Top Clinton Donor buys "The Onion", immediately starts posting propaganda.

[ArcadiaGP]

RIP "The Onion". Add it to the graveyard of blacklisted domains.

https://theintercept.com/2016/01/26...p-financial-supporter-now-controls-the-onion/

 

[Thor]

Not even humor is safe from PC Progressive Police.

 

[churchmouse]

This is a prime example of what the media has become

 

[Mgderf]

O.K. That's NOT funny!

 

[Alamo]

An extensive New Yorker profile of Saban recalls how Saban publicly described his “three ways to be influential in American politics” in 2009. One was political donations. Another was establishing think tanks (he founded the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution in 2002). And the third was controlling media outlets.

Instapundit has been saying for awhile that rich Republicans and conservatives need to stop blowing money on superpacs and instead buy media outlets, particularly women's magazines and such, and start influencing the culture. I think he' right.

 

[MisterChester]

Their comedy has been hit and miss lately anyway, although I had a good laugh on their "Scalia loses 30 year battle against social progress" article

 

[Lowe0]

Which Onion article are you referring to as posted propaganda? The closest thing I can find is this.

 

[BugI02]

RIP "The Onion". Add it to the graveyard of blacklisted domains.

https://theintercept.com/2016/01/26...p-financial-supporter-now-controls-the-onion/

Citizens United chickens coming home to roost. Nothing to see here

 

[oldpink]

Which Onion article are you referring to as posted propaganda? The closest thing I can find is this.

As if you were a good source authority to discern between propaganda and satire...

 

[Mr Evilwrench]

Is it April yet? Wait, no, but I'm smellin' some onion. Think about it, you don't buy something to throw money away. If you tried to mission creep something like the onion to its opposite, to avoid having your audience evacuate you would have to subvert your own message completely. Money thrown away, either way. This might be mildly amusing to watch.

 

[Lowe0]

As if you were a good source authority to discern between propaganda and satire...

Are you going to address the question, or just the person posting it?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Are you going to address the question, or just the person posting it?

That's, other than one recent noteworthy instance, his modus operandi.

 

[oldpink]

That's, other than one recent noteworthy instance, his modus operandi.

So, you're in agreement with the guy who subordinates the 2A to "social justice?"

 

[Leadeye]

Maybe Bloomberg will just buy the Democratic party.

 

[BogWalker]

Justice Scalia Dead Following 30-Year Battle With Social Progress - The Onion - America's Finest News Source
Obama Compiles Shortlist Of Gay, Transsexual Abortion Doctors To Replace Scalia - The Onion - America's Finest News Source
Mitch McConnell Has Hands, Vocal Cords Removed To Prevent Self From Holding Hearing On Scalia Replacement - The Onion - America's Finest News Source
How Supreme Court Justices Are Chosen - The Onion - America's Finest News Source

Female Presidential Candidate Who Was United States Senator, Secretary Of State Told To Be More Inspiring - The Onion - America's Finest News Source
This one's pretty stand out.

Clinton Aide Told To Leave Behind Weak Volunteer Who Collapsed During March To South Carolina - The Onion - America's Finest News Source
But then there's this which satires Hillary.



Oh, and just for laughs:
http://www.theonion.com/article/jeb-bush-assures-pipe-wielding-thugs-hell-have-del-52344

 

[Kutnupe14]

So, you're in agreement with the guy who subordinates the 2A to "social justice?"

If he told me 2+2 =4, am I to disagree because he has a political stance I may not agree with?

 

[Lowe0]

Obama Compiles Shortlist Of Gay, Transsexual Abortion Doctors To Replace Scalia - The Onion - America's Finest News Source


How Supreme Court Justices Are Chosen - The Onion - America's Finest News Source

While most of those were pretty garden-variety Onion of the sort I've been reading for the last 17 years or so, the two I quoted above from your links really stand out - because one is quite critical of the demographic checklist approach that the Democrats have been accused of taking the last two times, and the other is just absurdity applied to a serious situation for comic effect.

But hey, since you chose it as an example, can you tell me which side "Nominee stands as their predecessor’s robe is draped over them to see if government can save a few bucks on not ordering a new one" is propaganda for? How about "Candidate asked whether they see themselves in exact same place 35 years from now"? Are these really propaganda, or just a few random political articles tossed against the wall to see if something would stick?

 

[oldpink]

If he told me 2+2 =4, am I to disagree because he has a political stance I may not agree with?

Yeah, he's got priorities.

 

[actaeon277]

If he told me 2+2 =4, am I to disagree because he has a political stance I may not agree with?

If I disagree with someone, political or otherwise, I still listen.
I may weigh it a bit. I may weigh in if the person uses bad logic, bad sources, or is rewarded by lying to me.

But a socialist that tells me 2+2=4, uses the Democratic Underground as a source, and tells me he get's paid if he convinces me is still right.
But I may want independent verification or proof.

 

[BogWalker]

While most of those were pretty garden-variety Onion of the sort I've been reading for the last 17 years or so, the two I quoted above from your links really stand out - because one is quite critical of the demographic checklist approach that the Democrats have been accused of taking the last two times, and the other is just absurdity applied to a serious situation for comic effect.

But hey, since you chose it as an example, can you tell me which side "Nominee stands as their predecessor’s robe is draped over them to see if government can save a few bucks on not ordering a new one" is propaganda for? How about "Candidate asked whether they see themselves in exact same place 35 years from now"? Are these really propaganda, or just a few random political articles tossed against the wall to see if something would stick?

To me they felt less pro-Clinton than anti-Republican. The Supreme Court articles are clearly lampooning Republican stancing towards blocking Obama's nominations.

Step 10: "The Senate votes on whether they like the president or not" was clearly one of such jabs.