KUDOS to MSNBC host Joy Reid, who is "coming out" as a true ally of LGBTQ people. She changed. People can and do change from homophobia. From inadvertent, insensitive comments. From discriminating policies and laws. Thank you, Joy Reid - apology accepted. And thank you to all allies of LGBTQ people.

Joy Reid is a national treasure.
President Obama's views on gay marriage evolved as well.

You really aren’t going to call BS on her lie?

You can like her regardless, but I can’t believe you and Papaken will let her lie slide—-

“I genuinely do not believe I wrote those hateful things . . .”



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 06:58PM by jay.

"Joy Reid opens her 4-28-18 show with an extended apology" -- headline

http://money.cnn.com/2018/04/28/media/joy-reid-am-joy-apology/index.html


"I genuinely do not believe I wrote those hateful things because they are completely alien to me. But I can definitely understand based on things I have tweeted and have written in the past why some people don't believe me."

Changing for the better is good. I took a long time to come around to the idea of gay marriage. What finally did it for me was an article in my local paper that highlighted a gay couple with kids. And what struck me was that they were just a normal family. They had a house, and jobs, and were devoted parents -- they had all of the normal joys and worries of family life. And after having been together for a very long time, they wanted to be married. Just like everyone else.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 10:57AM by summer.

I watched her show this am and I do have to commend Joy.

Too bad Coulter took the trumpian low road of blindly punching back.

Too bad she felt it necessary to lie about the second batch of homophobic writings that have been dug up. She claims Wikileaks and Russia “hacked” her. The on-line magazine she writes for, The Daily Beast, investigated and concluded it was at best a fantasy. They suspended her (or something like).

The problem isn’t that she wrote homophobic things in the past. We forget how homophobic America was even just 5-10 years ago, including so-called liberals. The problem, and it’s a big one, is that she lied about this second batch and, par for the MSNBC/DNC course, blamed her failings on Wikileaks and Russia.

Joy Reid is no journalist. Like the rest of her MSNBC colleagues, she is paid very big bucks to lie to you.

Human

please tell us one lie she has told.

Dave the Atheist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> please tell us one lie she has told.


One?

She’s lying that she was hacked by Russia and Wikileaks. She wrote those hateful posts whether she remembers writing them or not.

But MSNBC loyalists don’t care if their “journalists” blatantly lie and scapegoat. Heh. Brian Williams is still there.

You claim she is paid to lie. Hows much did she receive to claim she was hacked ?

I’m guessing she makes a little less than Chris Hayes and Maddow’s roughly $30,000 a day.

Is that the question I should have asked ?

It looks like she's going to get away with it Human.

Gee, I'm so sorry. I don't believe I wrote those things. These are the people I advocate for . . . . .

Sorry for what? Sorry she doesn't believe she wrote it? It's an apology for those who want to think she's apologizing and a denial for those . . . . hey, she could teach the mormons leadership a thing or two .....

jay Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It looks like she's going to get away with it
> Human.


I’m not sure about that, jay. If keeping her job is gettng away with it,” then yes. However:

Cable News is geriatric central. The median age of viewers of CNN/FOX/MSNBC is over 60. Not only are people 40 and under not watching Cable News, they’re not watching Cable period. So she may ‘get away with it’ among devoted retirees.


This poses a real, concerning problem, though.

Part of Trump’s victory was due to his ‘Me v. Media’ trope. Why? Because he knows that most people with brain cells left to waste don’t waste it on Cable News bullshit. He knows that not only are most people not watching (it’s a huge deal if they can get over 3 million viewers) but that most people think the entire enterprise is bullshit on top of bullshit.

So go ahead Joy and all those aiding her, keep proving most people right. It’s one thing to have one journalist lie, but it’s another thing to have so many other journalists show that they are unconcerned with her lies.

So with corporate media so overwhelmingly undermined by their own selves, what comes next? That’s a problem.


And you’re right, it’s reminiscent of LDSinc. The geriatric 15 and 70 may think they’re getting away with it because the geriatric members are willing to go along with ANYTHING the brethren say, but that is far less true for members under 40, and chronically untrue for those just entering adulthood.

You don’t know much about healing, do you.

Oh well, good luck anyway.

Lying isn’t healing.

Nor is defending liars.

Nonetheless, I wish you well.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 09:09PM by steve benson.

If you're going to chime in, are you going to agree that Joy did not apologize for the recently discovered blog posts? Because, you can't apologize for something you genuinely don't believe you did, can you?

Like, what if you apologized for offending believers of all sorts, but claimed you only claimed Jesus didn't exist, and could not believe you ever made such claims about Santa . . . .

Come on, Steve, unleash that deadly logic . . . help us out here.

Double standard?! That’s all I needed. I suckered you in.

Thanks for backing us up —-

When I say us, I should really say me – Human is far too sophisticated to need back up

And you didn’t sucker me in. I sucker-punched you with something you can’t respond to honestly. Again, your problem, not mine



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 09:42PM by steve benson.

Is the cowering comic fleeing from the facts?

But you're right about the double standard.

"Double standard": most succinct argument you've every made! :)

I know, I know, dealing honestly with your double standard just isn’t your thing.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 09:55PM by steve benson.

I apologize for calling you a cowering comic . . .

but I genuinely don't believe I said anything about a double standard.

deal with that---


oh, faux news? purely hysterical stuff. It's a good laugh. Gives you a run for your money. Does anyone take that seriously?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 09:56PM by jay.

address the double standard.

To use your own words, quit “cowering.”

I thought you were saying the way some liberals were treating Joy was a "double standard" --- giving her a pass for lying about past statements.

What double standard are you referring to?

Don't make me bring in Tall Man, Short Hair.

Just because you come off as a self-confessed apologist for FAUX “News” doesn’t mean there isn’t a double standard at play on your part. Methinks you apologize too much. All this dumping on MSNBC by right-wingers who somehow can’t see how FAUX “News” has its own serious credibility problems.

If, on the other hand and as you say, you misinterpreted my initial post then, again, that’s your issue, not mine.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 10:12PM by steve benson.

oh I definitely misinterpreted your double standard comment.

But if you can't acknowledge the flaw in Joy's apology, my condolences to your reason.

And I "come off as a self-confessed apologist for FAUX “News”? That's wild. I think all you're going on in reaching that conclusion is that I'm skewering Joy for a lie, a lie and an apology.

I'm not alone in recognizing her failure to acknowledge she wrote the recently discovered posts.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/joy-reid-apologizes-for-homophobic-posts-she-doesnt-remember-writing?ref=scroll

See also: New York Time: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/28/business/media/joy-reid-hacking-msnbc.html?mtrref=www.google.com&gwh=B193C08CF0CB0E00F04AC0A28E974FE7&gwt=pay

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 10:35PM by steve benson.

lol


Why can't Joy just admit she wrote the recently discovered posts?

It would, in my opinion, make her apology more meaningful.

edit: plus, we have a world-class liar in the white house --- we have to be better, way better ---



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 10:53PM by jay.

Did she apologize?

"I genuinely do not believe I wrote those hateful things because they are completely alien to me. But I can definitely understand based on things I have tweeted and have written in the past why some people don't believe me."

http://money.cnn.com/2018/04/28/media/joy-reid-am-joy-apology/index.html



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 08:12PM by jay.

Not in those two sentences you quoted, but you managed to skip the third sentence in the MSN link in the post above yours (your link was garbled by the parens you added to the link)

Third sentence: "For that I am truly, truly sorry."

Next paragraph:
Reid also apologized to pundit Ann Coulter, whom she suggested in several tweets dating to 2010 and 2011 was a man. “I want to apologize to the trans community and to Ann,” she said.

So yes, she apologized.

Well, she said “I genuinely do not believe I wrote those hateful things . . .” Referring to the recent posts that were uncovered.

So how can her apology be interpreted to apply to the posts that she genuinely does not believe that she wrote?

Now she does apologize for her tweets – the ones that she apologized for back in December. But she doesn’t take responsibility for the new posts that were found.

So how is that an apology?

PS I didn’t skip over the third sentence because if you read that article that I cited there is no third sentence – and also that’s not my post are you referring to I didn’t do that - I truly do not believe that that i wrote the post you’re referring to.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 08:18PM by jay.

Yes, she did apologize.

Ken – she said that she genuinely doesn’t believe she wrote those words - from the posts recently uncovered.

So please explain to me how somebody can apologize for something that they genuinely don’t believe that they wrote. Is that possible?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 08:19PM by jay.

PapaKen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, she did apologize.


How is it an apology to apologize for writings she doesn’t even admit writing?



But the LGBQ angle is just the bait to bait you away from the real issue: that she lied about her writings being planted by hackers on behalf of Wikileaks and Russia.

The problem isn’t her stance on homosexuality. The problem is that she is presented to the world as a journalist but is instead a liar, a maker-up of bullshit.

You do care if journalists lie, right? Not caring is like not caring if Engineers know math.

A fundamental lack of distinction on your part, as to how self-expressing opinionators and news-reporting journalists differ.

I see this basic lack of comprehension all the time. You are just the latest manifestation of it. Ironically enough, taking an entry-level journalism class would help you understand this.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 10:58PM by steve benson.

I'm sorry, but I'm not a fan of "you caught me, and I'm truly sorry" apologies. And I don't really buy the hacking thing. "I don't believe I wrote those things" is not good enough. If it's not clear as day that you never said those things, you can't hide behind the excuse that perhaps you said them, but you hope you didn't. Own up to what you did, don't make excuses.

Therefore, her apology, along with any attendant excuses such as confused memories, is quite sufficient.

It's not sufficient for me . . . and I'm so liberal and progressive that Ken and Dave couldn't hold my leather jockstrap -----.

When I first saw this story, I was wondering how she could possibly maneuver thru this. When I heard the FBI was involved and she was claiming hacking, then I was waiting for this to blow up in her face.

Now, she did offer a nice apology. If she could have just copped to the latest posts that were uncovered - if she could have just copped to lying out of fear she'd lose her job, then it would have been a world-class apology. But, she lied.

And sadly, it gives fuel to the right-wingers . . . it supports their version of crazy. Damn it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 08:51PM by jay.

caffiend Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Therefore, her apology, along with any attendant
> excuses such as confused memories, is quite
> sufficient.


I wish so much that smart guys like you who lean right would stop calling people like Joy Reid a Progre.ssive. She is anything but a Progr.essive. In fact, Joy Reid, her Network and her party do everything they can to block Progressives.

And by the way, she works for the same team you cheer for, just from an opposite side-line.

Those damned meddling Russian probably hacked it.

The trumpanzees do not want drumpf to apologize. Joy Reid insulted gays 10 years ago and apologized. Trump Just Insulted the Disabled TODAY--AGAIN !

Trumpanzees, don't make me laugh with your faked indignance

Jay and Human: what part of “I want to apologize to the trans community and to Ann" are you unable to parse? It's a simple declarative sentence

Here is the part I can't parse:

She had previously (back in December?) apologized for some old tweets.

Someone uncovered a bunch of additional old posts that said nasty things about gays. I won't repeat, but you can find them.

First she said she'd been hacked. You can find that lie.

Then, as a preface to her recent apology, she said regarding the newly discovered posts: "I genuinely do not believe I wrote those hateful things. . . ."

Thus, she didn't apologize for the recently found statements. To the contrary, she lied saying she didn't believe she wrote them.

She lied about being hacked. Then she, I think, lied that she genuinely didn't believe she wrote the recently discovered posts. And then she apologized for the stuff she had previously apologized for.

It's an apology wrapped in a few lies.

Do you not see that?


p.s. Sorry if you don't understand what I'm saying. Also, I genuinely don't believe that I ever said she lied.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2018 10:12PM by jay.

Dave,

That's an excellent point that merits serious consideration. You may have just exposed a flaw in my logic.

you have no logic. you are a comedian.

https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/990265579071266816

Wait . . . . here's a funny one--

If I want a funny one I'll watch fux nooz.

Please tell us about this "Lenin" of yours.

And then tell us how much you love Putin.

Lenin was, of course, the ruthless, brutal founder of the officially atheistic Soviet state. Between 1917 and 1987, an estimated 60 million people were killed by execution, starvation, work camps, torture, machine gun, and so on. Lenin, in power from 1917 until is death in 1924, accounts for the first 4 million.

Putin, although not a Communist ideologue, is another brutal Russian dictator. Hope that clears things up a bit, Dave.

So the murdering head of KGB Putin is your role model ?

I have no opinion for once.