Goodbye, #NYT! My last comments on New York Times Op-Eds | Blog#42

As I announced last month, yesterday and today were my last days writing comments in the New York Times.

I unsubscribed this morning.

I fully explained my decision to unsubscribe here. Here is a recap.

The NYT, back in 2008, decided to pick a number of commenters they deemed popular and met their posting guidelines. After inviting them, they gave them privileges to post while bypassing the moderation system. I, too, was asked. None of us asked for special status. Then, last year, they decided to end verified commenting in December.

They didn’t notice until end of January that they had a glitch that didn’t really end the verified system. They fixed it. Since then, all the formerly verifieds’ comments get posted with a 12-hour delay, get held and then buried, or don’t get posted at all, even if they were one of the first to comment.

I tested the system for about six weeks while complaining bitterly to the new manager. At first, she claimed it was my link at the end of each comment. When I produced evidence that this happens regardless of the presence of links, she said it was buzzwords that triggered moderation. So I started posting my comments and replies in duplicates, with buzzwords and with buzzwords removed. My experience didn’t change. But a pattern emerged. For every one comment that got posted instantly, I was also able  to reply instantly about 6-8 times. Then, the next 15 or so comments would get delayed, no matter how quickly I posted them and they would get buried.

After repeatedly pointing out to the community manager that they replaced an unfair system with another unfair system. I repeatedly why comments couldn’t just be approved in the order they came in and was never given an answer. I’m not putting up with that crap.

Fittingly, all of my last comments were delayed by about 12 hours and are buried where they’ll never be seen.

Here they are, for posterity.

On Charles M. Blow

The Fickle Over the Faithful

Loyal supporters of the Democratic Party deserve answers.

I am including replies here, as many of them are something to behold…

Rima Regas commented April 28

Rima Regas
Southern California 

Yes, Democrats do deserve answers. They deserve to know why it is that the party establishment had meetings in San Francisco with high-dollar donors, party operatives, Nancy Pelosi, mayor Pete, DNC officials, and a slew of others to discuss what to do about Bernie Sanders. It’s been clear since 2015 that the establishment well, at any cost, the a win by the progressive flank of the party. That cost has been the election of Donald Trump. For once, let the issues decide the election. There are plenty of well-established, smart, thoughtful, creative, policy-driven, candidates. Joe Biden is not one of them. In an interview he gave just two weeks ago he rattled off every single issue voters want and said he was against. Joe Biden continues to be unrepentant over a behavior we can see on video on YouTube at any time, during the Anita Hill grilling that he chaired. He took full part in that grilling. Yet, he denies he did anything wrong and refuses to apologize. Women have taken note. After 2016, ramming yet another establishment candidate down the electorates throat will take the Democratic Party down a similar spiral as the GOP. After the destruction wreaked Trump and his Republicans, we need leadership whose names are toward reconstruction and change -not incrementalism and a continuation a failed policies. This is another change election. Let us not repeat the same insane mistakes.

Things Trump Did While You Weren’t Looking [2019] https://wp.me/p2KJ3H-3h2

22 REPLIES

Will. commented April 28

Will.
NYCNYC

@Rima Regas I fail to see how the candidate (whomever he or she may be) that gets the most votes is ‘rammed’ down “our” throats. (Hillary Clinton won the 2016 Democratic nomination by an OVERWHELMING 4 million ballots.) I don’t like Bernie Sanders at all, but if he gets the most votes and becomes the Democratic nominee, I will enthusiastically support him in 2020. ENTHUSIASTICALLY. WITHOUT RESERVATION. In fact, the only way I will not support the 2020 Democratic candidate is if they somehow manage to nominate Donald Trump! I suggest we all take a deep breath a reflect on what the re-election of Donald Trump might mean. The next president will almost certainly nominate replacements for Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Stephen Beyer. And of course appoint a whole lot more folks to the Federal Bench. If that person is DJT, it is game over for any worker, environmental or voting regulations. And it will be game over for many decades to come. It will be GAME OVER. Let’s not squabble. Let’s vote and the chips as far as the nomination will fall as they may. And then let’s come together and vote for the Democrat in overwhelming numbers, whether that nominee is Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden, or some dead squirrel found along the highway. (Let’s also keep in mind during this process that we do not need a candidate to run up numbers in California, New York and Massachusetts. We need a candidate that will win Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.)

Rima Regas commented April 28

Rima Regas
Southern California

@Will. The next president needs to have the vision and the intestinal fortitude to undo the damage that’s been done. I’m doing that damage May well take doing some things that has never been done before, or that have been done very seldom. Along with rebuilding the middle class we need a constitutional reboot. Is a candidate who promises more of the same or a return to 2016 the kind of candidate voters really want? Now is the time for voters to be alerted to the issues they need to be thinking about as they pick their candidate.

Rima Regas commented April 29

Rima Regas
Southern California

Autocorrect strikes again “It’s been clear since 2015 that the establishment well, at any cost, the a win by the progressive flank of the party.” It’s been clear since 2015 that the establishment will, at any cost, derail a win by the progressive flank of the party. — There’s a new poll by Washington Post and ABC News, taken just before Biden announced his candidacy. He is down four points. It cannot be, even with a well-known politician, to have the kinds of polls we’ve been bombarded with even before it candidacy is declared. Look at the fundraising. Look at how much is being raised, and from what kind of donor. This time around small donors are desirable. This time around voters are looking at money in politics. This time around, voters are paying attention to the issues and policy, which candidate is actually talking about policy? Which candidates policies run parallel to the wishes of the electorate? Which candidate has the history voting in favor of corporate sponsors? Those are the things that matter.

Tom Daley commented April 29

SF

@Rima Regas There wasn’t a secret conspiracy by a cabal of elite party operatives and it certainly wasn’t necessary because the majority of us already knew what to do with Bernie. We voted for Hillary. We have the opportunity to pick the candidate of our choice in the primaries just as we did in 2016. A protest vote or a non-vote in the general is essentially a vote for Trump. Trump and the trolls worked hard to sow mistrust and discord against Clinton and the “party establishment”. She’s still a favorite theme at his rallies. Let’s not make the same mistake twice.

Carson Drew commented April 29

Carson Drew
River Heights

@Rima Regas: Bernie Sanders considers it beneath him to join the Democratic Party, yet he thinks he’s entitled to use the resources of the party to advance his agenda and his ego. We have 19 other candidates to choose from. Many are as progressive as Bernie. Some are stronger on key issues (e.g. reproductive rights and gun control). Most are more charismatic than he is and will have more appeal to voters. Why would we choose a nominee who isn’t even a member of our own party and who has made his disdain for us clear? We don’t need this creepy, arrogant old egomaniac undermining us in another election.

David commented April 29

David
MA

@Rima Regas All well and good Rima BUT will you vote for Biden if he’s the nominee or throw your vote away on a third party candidate and indirectly help Trump?

Mimi commented April 29

Mimi
Baltimore and Manhattan

@Rima Regas What matters is beating Trump and your opinion reflects the wrong thinking that brought Trump to the Oval Office in 2016. Please – not again.

JenD commented April 29

JenD
NJ

@Rima Regas I’m a woman and I have taken note. I’ve noted that the White House is occupied by a misogynist who has zero respect for women. I’ve noted that a man credibly accused of sexual assault was nominated by that misogynist and now sits on the Supreme Court. I’ve noted that that misogynist would like women’s reproductive rights to be taken back to the 1950s. I’ve noted a whole lot more. Biden has his flaws. But if he is the eventual nominee, I will vote for him. Gladly.

Rima Regas commented April 29

Rima Regas
Southern California

@Tom Daley

Maybe you missed this news items in the Politics section of the NYT on 4/16? It got a lot of prominence in news commentary.

‘Stop Sanders’ Democrats Are Agonizing Over His Momentum

WASHINGTON — When L eah Daughtry, a former Democratic Party official, addressed a closed-door gathering of about 100 wealthy liberal donors in San Francisco last month, all it took was a review of the 2020 primary rules to throw a scare in them.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/16/us/politics/bernie-sanders-democratic-party.html

@Carson Drew

As usual, you are ill-informed. Per the new DNC rules, all candidates must run as Democrats. There are lots of new rules. Have you read them yet?

@David and @Mimi

The primary is only just beginning. We should be talking policy and process – not the end result. Biden and Sanders voters, in multiple polls since January, all agree they’ll vote for the other candidate, should theirs not win. This is now a non-issue that you are allowing to distract you away from the more important policies and policy stances voters need and care about. What does Buttigieg stand for? O’Rourke? Harris? Biden? This is what voters look at during the bulk of the primary

josie commented April 29

josie
Chicago

@Rima Regas

I can’t with Bernie. I’ll vote for him if I have to, but not enthusiastically. No one is “conspiring” against him, though he would still be happy to have his supporters believe the system is rigged. Wish you could take off the Bernie glasses, and see that even if he gets in, he’ll likely accomplish little (especially if the Senate doesn’t turn over), and most of the policies he’s pushing are simply unfeasible as he proposes them.

Thomas Zaslavsky commented April 29

Thomas Zaslavsky
Binghamton, N.Y.

@Rima Regas “Undoing that damage”, of course! Turn off autocorrect?

David in Le Marche commented April 29

David in Le Marche
Italy

@Rima Regas Interesting comments, as always. Quick proofreading can defeat “autocorrect”.

Rima Regas commented April 29

Rima Regas
Southern California

@Thomas Zaslavsky You are correct. I’ve had to dictate. No use of hands for typing @David in Le Marche I did proofread. Then… things got reinstated. Grr

SParker commented April 29

SParker
Brooklyn

@Rima Regas Sanders is not a Democrat. Is there any reason for the party to support this opportunist?

Rima Regas commented April 29

Rima Regas
Southern California

@josie There is literally nothing that can’t be done. Defeatism and lots and lots of propaganda promoted by those who would deny you even your birthright is what has gotten us here.

Rima Regas commented April 29

Rima Regas
Southern California

@josie That is just fine. The point is for all the candidates to be able to run their primaries without people meeting in secret to foil them. It depresses turnout.

Rima Regas commented April 29

Rima Regas
Southern California

@josie

From the Politics section

‘Stop Sanders’ Democrats Are Agonizing Over His Momentum

WASHINGTON — When L eah Daughtry, a former Democratic Party official, addressed a closed-door gathering of about 100 wealthy liberal donors in San Francisco last month, all it took was a review of the 2020 primary rules to throw a scare in them.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/16/us/politics/bernie-sanders-democratic-party.html

Rima Regas commented April 29

Rima Regas
Southern California

@SParker Sanders is a left-leaning independent who has caucused with Democrats since he was elected to Congress as a member of the House of Representatives in the 1980s. That means he voted with Democrats and worked with Democrats to advance legislation. He does that to this very day. DNC rules changed, in great part thanks to Sanders’ efforts, and now anyone who runs does so as a Democrat. Please read the new DNC rules published late last year. Your argument is moot.

Mimi commented April 29

Mimi
Baltimore and Manhattan

@Rima Regas Policy proposals are meaningless at this point. Moreover, “what they stand for” does not equal “policy” so what are you talking about? Just go back and listen to what Trump “proposed” in 2016. Millions fell for it. That’s what you’re getting with Bernie – all talk.

Rima Regas commented April 29

Rima Regas
Southern California

@Mimi

Um… What? “Policy proposals are meaningless at this point.” Voters choose their candidates based on the policies those candidates outline at this stage of an election. The fact that this part of the process, a crucial one, is meaningless to you shows just how arbitrary so many voters are when it comes to who they pick and why. Sanders’ proposals are in line with everything he’s ever proposed, submitted legislation for, and voted on. Those things are on record over decades of political work. Trump proposed the policies voters were desperate to hear from Clinton and, yes, he conned his voters. It was a lie. They fell for it. Now, many regret it and that is why the November mid-term looked the way it did. Policy is what differentiates between candidates. One candidate has come out and said he prefers not to talk policy at this point. That should alarm – not soothe you. Another candidate is running on the promise to compromise with Republicans. That should scare the pants off of you. Compromise with Mitch McConnell? After all the destruction he and Trump have engaged in?

sophia commented April 29

sophia
bangor, maine

@Rima Regas: You know what Rima? I think you should take a pledge to vote for whoever is the nominee. Can you see your way to do that? Please do not foment division. We have enough of that from Trump. I do not like Sanders any more though I caucused for him in 2016. But if he’s the nominee I certainly will vote for him. We have to beat Trump. And we can’t do it with a socialist progressive who is not even a Democrat.

Thomas Zaslavsky commented April 29

Thomas Zaslavsky
Binghamton, N.Y.

@Rima Regas Go, Rima! Compromise with Republicans, after all those years of massive anti-Democratic warfare? Who’s crazy here?


On David Brooks

An Era Defined by Fear

The emotional tone underneath the political conflicts.

This world has  existing in eras of fear for centuries and religion and politics have been its fuel, for the benefit of those who would rule.

Before this phase of white nationalism in America, before the Nazis in World War II, before American slavery, before American genocide of Native American tribes, before the pogroms in Russia, Ukraine, Poland, before the Inquisition, before the fall of the Second Temple, before the fall of the First Temple, we had fear.

As we’ve grown more knowledgeable, we’ve grown more sophisticated, as a species, to fine tune our tools of fear mongering.

Fear has always been with us. It will remain with us until we resolve to banish those who spread it.

Choose wisely. 2020 is the last redo.

So long.


On Paul Krugman:

The Zombie Style in American Politics

Why bad ideas just won’t stay dead.

The Republican party became compromised when it came under the total control of oligarchs and corporations who, at the same time, engineered the legalization of corruption through our courts.

Oligarchs feel less of a duty to nation than people who believe in democracy. Their allegiances are to their own clans of wealthy people, rather to country.

That is one of the greatest failings of our constitution. It was written by oligarchs, slavers, and it left some gaps through which generations of rich people have, in cyclical manner, tried to take control of our government. As our population has grown and civil rights have become more of an issue, this gaping hole is now visible to all and is impinging on all of our rights in new ways.

The other major party is no less susceptible to corruption than Republicans. In fact, after Trump or as Trump is up for reelection, the wealthy will turn their attention to the DNC and attempt to influence who is chosen. The New York Times reported on that last week in an extraordinary piece about how to “stop Sanders.”

Russia is run by oligarchs. We are now run by oligarchs. If you google Ukraine and any number of politicians on the left or right, you will see a lot of connections.

Rot never affects only one portion of the food it is on. To think one is immune is to be a fool.

Choose wisely. 2020 is the last redo. So long.


Blog#42: When Disability Hits, A Move to The Next Thing

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *