Holy shit you can feel the contempt the author of this article had for them not endorsing Kamala. It’s just seething rage every sentence
post
Huh, didn't know the LA Times was real like that, always assumed it was basically New York Times West
Not to say that doing this alone is super radical or anything but it's still more principled than anyone voting Democrat
The owner already walked backed the statement and said he had his own reasons, different than his daughter's support of Palestine.
Disappointing the owner would do that, but this still builds the narrative so it's still a win regardless of what he says now.
Daughter: I'm not endorsing Kamala because she's supporting Israel.
Owner: I'm not endorsing Kamala because she's isn't supporting Israel enough.
Somewhat based mainstream media?
How exactly did they "experience" South African apartheid?
Soon-Shiong was born in South Africa, and under apartheid was considered "colored". Basically everyone that wasn't white was discriminated against, Chinese were legally second-class citizens.
It was only well into the 70's, more than 20 years after his birth, that some Asians started getting "honorary white" status.
It was only well into the 70's, more than 20 years after his birth, that some Asians started getting "honorary white" status.
Mostly Taiwanese and rich Japanese people, because they supported Apartheid South Africa. I think Asian in South Africa meant like Southeast Asian than the whole Asian continent.
Her father, the owner of the paper, grew up in apartheid era South Africa, and Chinese people in South Africa were usually classified as “coloureds”
The LA Times has been trying its hardest to be an imperialist rag on the Washington Post New York Times tier for a long time now (well I guess it probably always was since it has existed for 142 years). I doubt this signifies any real change in the articles.
all 21 comments