Donald Trump and US politics

"
Budget_player_cadet wrote:
"
Manocean wrote:
If Breitbart, Infowars or similar right side "tabloid news" should be treated equally with these left side tabloids, if they are not at a press conference, these other "news" places shouldn't be. #EqualityOfThePress


"Left side tabloids" being... What, "OccupyDemocrats"?


No NYT, CNN, ABC etc.
Git R Dun!
"
diablofdb wrote:
and then you see general people reaction: "CNN you brought this upon yourself"

The snobbish media elites are completely disassociated from the public, that is painfully obvious. MSM is also dying, so we will witness many death kicks while they spiral down.
When night falls
She cloaks the world
In impenetrable darkness
CNN: This shit is the most smelly shit in the world / But this other shit is the least smelly shit in the world

Breitbart: 10 Similarities between this shit and the left, btw Trump is totally awesome.

Infowars: This shit make the frogs gay!!! / You see that smelly shit in the floor right there? Nobody dumped that, in fact that shit is just a paid actor pretending to be a shit.
--

That is the impression that I have between these three.
Last edited by soneka101#4659 on Feb 25, 2017, 4:00:14 PM
"
diablofdb wrote:
"
kolyaboo wrote:
As predicted. The MSM has now changed the gaggle yesterday which did not allow certain um, news orgs in, into a WH press briefing. They eventually will go too far and even get caught by a moron. Maybe.



Funny part about that gaggle is: You see the MSM reaction as: OMG this is madness!!! Discatorship!!!


and then you see general people reaction: "CNN you brought this upon yourself"


Do you think it's at all chilling that a legitimate, mainstream news outlet (I guess you're just not going to take me up on that challenge to show how CNN actually qualifies as "fake news") has been barred from what has, in the past, been an absolutely standard thing for the press to cover merely because one politician doesn't like their coverage? A friendly reminder, at this point, that at no point did President Obama bar FOX News, a far more clearly partisan and dishonest news network, from any of his events.

"
Aim_Deep wrote:
"
Budget_player_cadet wrote:
"
Manocean wrote:
If Breitbart, Infowars or similar right side "tabloid news" should be treated equally with these left side tabloids, if they are not at a press conference, these other "news" places shouldn't be. #EqualityOfThePress


"Left side tabloids" being... What, "OccupyDemocrats"?


No NYT, CNN, ABC etc.


Called it, Laurium.
Luna's Blackguards - a guild of bronies - is now recruiting! If you're a fan of our favourite chromatic marshmallow equines, hit me up with an add or whisper, and I'll invite you!
IGN: HopeYouAreFireProof
"
Budget_player_cadet wrote:


Do you think it's at all chilling that a legitimate, mainstream news outlet (I guess you're just not going to take me up on that challenge to show how CNN actually qualifies as "fake news") has been barred from what has, in the past, been an absolutely standard thing for the press to cover merely because one politician doesn't like their coverage? A friendly reminder, at this point, that at no point did President Obama bar FOX News, a far more clearly partisan and dishonest news network, from any of his events.





Like I've said the other day:


I'm all in for free speech and free press. But CNN legit deserve this, they stopped being journalists long ago. Now they are propagandist, fearmonger with a dark shaddy political agenda. They have zero journalistic integrity. Therefor I feel so sadness for them being barred.
Wait! Didn't the WH in early Obama days as in Rahm Emmanuel do something similar w/Fox? I seem to recall something like this reported by ABC? Am I crazy?
Censored.
"
diablofdb wrote:
"
Budget_player_cadet wrote:


Do you think it's at all chilling that a legitimate, mainstream news outlet (I guess you're just not going to take me up on that challenge to show how CNN actually qualifies as "fake news") has been barred from what has, in the past, been an absolutely standard thing for the press to cover merely because one politician doesn't like their coverage? A friendly reminder, at this point, that at no point did President Obama bar FOX News, a far more clearly partisan and dishonest news network, from any of his events.





Like I've said the other day:


I'm all in for free speech and free press. But CNN legit deserve this, they stopped being journalists long ago. Now they are propagandist, fearmonger with a dark shaddy political agenda. They have zero journalistic integrity. Therefor I feel so sadness for them being barred.


Quote, um, me:

"I wonder if anyone here would actually be interested in supporting their claim that CNN (or, for that matter, the New York Times, which was also barred from the press conference) is "fake news". And perhaps defining what the hell they mean by "fake news", because last I checked, FOX was there, and FOX is perhaps the most consistently dishonest mainstream cable news network currently on air, at least until we get the Breitbart Channel."

CNN's reporting is often vapid. I'll freely admit that. There's a lot of stuff there that really doesn't matter, that makes me wonder why it's a news issue. Their coverage of flight MH370 got quite a lot of mockery, and not without good reason. But sensationalism is a minor crime in journalism when presented next to, say, constant dishonest partisan slant, as one can find at FOX news. Or hiring Milo Yiannopolous to write columns.

"
kolyaboo wrote:
Wait! Didn't the WH in early Obama days as in Rahm Emmanuel do something similar w/Fox? I seem to recall something like this reported by ABC? Am I crazy?


Well, one of the nice things about the internet is that things don't tend to go away. I'm sure if this actually happened, you can find it. ;)
Luna's Blackguards - a guild of bronies - is now recruiting! If you're a fan of our favourite chromatic marshmallow equines, hit me up with an add or whisper, and I'll invite you!
IGN: HopeYouAreFireProof
Why are illegal immigrant concerns twisted into immigrant concerns?
Trump's immigration platform targeted illegal immigration. Yet there was all this hysteria earlier in the month that he's going to focus his death lasers on legal immigrants, based on language used in a leaked draft. Nothing has come of that, yet the media has been encouraging all immigrants to protest, and most of the headlines refer to immigration instead of illegal immigration.

In the 90's Bill Clinton did some massive welfare reform that actually targeted legal immigrants (the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act). The government could 1. prevent legal immigrants from obtaining means-tested public benefits (i.e. food stamps, TANF, SSI, and SCHIP) for the first 5 years after receiving their permanent residence/green card, and 2. deport legal immigrants if they become unable to provide for themselves (defined as a "public charge") within 5 years of receiving LPR/green card.

There was no media outcry back then, no mass demonstrations, and no Nazi accusations. FYI, Trump's supposed leaked draft simply defined "public charge" more explicitly to try to make point 2. easier to enforce ("receiving public benefits for which eligibility or amount is determined in any way on the basis of income, resources or financial aid"). Yeah there are some issues with that wording, but it was a draft and if anything about that stays in there at all, it's reasonable to expect better wording.

Why is better border security twisted into xenophobia? (Trump's position on building a wall is very similar to Hillary's 2008 position on building a barrier, her support of the 2006 secure fence act, and Bill's 325 mile fence in the 90s).

Why are travel restrictions until better screening is in place, up to 90 days, from countries Obama bombed the fuck out of, destabilized, and sanctioned twisted into an immigration ban? These are countries we can't even safely visit ourselves (avoid all travel alerts), many without a US/Canadian/UK embassy. There's no quid pro quo on safe travel.

In fact, Obama already initiated travel restrictions on anyone who has been to Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen within the last 5 years (the same 7/7 countries on Trump's list), requiring them to obtain a visa to enter the US even if they would normally be exempt. Obama also banned immigration from Iraq for 6 months in 2011 (he delayed processing until they could enact a more stringent vetting process). Bush restricted travel to the US from these same 7 countries after 911 (unanimous support from congress).

The MSM isn't being objective or honest about this stuff. There's so much emotional/irrational outrage and hypocritical bullshit. I swear if people keep calling it a muslim ban I'm going to burst a blood vessel.

Edit: I'm not saying I agree or disagree with any of it, I'm just peeved at the dishonesty and hysteria.
Never underestimate what the mod community can do for PoE if you sell an offline client.
Last edited by Vhlad#6794 on Feb 25, 2017, 10:21:55 PM
"
Budget_player_cadet wrote:


Quote, um, me:

"I wonder if anyone here would actually be interested in supporting their claim that CNN (or, for that matter, the New York Times, which was also barred from the press conference) is "fake news". And perhaps defining what the hell they mean by "fake news", because last I checked, FOX was there, and FOX is perhaps the most consistently dishonest mainstream cable news network currently on air, at least until we get the Breitbart Channel."

CNN's reporting is often vapid. I'll freely admit that. There's a lot of stuff there that really doesn't matter, that makes me wonder why it's a news issue. Their coverage of flight MH370 got quite a lot of mockery, and not without good reason. But sensationalism is a minor crime in journalism when presented next to, say, constant dishonest partisan slant, as one can find at FOX news. Or hiring Milo Yiannopolous to write columns.



"Fake news" is obviously news that you don't like. I can call every news channel "fake news", that is empowering. I can also call you a liar, a jackass or a cheat. That is how slander or defamation work. It does not matter whether it is true or not.
Here are two quotes from some of the organizers of the 'Day Without Immigrants' protests (one from Facebook, plastered by the MSM everywhere, and the other by the director of a nonprofit serving the Latino community):
"
For one single day on a weekday, we must come together and unite in absolute resistance in order to reject the system dictating the launch from dehumanisation and blatant oppression of those that are not straight, white, natural-born citizens
"
Our goal is to highlight the need for Philadelphia to expand policies that stop criminalising communities of colour

???? what the fuck is that, the media (and these event organizers) should be castigated for twisting the illegal immigration discussion into racism/homophobia or a slight against all immigrants.

Meanwhile, this week in South Africa: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4256962/Violent-clashes-South-Africans-immigrants.html

Yes the marches were anti illegal immigrant marches, but there is widespread xenophobia and hate toward even legal immigrants in South Africa. You have angry mobs attacking and looting foreign owned businesses and rioting.

That's not what's happening in the US, despite what the hysterical reactions and hyperbole suggest. America is still one of the most immigrant friendly places on earth. If the 63 million people who voted for Trump were actually Nazis, the US would look completely different.
Never underestimate what the mod community can do for PoE if you sell an offline client.

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info