USA Today is trash

Joined
Jan 3, 2010
Messages
907
Likes
121
Location
Boston area
Feedback: 17 / 0 / 0
USA Today is a left wing, anti Christian, propaganda scare machine for American tourists and foreign visitors. Just about every front page has an anti-gun article. Every issue has articles that are politically slanted to the left. Its articles frighten the reader into supporting any and all demo rat and their deficit spending. It almost daily includes desparaging articles about the Vatican. Who's idea was it to hang it on every hotel door? Disgusted.
 
I was traveling for work on the left coast last week and the hotel provided copies of USA Today. I wsa bored and started reading it for a few days. I second your observation, almost every page had some kind of negative gun article. Then I blew through the cross word puzzle in about 20 minutes. Connected?
 
Which main stream paper prints desparaging articles about Jews, atheists, gays, and Muslems? It's not journalism. It is a paper full of opinions and propaganda that fuels hatred. Unfortunately, the masses who read it don't recognize that. The fact that it is accepted and hung on every hotel door in the morning is troubling.
 
USA Today is a left wing, anti Christian, propaganda scare machine for American tourists and foreign visitors. Just about every front page has an anti-gun article. Every issue has articles that are politically slanted to the left. Its articles frighten the reader into supporting any and all demo rat and their deficit spending.

Fast Forward nine years, nothing has changed, USA Today is still the same old leftist trash, now they're shills for the CCP:

 
not only is USA Today an issue, but all the smaller local papers and media outlets the parent company owns too
 
Now they're finally admitting that they're fake news:


But I'm not holding my breath waiting for NYT, WaPo, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, NPR, MSNBC and the rest of the leftist MSM to follow suit.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone read a newspaper anymore??? I mean, anyone under 70?
I read the free paper that is sent to every home in the region. The local Greenville paper is sold in stores and sometimes I’ll buy one but that’s it. I haven’t bought a so called “real paper” in a very long time.
 
I think, as a private entity, they're entitled to print whatever "left-wing, anti-christian" articles they want. Don't like it? Don't read it.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk
LOLZ...Just like if you don't like Twitter, you're free to start your own? Oh, except when Parler tried that their tech buddies jumped in to shut down their servers.

These fake news entities are just defaming people and then hiding behind their status as "news organizations", so they can't be sued.

But if being private organizations is what they really want to be, then it's time to reform the libel and slander laws, so they can be held accountable when they intentionally spread lies.
 

The claim: The Second Amendment reference to a 'well-regulated militia' was limited in 1791 to one musket and 24 bullets.
“Did you know in 1791 when the Founders ratified the 2A, a well regulated militia was restricted to 1 musket, 2 spare flints and 24 bullets?" reads the post.
Commenters seized on the claim to assert that the Second Amendment is outdated.
But the limitations described in the post are not accurate. The figures cited were minimum requirements for militia members – not maximums, according to an expert. The post also gets the timeline wrong: The Second Amendment was ratified in 1791, but the federal law on militia armaments didn't pass until a year later....

Our rating: False

Based on our research, we rate FALSE the claim that the Second Amendment reference to a “well-regulated militia” was limited in 1791 to one musket and 24 bullets. That number of muskets and bullets matches the Uniform Militia Act of 1972, which passed a year after the claim asserts. But more significantly, this legislation established nationwide minimums, not maximums, for militia weaponry.
 
This whole argument about who has how many of what weapon and how many bullets is going to come back to bite us all in the a** at some point in the future. Maybe not right now, maybe not for many years but it will. I get the idea of common use and magazine size is important right now but as weapons and weapon systems continue to evolve technology will change and the decisions we made today will come back for the haunt. The best thing to do is to say it's not bannable under 2A because it's a weapon.
 
If it wasn't for hotels and airports, nobody would read it. It's akin to the print version of CNN.

I remember them handing them out on the street corners outside of South Station to get people to read it. Readership went from zip to second-largest readership nationwide almost overnight.

I recall getting about 48 individual boxes of Cracklin Oat Bran (which should be called Crack, with Oat Bran) cereal the same way. Damn that was good stuff. Terrible for you. Milk and sugar?? How about open the box and eat them while watching TV???

Hell, I recall early 80's some health insurance company was trying to get people to sign up outside of Woolworth's in Boston. They were handing out. . . . packs of cigarettes. PACKS OF CIGARETTES! I was 12. I must have collected a carton of them wandering through. Grandmother collected another carton of them. She was happy. I swiped 2 packs when my mom came to take me home a few days later. LOL
 
Back
Top Bottom