?
And (looking him up)... yep. There it is.
So why the random potshot implying Mamdani is struggling to win over Jewish New Yorkers? On what basis does the Times make this claim? The reality is that Mamdani has alienated pro-Israel adovacy groups and pro-Israel donors, but this sounds too ideologically motivated, so instead the Times conflates the “Jewish community” with support for the Israeli government and its myriad war crimes in Gaza over the past 20 months.
On that note, has anyone else noticed that the governments and their media mouthpieces aren't even trying to trot out their standard "Israel has a right to defend itself" rhetoric? Even they realize that there's no way to even pretend that that's what Israel is doing now. All they have left is conflating opposition to Israeli actions and policies with "antisemitism," and they just flog that one lie constantly.
I always wonder what it must feel like to be that morally bankrupt. They can't possibly all be conscienceless monsters — what goes on in the heads of the ones that still have at least some vestige of a functioning moral center? How do they cope?
I presume it involves a lot of alcohol.
He refused to say in the debate that Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state. That is probably enough for AIPAC to drop the knife on him.
If you don't accept their religious-nationalist colonialist ethnostate's genocide you clearly disagree with their religious or ethnic right to exist, instead of the fact they are a religious-nationalist colonialist ethnostate who is committing genocide!
"Does Rhodesia have the right to exist?"
Actually that's not even quite it. He refused to say Israel has a right to exist "as a jewish state" and continued with "Israel has a right to exist as an equal state for all". He also refused to say the first thing he would do if he got elected was to go visit Israel.