If the article’s intent was to let the facts speak for themselves, it forgot to invite them. Instead, Tracy leveraged the full weight of his employer, America’s paper of record, to ask an entertainer who sings with Elmo about how to go to school if she would care to comment about receiving money from Hamas. Nasty work.
You know it occurs to me that when all you care about is money, you may think that the only motivator people have is money.
I.e. The only reasons that anybody does anything is for a pay day. That means you either think everyone"like" you must think like you and the only reason they don’t say so is because they have been paid (since that would apparently be enough to get you to say the opposite of your beliefs). OR, that they don’t have morals (or strength of conviction) and need to be told what to say.
What is most worrying about that is the implication that a supposedly unbiased journalist can be assumed to be open to publicly say things against their beliefs if the price is right.
Yeah, it’s projection. “I’m only pro-Israel because they pay me, so others are only pro-Palestine because they’re being paid.”
Good point. I genuinely believe the pursuit of wealth is, like anything else, a psychosis at a certain point. Like, Musk is upset that people don’t like him. Why did he ever have to be in the public eye? Why is he still working when he has wealth and hundreds of children? My grandpa was told that, in his retirement, if he wanted to continue to produce and sell Adirondack chairs at a factory level he would have to pay sales tax. He didn’t want to figure that out so he stopped working, and died. My dude, you like fishing and watching sports coverage. Just do that. Why do you NEED to work? That’s not normal.