If you're a progressive news junkie read RawStory
by Hal Brown
Stories that piqued my interest today on bottom of page
There are several aggregate non-partisan websites to choose from so you don't have to click on individual websites to keep up with news as it breaks and the best opinion stories of the day.
 |
| Click image for link |
 |
In review, Raw Story is primarily a news aggregation site that aggregates news from AFP and Reuters. Raw Story also summarizes information from other sources such as this: “Irate customer drags salon owner 50 feet to her death after running out on manicure without paying.” Infrequently, they publish original stories such as this: Trans activists detained in Arizona and threatened with deportation due to bureaucratic catch-22. Raw Story consistently utilizes strong, emotionally loaded headlines such as “Trump insists border wall will be ‘all concrete’ — except where it’s ‘see-through’: ‘Makes sense to me!’” and “MSNBC’s Morning Joe mocks ‘confused’ Trump over shutdown boasts: ‘Voters are blaming him.’”
Raw Story generally sources credible media outlets such as the Washington Blade, Las Vegas Review-Journal, and the St. Louis Post Dispatch. Generally, story selection always favors the left and frequently has an anti-Trump tone. Raw Story has published misleading articles promoting miracle cures such as this: Scientists discover virus that kills all grades of breast cancer ‘within seven days.’ This headline is misleading, as, within the article, they clearly state, “but not in normal mammary epithelial cells.” Regarding consensus science, they sometimes promote anti-GMO propaganda; however, they also publish credible, scientifically sound information.
Failed Fact Checks
- A factual search reveals a Half-True claim from Politifact, a false claim, and an Unproven claim with Snopes. They have also promoted misinformation during the 2020 election.
Overall, we rate Raw Story Left Biased based on story selection that favors the left and Mixed for factual reporting due to half-true, false, and unproven claims, as well as the promotion of mild pseudoscience misinformation. (5/15/2016) Updated (M. Huitsing 08/10/2022)
I find Kos pales in comparison for aggregating political news article published elsewhere along with excerpts to RawStory. The later recently added original articles. The pluses are that Kos allows anybody to post their own stories, called diaries, and that there's often thought provoking discussing in the comments. The minus is that community posted stories rarely include original material and opinion, in fact they don't even have an opinion section like major newspapers. For my take on why my story got me banned, with the story removed from the site, without any reason sent to me, can be found if you Google my name, Hal Brown, and a keyword like Daily Kos or Trump. That will get you to my blog.
Tip for consumers:
I do not find Daily Kos to be a particularly useful site for political news or opinion.There are better websites to do this with. If you want to post your own material it is the only liberal website I know of where any registered member of what they call their community can do so and potentially get up to 2000 readers and over 200 comments as I did a about a dozen times with my over 1,700 posts there before I was banned without them letting me know why.
I adore alliterations. I am a wee bit ashamed to admit that I have been known to use the thesaurus to build on an initial idea with only three or four words. For example in describing Trump using a magic wand to declassify top secret documents I wrote he was a flying fat fatuous fantasy flailing fairy.
Main points from Washington Post Column on possible Russian use of nukes:
Demonstration shot over uninhabitated area- least likely because it wouldn't be shocking enough.
This explosion would not require a nuclear response by the United States. To prevent further escalation, President Biden could call for Russia’s international isolation (China and India, for example, would quickly distance themselves), impose extraordinarily harsh new sanctions and issue warnings of grave consequences should Russia proceed with additional explosions.
Low-yield weapon. Russia could fire a “low-yield” nuclear weapon on a Ukrainian military target. The explosion would kill hundreds or thousands and cause significant damage.
This might be the most likely scenario. Again, it would not require a “response in kind” by the United States, though some would urge that. The likely response, in addition to those in scenario one, would be massive increases in military aid to Ukraine and possibly concerted NATO or U.S. strikes on the Russian units that launched the attack.
Large-yield weapon. Putin could dial up the explosive force of the attack to the 50- or 100-kiloton range, or about three to six times the Hiroshima bomb.
This would almost certainly trigger a direct U.S. or NATO response, though not likely nuclear. The United States and NATO have sufficient precise, powerful conventional weapons that they could use to devastate Russian forces in Ukraine and command headquarters, including those units responsible for the attack. This would likely be accompanied by large-scale cyber operations.
Nuclear attack on NATO. This is the least likely scenario. Russian first-use doctrine includes the option of striking NATO targets.This could trigger a nuclear response. Some would argue a limited nuclear counterstrike was necessary to preserve nuclear deterrence. More likely is an all-out conventional assault to try to eliminate either Putin himself or the weapons he commands before he strikes again.
These are horrible scenarios to consider. If you are worried, you are having the appropriate reaction. We should do all we can now to prepare a massive political response that might deter Putin from crossing the nuclear line.
 |
| Click above to read |
