If the press would cover me accurately & honorably, I would have far less reason to "tweet." Sadly, I don't know if that will ever happen!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 5, 2016
AND: Asked about Trump's tweeting, Dick Cheney said:
I think one of the reasons people get so concerned about the tweets is it is sort of a way around the press. He doesn't have to rely upon, uh, rely upon [the press]. This is the modern era, modern technology. He's at the point where we don't need you guys anymore.
पोस्ट्स
१९१ टिप्पण्या:
Why do I get the sense this is last thing the MSM wants.
@realDonaldTrump, perhaps after the Times and the Post go bankrupt perhaps it will. Perhaps.
He's not wrong.
trolled
"He's at the point where we don't need you guys anymore."
This feels amazingly good.
He's exactly right. Due to their liberal bias and shoddy journalism, the mainstream press (i.e., the NYTimes), has forfeited its right to be the self-designated filter of the messages our President wants to convey to the citizens of this country.
If the Press could ever return to reporting the news, rather than shaping the narrative (almost always slanted left), he wouldn't need to twitter.
There are some good reporters out there. One I've found I quite enjoy is Salena Zito. But even she lives in a bubble. When Trump ditched his press gaggle to go to dinner, she said he was wrong to do so. Her argument was along the lines of, what if something happens to him? She gave a historical answer about a diplomacy trip for some past president or vice president. And they took off in a plane and rumors started that the plane went down or something. It took awhile for everyone to figure out all was well.
Is this the best they can do?
We need the press watching Donald Trump 24/7 so we can rest assured he is safe and all is well?
They are losing this battle.
Trump, among other things, threatening a trade war with China over Twitter using highly charged language is what makes people concerned.
Dick is right. We don't need them. I foresee a lot of job losses in the fake news -- er DNC-Media-Academic complex -- over the next 8 to 16 years.
Let's see...
Some of the stories that the press reported accurately, using Trump's own words:
~He wanted to "ban all Muslims" wishing entry to the U.S.;
~He mocked a disabled reporter;
~He asserted that General Pershing used bullets dipped in pigs' blood to execute Muslim prisoners;
~He said of John McCain, "I prefer people who weren't captured...";
~He settled the Trump University fraud case for $25 million;
~He said that his own private investigators looking into the Obama birth certificate were finding "amazing things";
~He testified that his net worth was partly whatever he thought it was on a day-to-day basis;
~He said Hillary Clinton wanted to abolish the Second Amendment;
~He said that he watched "thousands of people" in New Jersey celebrate the collapse of the World Trade Center;
~He said it was "absolutely horrible" that Ted Cruz's father was "with Lee Harvey Oswald... shortly before [JFK] was shot";
~He claimed the U.S. was "the highest-taxed nation in the world";
~He said of Vladimir Putin, “I got to know him very well because we were both on 60 Minutes, we were stablemates and we did very well that night.” (Trump and Putin appeared via separately-taped inteviews; they never met.)
~Finally, there is the positively sociopathic -- and repeated -- pattern of Trump calling reporters in the 1980's and 90's as someone else, speaking for Trump. Trump subsequently lied about it, then fessed up to it, then returned to lying about it in 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/donald-trump-alter-ego-barron/2016/05/12/02ac99ec-16fe-11e6-aa55-670cabef46e0_story.html
That last item is my personal favorite. It is the most personally twisted of all of these bizarre lies.
Götterdämmerung
Trump determines which stories have legs, not the MSM. Soap opera women are disenfranchised.
Blogger Chuck said...
Let's see...
Some of the stories that the press reported accurately, using Trump's own words:
Wherein Chuck shares with us a bunch of stories that are mostly inaccurate to prove the media is accurate.
Sad!
Chuck,
Trump is right. He doesn't need the msm to get his message out.
And we don't need The NY Times and other msm to keep us from being fooled by Trump. We only need you commenting on Althouse.
Keep up the good work!
Quayle
Cheney was better to watch than read He was very sly when he said that looking at the CNN woman It was funny. I also notice he never said President Obama He said the President of the United States and Barak Obama . When he referred to Trump he said President elect Trump.
The mainstream media is irrelevant with respect to the people, and are a propaganda arm of the Federal Government. This was proven beyond all doubt in the last election, where they lied about the polls to discourage Trump voters, and were campaign headquarters of the Crooked Old Lady.
Now they are, along with Congress, pushing the "Fake News" meme, in order to distract from #pizzagate, a satanic pedophile ring of massive proportions involving those in government. They are protecting pedophiles.
That tweet was almost a haiku on being Trump.
Lifelong Republican Chuck is still here to tell us all how Hillary would be moving the country in a better direction than Trump. And how we need to appease communists in Cuba, Russia, and China more by stomping on our friends in Taiwan.
--Vance
George W. Bush said in a speech "The question is, are children learning?" Leaving out the first two words, the NYT transcribed the sentence as "Is our children learning?"
"Aha!" NYT subscribers exclaimed. "Here is the proof that Bush is an idiot!" Much hilarity ensued.
Given the ever-increasing political bias of the media over the past few decades, the media have earned many times over whatever contempt Trump displays.
Like most of Cheney's output this is not really true. The only reason most people know Trump tweets is because of the press.
OWT said: "Trump, among other things, threatening a trade war with China over Twitter using highly charged language is what makes people concerned."
I am enjoying this. The harumphs emanating from the press, especially the foreign policy experts (cough) is amusing. Get used to it.
Sometimes a preemptive shot across the bow is what is needed. The time for the US being played like a fiddle may be coming to a conclusion. We shall see.
"Chuck" wrote:
"It is the most personally twisted of all of these bizarre lies."
Obama's most twisted lie was "If you like the plan you have, you can keep it. If you like the doctor you have, you can keep your doctor, too. The only change you’ll see are falling costs as our reforms take hold."
http://www.politifact.com/obama-like-health-care-keep/
This lie, in one form or another, was repeated over 30 times by Obama or one of his surrogates.
In spite of the fact that Obama had no idea if this was true, the media never, ever called him on it. No journalist ever saw fit to ask "how does Obama know this? He isn't writing the legislation. He doesn't have any more idea what the legislation will do than any random person."
Obama's lie was incredibly cynical. He knew that over 80% of Americans were happy with there healthcare in 2009. He had to lie to that 80% to quell any doubts they might have that they might lose a health plan or a doctor that they were happy with.
Obama's lie was exactly the type of lie that a free press should have exposed, and di not expose.
What was inaccurate, eric?
Be specific.
And I have never suggested that "the media is accurate." That's yet another claim about me that you can't back up. (Along with, "Chuck is a Democrat;" "Chuck is a Hillary supporter;" and "Chuck is a paid troll from the Democrats."
I'm a Republican who has praised Ann Althouse (not a Republican) for her good and careful criticism of much of the media's coverage of Trump.
The problem for Trump is that he says so much stuff that is complete garbage, that he doesn't get the benefit of the "biased leftwing media" argument that Republicans can use.
What garbage from the Althousians. Professor Althouse should be so ashamed of what she has developed at this point.
Just a bunch of trashtalk saying that I am a leftwing Democrat. And saying, 'But what about Obama?' 'And what about Hillary?'
Unlike some of you -- and Professor Althouse, I think -- I've never voted for Obama, or Hillary, or any Democrat in this 21st century.
I challenge all of you fuckheads to quote my most pro-Democrat post(s) on these Comments pages. No, not my criticism of Trump. That doesn't count. Prove my pro-Democrat bona fides.
Henry Kissinger told a story of his first press interview when he moved to Washington DC. The reporter asked him if he was going to be hitting the nightclubs, as he did in NYC. Kissinger asked "Are there any nightclubs in DC?". When the story came out, it was reported that the first thing Kissinger asked the reporter is whether there were any nightclubs in DC. After that he was more careful.
That he said to ban a Muslims. That he mocked a disabled reporter. The implication that Hillary didn't want to abolish the 2nd amendment via the supreme Court.
I'm not familiar with all the stories. I will just assume they are as inaccurate as the ones I am familiar with.
Now they are, along with Congress, pushing the "Fake News" meme, in order to distract from #pizzagate, a satanic pedophile ring of massive proportions involving those in government. They are protecting pedophiles.
LMFAO.
Mick. Mr. Pizzagate.
Good Luck Trump
Müthiş bir film izle
Presidents also go around the Press by simply giving a speech that must be covered and is unaltered direct to the people. Obama used that medium to lie regularly about things like taking over 1/16th of the economy, losing an embassy and 4 brave Americans, his red lines in the sand, and trivia like that. He might have been less dishonest if he kept to 140 characters.
Let me see: "If you like your plan you can keep your plan." "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor." "We will reduce premiums by $2500."
Nope. He was quite efficient with his own style.
Trump ran a campaign of lies and insults. A dishonest, dishonorable man has no claim to ask others to be better than he himself is.
Just a quick poll:
How many of you actually follow Trump's tweeting? I know every single tweet of his I have ever read came directly or indirectly through a reporting of it from a source that calls itself a reporter, journalist, newspaper, or news organization. Every single one.
Who is the audience for Trump's tweets?
Regarding Chuck's laundry list of horribles, I say:
"Is That all? Really, That's all you have?"
Trump has lived a very public life for 50+ years, and the best cherry pickers can find 9 or so stupid statements?
Jeez, we've had Presidents who killed folks in duels (Andy Jackson) and likely raped a woman (Bill Clinton).
As for liars, jeez, too many to count. How about in the process of wrecking our health care system, the current Prez says I can keep the doctor I want? But what if the doctor is driven out of his practice, because of all the oppressive regulations?
If you put a magnifying glass, plus 10 professional researchers to scour everything Ghandi or Mother Theresa ever said or did, you will garner a much worse list.
Your list makes me like Trump even more.
eric:
The "ban on all Muslims..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh7XaJlvJIg
The mocking of a disabled reporter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZcuWba_HgU
The statement that Hillary wanted to abolish the Second Amendment:
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/08/09/trump-warns-hillary-wants-to-abolish-the-second-amendment/
As for that last one, I take it you agree that Hillary didn't want to "abolish the Second Amendment, but that she had a more insidious, circuitous method in mind to nominate federal judges who would, over time, reverse the Heller and MacDonald decisions from the Supreme Court. Okay. I'm right; Hillary did NOT propose abolishing the Second Amendment. If Trump had an argument on gun rights, he made it in a grossly inaccurate and ham-fisted way.
Presidents and their administrations have always used the media. Trump has just changed the strategy in how to use them.
As I said, I'm familiar with all of those. I don't need your links, thanks anyway Chuck.
If this is the best you got, well, thank God for twitter. Not all of us need the media to think for us. I'm perfectly capable to listen to Trump and understand him without your filter, or the media's filter, which always spins it to make Republicans look dumb.
Blogger sunsong said...
Trump ran a campaign of lies and insults. A dishonest, dishonorable man has no claim to ask others to be better than he himself is.
You spelled Hillary wrong.
Perfect:
eric said...
Blogger Chuck said...
Let's see...
Some of the stories that the press reported accurately, using Trump's own words:
Wherein Chuck shares with us a bunch of stories that are mostly inaccurate to prove the media is accurate.
Sad!
Ha ha ha ha ha.
Bay Area Guy:
No, those are just some of the richest, tastiest, most funny, most easily disproven gross falsehoods. Trump is turning out lies, misconceptions and goofy/mendacious stuff on a nearly-daily basis.
Now; I like Attorney General Jeff Sessions. I like the fact that Trump might nominate a Bill Pryor to the Supreme Court (we'll see). I like it, a lot, that Republicans held the House and the Senate. I like Betsy DeVos at Education. Trump was the lesser of two evils, in November '16. Okay?
Why jump DJT for being a scary change agent...HE SCARES US is not an argument. He promised to do things different 30 times a week for over a year.
Oh yeah. He is a White Anglo Protestant Supremacist.
Did someone send you a fax on the subject?
AReasonableMan said...
Like most of Cheney's output this is not really true. The only reason most people know Trump tweets is because of the press
"He's at the point where we don't need you guys anymore."
(sound of collective media sphincters tightening)
2016 seems to be the year of the Tu Quoque argument, with Ad Hominem a close second.
After this election the wash post and nytimes are the last places I look for news.
Twitter banning Trump accounts...3...2...
eric,
The problem isn't so much that the media works to make Republicans look dumb.
The problem is that Trump does it on his own, with the media not having to stretch themselves at all, to make Trump look dumb.
I suppose the issue is whether Trump is a Republican. That may be the issue in the end. Trump might end up as a President without a party.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-congress-senate-trump-idUSKBN13H111
Who is the audience for Trump's tweets?
40k likes. So someone out there is listening.
" He is a White Anglo Protestant Supremacist. "
a WAPS? No, I think wops are something different.
Well, Chuck, if the United States had banned all Muslims there would be a bunch of students at OSU who wouldn't have needed hospitalization. But perhaps you're a Michigan fan and don't much care about them. If Muslims were banned there would be a bunch of gay men in Florida who would be getting ready to celebrate Christmas with their partners, but perhaps, Chuck, you're homophobic.
What Cheney said.
Blogger Chuck said...
Bay Area Guy:
No, those are just some of the richest, tastiest, most funny, most easily disproven gross falsehoods.
Let's apply the trump standard to chuck. Shall we?
Chuck, please explain how mocking a disabled reporter is a "falsehood".
Chuck, please explain how banning "all" Muslims is a falsehood.
Trump and Chuck tend to have similar speaking patterns. Next Chuck is going to tell us saying mean things about John McCain is a falsehood.
Sad!
So far, it is not Trump who has proved out to be the dumb one.
Trump's Tweeting is about him not having to answer questions. It has nothing to do with media coverage.
Once written, twice... said...
Trump, among other things, threatening a trade war with China over Twitter using highly charged language is what makes people concerned.
Don't you really mean instigating a "trade war"? Doing something that would cause China to up the stakes?
When looked at critically, I don't think that China would risk that in response simply to the Trump initiatives to keep more high value-added manufacturing in the US.
China has way more to loose than the US from a reduction in trade and Trump knows that.
eric, mocking the disabled reporter is just gross. Sociopathic. And idiotic. Displaying a weird level of self control.
Tump's later denying that he was in any way mocking that reporter is what is a lie. Trump denied mocking him (huh!?); and then Trump went on to say that he hadn't even met the guy, when in fact Trump knew just what the guy's disability looked like, and the guy had covered Trump for years before Trump had any inkling of running for President.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34940861
eric, you don't have to accept these things as "falsehoods." Instead, a guy like you can simply take them as random, inexplicable idiocies. Does that work for you? Feel better? As I started off, the issue is that the press -- accused of covering Trump unfairly -- didn't have to report any of my selected items unfairly. The press could simply report it all accurately, and Trump was made to look worse than anyone who gets unfair press treatment.
Original Mike said...
"He's at the point where we don't need you guys anymore."
This feels amazingly good.
12/5/16, 11:21 AM
It does "for now" but it actually is quite sad. It is sad that one of the greatest industries in the world ever has completely prostituted themselves out. Has completely soiled their profession. Has completely reneged on their birthright and their potential. Their responsibility was and is to be a neutral reporter of truth and facts.
This soiling did not start this election cycle. They (as a profession and industry) have been pissing it all away for a fairly long time.
This country will be worse for this loss. Some other forms of media will continue to grow to fill the void but it did not have to be this way. May they all live to regret their pettiness.
Chuck, the Hillary Clinton supporter, writes without detectable irony* "He mocked a disabled reporter" as if that is a moral failing. Is mockery no longer acceptable? Are we to treat disabled people differently?
Would treating disabled people differently be a Chuck-approved endorsement of discrimination?
*My comment, however, has easily detected sarcasm.
Chuck said:
This, that, the other, etc.
Ya know, in spite of Chuck threatening to attack Greta,in order to see how she reacts to being violently manhandled and thrown to the ground like a used sanitary napkin in Wisconsin,and his occasional obscene language and vile name calling, we all have to acknowledge that he is generally a pretty good sport about the abuse handed out to him by his superiors in the comments here.
Be generous and keep in mind while responding to Chuck:
Grieving is a personal process that has no time limit, nor one “right” way to do it.
Big Mike said...
Well, Chuck, if the United States had banned all Muslims there would be a bunch of students at OSU who wouldn't have needed hospitalization. But perhaps you're a Michigan fan and don't much care about them. If Muslims were banned there would be a bunch of gay men in Florida who would be getting ready to celebrate Christmas with their partners, but perhaps, Chuck, you're homophobic.
So your notion is that "a ban on all Muslims" is actually a good idea!
That is okay, and it is your right to say so. Then, we can have the debate as to whether that is a good idea, whether it would pass muster under the Constitution (the Constitution of Ted Cruz and Rand Paul and the ACLU and the U.S. Supreme Court) and just how the ban would work in practice. But now, even Trump won't back up his proposed ban. If you are out there proposing a Muslim ban, Trump does not have your back.
Blogger Skitzie Roxx said...
Trump's Tweeting is about him not having to answer questions. It has nothing to do with media coverage.
Except that, if the media coverage were better, he wouldn't have an excuse.
Birkel said...
Chuck, the Hillary Clinton supporter, writes without detectable irony* "He mocked a disabled reporter" as if that is a moral failing. Is mockery no longer acceptable? Are we to treat disabled people differently?
Birkel I am lifting my own irregularly-imposed ban on replying to you, to say that if Mr. Trump thought that mocking the reporter was such a clever ploy, he wouldn't have later denied that that was what he was doing.
And now, since I have bothered to type your name today, let me just say that your constant, laughable bullshitty claims that I am a "Hillary Clinton supporter" causes me to dedicate all of my posts in this thread to you. You insufferable douchebag waste of time. Everybody should demand of you to show them where I wrote a single word of support for Hillary Clinton. Fuck you and your personal attacks.
eric, you don't have to accept these things as "falsehoods." Instead, a guy like you can simply take them as random, inexplicable idiocies. Does that work for you? Feel better? As I started off, the issue is that the press -- accused of covering Trump unfairly -- didn't have to report any of my selected items unfairly. The press could simply report it all accurately, and Trump was made to look worse than anyone who gets unfair press treatment.
Chuck, can't you just admit you lied? I see youre backing off the falsehood claims now. Good for you! You don't need to lie here. We are all friends. Don't call things falsehoods that aren't falsehoods.
And, you know I'm just giving you a hard time, right? I know what you meant.
Just as I know what Trump meant.
I'm willing to give you both leeway. Maybe someday you'll learn how to understand Trump without giving everything he says the worst possible interpretation.
But if you don't learn that lesson, well, don't whine when it happens to you. Because it will.
Chuck:
Be honest. You are angry that Trump proved you wrong at every turn.
N'est pas?
Full Moon:
Grabbing Greta van Sustern in precisely the same way that Corey Lewandowski grabbed Michelle Fields (which Greta asserted was inconsequential nothingness) would be part demonstration, and part personal in that there is almost nothing I like about her.
Chuck: eric, mocking the disabled reporter is just gross. Sociopathic. And idiotic. Displaying a weird level of self control.
Tump's later denying that he was in any way mocking that reporter is what is a lie.
Actually Trump's denial is the truth and you're continuing to peddle a false story is the lie, Chuck. Trump uses this gesture to indicate someone who has claimed "confusion" about their shifting story. In one case it was the disabled reported (who doesn't have spastic hand movements to mock) and in another a perfectly able general. The common thread was people who take back earlier assertions just because Trump cites them. False story peddled by a dishonest campaign and lapped up by the lapdog media and eager ears like yours. Fake! Sad!
Your other bullet points are likewise specious. It is a dishonest list, ironically. What do you even mean by the McCain and Trump U items? Are you saying he DIDN'T say that about McCain? Are you saying he DIDN'T settle his suit? What exactly is your bitch here?
I've noticed that Chuck is a real asshole.
Birkel I am lifting my own irregularly-imposed ban on replying to you, to say that if Mr. Trump thought that mocking the reporter was such a clever ploy, he wouldn't have later denied that that was what he was doing.
This is another example of you sounding exactly like trump. Imprecise language.
Trump mocked a reporter. More than one actually. The controversy wasn't that he mocked a reporter. It was that he mocked the disability of the reporter. Trump doesn't claim he didn't mock the guy. He did. He claimed he didn't mock his disability. He didn't.
But your imprecise language makes it easier for you to twist things to your advantage.
Sorta like Trump.
Birkel said...
Chuck:
Be honest. You are angry that Trump proved you wrong at every turn.
I'll be honest. I voted for Trump. I was surprised, and relieved, that he won. I predicted that he would lose in an electoral landslide. I predicted that he would lose my home state of Michigan. My main concern going forward is what sort of lasting damage he might do to the Republican Party. I think Trump will accomplish about 5% of what he promised to his supporters.
Tapes were dug up that showed Trump mocking many adversaries in the exact same way as the reporter. It's his go-to imitation. So whether it's Colin Powell or Jeb! Bush, the imitation is the same. The waving of the hands shows the opponent is a loon. Trump would imitate Chuck in this manner.
Chuck:
I think you will find the lasting damage of losing a presidential race is worse than winning. You will find that ceding control of Congress is worse than maintaining control. Hell, I'll bet a President Clinton would only accomplish 5% of what she promised too.
But really you're just angry at being so publicly wrong. Have a sad on me, bro. Take two if you need.
Chuck, I don't know you but I read some if your comments here and I feel like I do. You are a man who lives according to an ideology you have crafted. Trump violated this framework in some way and, rather than consider you may need to expand it a bit or perhaps reconsider some of the base struts you rest it upon, you exert all your energy to repel this strange invader called Trump.
Really, sir, you'd be a lot happier right now if you could remember the words of the preacher: "To everything there is a season ...". Sometimes you should set aside ideology for a season. Now is such a time.
Darrell:
I always thought the waving of the arms was representative of a baby. Is that impression incorrect?
Sadly sad?
"Sadly" is hardly how he feels about it. I suspect he wants to throw a party for all the loons in the press (to say nothing of hugely rich entertainers) who just can't stop themselves. We need more "love trumps hate" protesters burning flags, disrupting traffic and generally making a nuisance of themselves. Talk about a perfect foil. If they keep it up, we could have endless generations of Trumps as president.
Tump's later denying that he was in any way mocking that reporter is what is a lie. Trump denied mocking him (huh!?); and then Trump went on to say that he hadn't even met the guy, when in fact Trump knew just what the guy's disability looked like.
The reported does NOT look like the hand flailing that Trump did. He has a completely different type of disability. Try again Chuck. Go watch the video of the reporter for yourself. I believe Trump. He wasn't mocking the disability, he was mocking the disingenuous act the reporter made of disavowing his own reporting on 9/11 that "thousands of Muslims were celebrating." He wrote the article Trump cited (about which other myths have arisen) and then disavowed his own article! Trump called him wishy washy. I agree.
I'm not really sure why you're allowing Chuck to change the subject from the media's diminishing power and the many benefits this has for society to a rehash anti-Trump talking points made irrelevant by the election. Seems like a waster opportunity.
eric, if you don't think that Trump was mocking the reporter's disability, we are done here. I don't have the time or the inclination to debate that. I will let people view the video(s).
I'm not stupid; I am not going to try to change minds in Trump-world. I won't waste my time.
Darrell said...
Tapes were dug up that showed Trump mocking many adversaries in the exact same way as the reporter. It's his go-to imitation. So whether it's Colin Powell or Jeb! Bush, the imitation is the same. The waving of the hands shows the opponent is a loon. Trump would imitate Chuck in this manner.
I've seen the other Trump-mocking videos. My first impression is that Trump is an asshole; inarticulate and barely above an adolescent's level of discourse. My second impression is that no, I am right about Trump's breathtakingly stupid and uncontrolled urge to mock the physical disability of a reporter whom he had known, known personally and wished to humiliate in a frat house style.
You are free to think differently. I don't expect to change your mind. You sure as hell aren't changing my mind.
The media and Hillary's campaign (pardon the repetition) continually flogged the same list of deplorable acts that Chuck is harping on and they both LOST THE ELECTION and the respect of the American people. People dislike Hillary and hate the media. For many of us it is just the sort of bullshit that Chuck's "list" represents that angers us. A lot of people are like Chuck and think these things happened and yet TRUMP STILL WON.
You know why? Only 15% of Americans can take the news they see and hear at face value. We're now like Pravda readers who have to look the news and wonder if any of it is true. The media vermin take cherry picked bits and twist them into something else and present it as "racist" or "anti-Muslim" or "xenophobic" so that everywhere the monoculture repeats it like a mantra. I heard the exact same list on the view (wanted to see what Jedidiah Belah was up to nowadays) and on "news" shows and from prog guests on Fox news. The same list the same way. Mind numbed little robots repeated what their masters tell them.
So the media lost the election bigly and yet they refuse to see the results for what it is. Even Michael Moore understood before it happened: This is a big middle finger to MSM and political correctness. Ignore that finger at your peril, newsies.
LOL.
Donald and Ivanka Trump meet with Al Gore.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ivanka-trump-to-meet-with-al-gore-to-discuss-climate-issues/
Rick: I'm not really sure why you're allowing Chuck to change the subject from the media's diminishing power and the many benefits this has for society to a rehash anti-Trump talking points made irrelevant by the election.
This is the same subject, I believe. Diminishing media and the diminished capacity posters here who fall for their bullshit. Two sides of the coin, you might say.
Hi Chuck,
I actually welcome your perspective. I kinda wish our left of center friends here would return, but they either have run away or have been chased away.
No, those are just some of the richest, tastiest, most funny, most easily disproven gross falsehoods. Trump is turning out lies, misconceptions and goofy/mendacious stuff on a nearly-daily basis.
It might be goofy/mendacious stuff. But, a hundred thousand blue collar, non-lawyer, 50-year old white guys making $50K/year at best in Wisc, Penn, Mich and Ohio decided to focus more on the lack of jobs in the industrial sector, how to feed their families, and how to regain a sense of dignity. These guys voted for Obama in 2012, but for Trump in 2016.
Now; I like Attorney General Jeff Sessions. I like the fact that Trump might nominate a Bill Pryor to the Supreme Court (we'll see). I like it, a lot, that Republicans held the House and the Senate. I like Betsy DeVos at Education.
Hear, hear!
Trump was the lesser of two evils, in November '16. Okay?
That's fine. I was in that camp, too, in the primaries. But I "evolved." I am delighted that Trump vanquished Hillary's political career, I think he has done an excellent with this appointments, and am willing to give nearly every benefit of the doubt, despite some of his flaws.
So when Trump uses the exact same spastic pantomime to mock the words of an Army General, Chuck still thinks that this is somehow a "disabled" thing?
Trump is a giant can of Raid being sprayed on the MSM human centipede. It will be interesting if the MSM will survive, not having a Democrat President's anal pore as a host. It will test evolution, can they develop lungs?
Man-Made Global Warming is fake news.
Entertaining the idea that college tuition could be made "free" is fake news.
The coordinated assessments of Trump's convention speech as being "dark" was fake news.
Gusty Winds: You need to have a talk with Ivanka Trump, about what sources say will be a signature issue for her. Hurry.
Okay, Chuck, you've convinced us. We now understand that there is no hope for us because Trump is a total, complete, hopeless, unmitigated lunatic whose administration will certainly bring on the complete and utter destruction of not only the country but also much of humanity. Most remarkably, you were able to do this without ever once getting out of the fetal postion or taking your thumb out of your mouth. Now, having done your civic duty, please keep silent so we can use the few precious days we have left before the inauguration to make our peace with God. Moreover, you should also know that we will always blame the coming apocalypse on you for failing to have enough credibility to allow us to believe your lamentations before the election when we could have still done something about it. You, Chuck, perpetrated this crime through your own lack of verisimilitude, therefore you are the one who must carry the responsiblity for its commission to your grave. May God have mercy on your soul!
I am thoroughly enjoying watching the MSM struggle for relevancy.
They realize they have already hit and iceberg named Hillary.
George Stephanopoulos is even a fake news anchor.
Are we really required to pretend that a Clinton campaign operative seated at a table in front of a camera is a news anchor and not still part of the Clinton / Democrat machine?
What killed the media was not all about the political lies. It was also about sitting on stories that are detrimental to their political party. It's about reading a sports article and getting hit with a slur on a President. Or reading a fashion column with the same result. Or ad infinitum. When the lefties decided to weaponize the entire media - ESPN and others - naturally there is pushback. This the The Case of The Boy Who Cried Wolf. Too bad the schools didn't teach the classics to these dummies.
Chuck said... [hush][hide comment]
LOL.
Donald and Ivanka Trump meet with Al Gore.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ivanka-trump-to-meet-with-al-gore-to-discuss-climate-issues/
Damnit Chuck, that is hitting below the belt! Can only hope they talk with climate realists also. Maybe bring up Gores past predictions and ask what he has in store for our future
Maybe Trump will do a Romney move on Gore, furrowed brow while listening, pretend to take him serious.
Chuck - I finally realize that you are about 12 yrs old; in fact or in mentality. You don't like Trump, fine. Your obsession with his "alleged" violations of proprieties is typical of your "allegedly" being a lawyer.
I am convinced, considering your prior statements, among others, of your height and weight, and "alleged" physical prowess, is that you are more likely a freshman in High School. Your irrationality and boastfulness are about the same level of maturity. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, if you are old enough.
I went to bed early on the night of the election. I was convinced that Trump was going to lose. I'm as skeptical as anyone here about the media, but I believed their narrative about how the election was going to turn out.......People underestimate the power of these glossy charlatans. The malignancies come at you from all sides, in all media --not just CNN and the NYT but in books. movies, songs, late night comedy monologues. You can pretend to be lofty and wise enough to see through the fog machine, but, as you do, you inhale the machine's vapors and they become part of you........ It's an open question as to whether Trump can successfully govern given the near unanimous hostility he faces in the media. Reagan managed to pull it off but that might be a one off.
Mike: When Trump mocked the reporter, it was exactly like that reporter's physical deformity and disability.
When Trump mocked Ted Cruz and the general, it was not the same. They were all stupid. They were all undignified and insulting.
But yes, I know what Trump was doing. I don't see the video the same way you do. And I don't for a New York minute accept Trump's excuse-making on the subject. He's lied too many times about such stuff. I think the video puts the lie to him better than I ever could, no matter what.
And Bay Area Guy: what the fuck were those poor stiffs thinking, when they voted for Obama? I didn't make that mistake. What is their ideology, their philosophy that made them Obama-then-Trump voters? (None, you will say. Just give them jobs, benefits, retirement, health care, etc. I say, Trump will not give them any of those things and indeed Republicans had better be reeeeeaaaallly careful about discontinuing ACA benefits without another plan in place. I worry greatly, that the disappointments with Trump will be far worse than anyone's disappointment with congressional Republicans or President Obama.
Mike said...
This is the same subject, I believe. Diminishing media and the diminished capacity posters here who fall for their bullshit. Two sides of the coin, you might say.
Every exchange about why Trump's stupid shit isn't that stupid is a loss. The subject itself is a loser. Let the losers wallow in it, it's not even relevant anymore.
chuck, hang in there.. the misinformation and hubris not to mention the insulting condescension on this blog is mind bloggling... many of the bloggers here have a very tenuous grasp on reality... i can only hope in their real lives they conduct themselves with a lot more civility...
Republican Trump Voter Michigan Lawyer Threatens Assault on Female Journalist!
Chuck said...
Full Moon:
(Assaulting) Greta van Sustern ... would be
... personal in that there is.... nothing I like about her.
Edited for brevity,MSM style
Chuck:
And Bay Area Guy: what the fuck were those poor stiffs thinking, when they voted for Obama? I didn't make that mistake. What is their ideology, their philosophy that made them Obama-then-Trump voters?
Many of them were union guys. They don't buy Reagan's "Supply-Side" Economics, they don't read Milton Friedman, they don't think too much about Goldman Sachs. They hunt, drink, work and raise families.
Chuck said...
Now they are, along with Congress, pushing the "Fake News" meme, in order to distract from #pizzagate, a satanic pedophile ring of massive proportions involving those in government. They are protecting pedophiles.
"LMFAO.
Mick. Mr. Pizzagate".
Another pedophile enabler.
look at the masterful job Tucker Carlson does taking down the NYT and Liz Spayd the public editor on friday. She's literally blubbering by the end of the segment
The NYT.....embarrassing
Chuck said...
Mike: When Trump mocked the reporter, it was exactly like that reporter's physical deformity and disability.
Nope. Reporter has arthrogryposis, more of inability to move a joint, not the goofy flailing arms of Trump. Vids on you tube, as well as pics of the reporter,Serge Kovaleski, who has one hand in a kind of "frozen" position.
I did not hear "his explanation" and do not believe anyone asked Trump about "mocking" the disabled reporter. They created the meme. I do accept the plain evidence in those videos where Trump does exactly the same thing each time (and no, the reporter does not have spastic movements, in fact his hand is almost always in one place next to his ribs) no matter the target of his act. You can accept the lie, peddle the lie whatever. He has demonstrated over the years a great sensitivity to and generousness to disabled, especially children in NYC. I don't believe he mocked the disability at all.
Yes it is childish to mock people at all, but so what? Yes, his explanations for other things change with the wind. I don't care. I'm taking a more holistic approach to Trump where I actively, purposefully give him the benefit of the doubt because the media (and you) have been so dishonest in reporting on him. But let's just go there for a moment.
Let's say you are right and he mocked that one reported specifically for his disability. Why do I care? It wouldn't make me vote for a progressive Supreme Court. It wouldn't stop me from trying to keep HRC as far away from power as possible. She mocked a rape victim, not an adult reporter. She laughed about her clients guilt in raping her. He might be wrong but she is evil.
Do you not remember the horrible things many many liberals were saying and doing about Sarah Palin's handicapped son? Me too. How times change.
What say the hillbillies? What do YOU see in the Trump videos?
" You need to have a talk with Ivanka Trump, about what sources say will be a signature issue for her."
I have no idea of what, if anything, will be a signature issue for Ivanka Trump.
But I don't think I will automatically take as Gospel what "sources say" filtered through a layer of Chuck.
I'd really LIKE to have a conversation, maybe many of them, with Ivanka Trump. I'll let her pick the subjects!
"He wanted to "ban all Muslims" wishing entry to the U.S."
You call it a bizarre lie. Others may call it a campaign promise. In any event, watching the linked youtube, it sounds like a campaign promise many people hope he will keep. He did not call for expelling muslims or permanently barring them from entry; he did make a statement that it might be a good idea to hold off importing any more people who seem to harbor such an incredible hatred for America and devotion to a primitive form of religious law.
But if you wish to argue that we are just as well off importing Pakistanis as Frenchmen, please go ahead!
The MSM's nervousness about the new reality is evidence by the "fake news" bugaboo. I heard a guy on NPR today (I missed the beginning but I'm sure his ideological bias was never identified) telling people to avoid "fake news." The interviewer asked what could be done about "fake news," and the guy said something like, "Only rely on trusted and respectable news sources." You know, like the MSM. He might as well have screamed hysterically6, "Don't listen to the lies of Emanneul Goldberg and his followers!"
But I don't think I will automatically take as Gospel what "sources say" filtered through a layer of Chuck.
This is he MSMs way of spreading gossip. I never listen to unnamed sources anymore. So annoying.
I wonder if there is a website that keeps track of how often these anonymous sources are right or wrong.
Blogger hawkeyedjb said...
"He wanted to "ban all Muslims" wishing entry to the U.S."
You call it a bizarre lie. Others may call it a campaign promise.
It's funny. Every Trump supporter I know took him to mean immigrants. Yet the media told us he meant a Muslims. Even US citizens. Then, when he clarified that he meant immigrants, we Trump supporters were told he is backing off his promise.
Fake news.
Full Moon -
The point is that Greta would not think that it was an assault at all. Greta thought it was a completely unserious event, that no prosecutor would pursue, and that it would be a terrible personal mistake for Fields to even think about a civil suit. That any legal complaint by Fields was ill advised and a terrible mistake.
I consider that as having my Project Greta green-lighted. It wouldn't be an assault at all, if Greta never thought it was an assault.
http://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/piers-morgan-michelle-fields-assault-claim-pathetic/289826
@ Chuck 12:06 You said:"Trump was the lesser of two evils, in November '16. Okay?" Then quit your bitching!
Blogger Chuck said...
Mike: When Trump mocked the reporter, it was exactly like that reporter's physical deformity and disability.
Not really. Or, better put, only is still pictures. The videos make clear they are miles apart.
It really isn't my job to police the Atlthouse forums. I am a mere consumer; a participant.
But Althouse... nota bene, you've succeeded in attracting the WND/InfoWars "Hillary is running a pedophile ring" crowd. At least, in the person of "Mick."
Lock her up!
@Mike
This hillbilly says that dueling with Chuck is a waste of time. He liked Trump better than Hillary. He likes Trump's nominees so far. What the hell is he complaining about?
He is the blogging/commenting equivalent of the guy we all know - he speaks/writes just to hear his own voice.
Chuck said...
Full Moon -
The point is that Greta would not think that it was an assault at all. Greta thought it was a completely unserious event, that no prosecutor would pursue, and that it would be a terrible personal mistake for Fields to even think about a civil suit. That any legal complaint by Fields was ill advised and a terrible mistake.
I consider that as having my Project Greta green-lighted. It wouldn't be an assault at all, if Greta never thought it was an assault.
OOh, now I get it. After realizing your previous threats of assault might reasonably be construed in a court of law as indicative of prior intent and pre-planning, you are now sliding over into preparation of a temporary insanity plea. Gold, Chuck, Gold.
Take it from me ,Chuck, NEVER, EVER, announce in advance plans for any sort of criminal enterprise. Also, do not brag to your friends, or on the internet. after the event, if you manage to escape arrest.
I follow Trump on Twitter. Have all through the campaign. I thought he'd stop tweeting, or at least decrease since the election, but no. They keep on coming.
It always makes me wonder if his staff/advisors are afraid to suggest he stop or if they have told him and he refuses.
I have an open mind toward his presidency, but the tone of those tweets is defensive and undignified (to me).
For the umpteenth time, Trump tells the simple truth that everybody knows but no one has said, and the media get the vapors.
Once again proving that the media are not about reporting the truth, which they could start doing at any time, they are about controlling the narrative.
Yes i know, Trump is pathetic.I ignore anything associated with his tweets as a ranting of a 5 year-old-boy. Who cares?
Vicki from Pasadena
Who cares?
Apparently, every Lefty in the US except you.
I look forward to the evolution of Amy.
"Lifelong Republican" Chuck: "But Althouse... nota bene, you've succeeded in attracting the WND/InfoWars "Hillary is running a pedophile ring" crowd. At least, in the person of "Mick.""
Wow. In Chuck's world, one is a crowd.
Quite telling indeed.
trump-warns-hillary-wants-to-abolish-the-second-amendment
Chuck - is the above statement true or false, on it's face? Pick one or the other.
"I think one of the reasons people get so concerned about the tweets is it is sort of a way around the press."
Are you kidding me, Dick? First, the press obviously loves the tweets because it gives them a constant source of copy. When else have they ever had anyone constantly feeding this stuff to them? They haven't had a slow day since he started running.
This idea that the press is afraid it's going to be obsolete because the president (and presumably all future politicians, following his example) is going to just use social media is absurd. Much of the media is dying (mainly print and the traditional networks) but that's been happening for years. Their models don't work in this day and age. They have far more to fear from online media competition than "direct to consumer" politicians. After all, those "DTC politicians" keep providing them with stuff to write about.
People said the same thing about how destabilitzing Martin Luther's 96 principles he nailed to the wittenberg door were. Which freed the serfs from the oppressive priesthood and the church. The social networks and fake news driving clicks being our Guttenberg. The elites knew that once this match was lit, their days were numbered. Couldn't happen to a nicer group of people. the Dems and their press The Stupid Party of Bullies meets thier spoiled children. Who never sat through a debate made in the Socratic fashion, where no speaking from authority is permitted. The party of stupid bullies. Granted this led to the inquisition for this heresy. Well, progress always has a cost. Whoda thunk the iPhone would have led to the demise of the left.
People will pay for facts, not opinion, "and science says" "fact check says" is not a fact. No amount of shouting in the children's playground can make it so. Ditto any agency where what they count is set by regulation or law. Incentives matter. This is why the USSR died, their system rewarded making their numbers not the truth. We know what truth is (almost in a business sense) in how auditors are used and are largely independent, and paid to continuously refine their measurement process to get closer to the truth, stamping out variance where the table no longer cross foots, sometimes using time to get stability, "we should count once an hour", same as we expect how drug trials are handled. Errors in a companies' books are fined or a correction plan implemented. The press can decide entertainment (opinion) or facts (very hard to determine, and sustain, They are so costly that only a few have ever survived. What is unemployment, who knows, what are the incentives for correcting. how many non-citizens voted? Is my "ring of truth" any less valid than yours "George Bush piloy claims must be false, to good not to be true. Once the public sees the sky is not falling nothing will get their attention at all. Own it you dummies.
> How many of you actually follow Trump's tweeting?
I follow all of my representatives.
Blogger wholelottasplainin' said...
Chuck said...
eric, mocking the disabled reporter is just gross. Sociopathic. And idiotic. Displaying a weird level of self control.
Tump's later denying that he was in any way mocking that reporter is what is a lie. Trump denied mocking him (huh!?); and then Trump went on to say that he hadn't even met the guy, when in fact Trump knew just what the guy's disability looked like, and the guy had covered Trump for years before Trump had any inkling of running for President.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34940861
**********
Utter bullshit. Here's the truth:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/08/31/ann-coulter-media-invented-lie-trump-mocking-disabled-reporter/
Money graf: "The reason the media won’t show an interview with Serge [the disabled reporter] is that if you ever saw him speaking, it would be blindingly obvious that Trump’s imitation isn’t in the same universe as Serge’s affliction. Serge speaks perfectly calmly. He does not twitch, jerk or flail his arms. (That’s Debbie Wasserman Schultz you’re thinking of.)
There’s an old interview with Serge here.
https://www.catholics4trump.com/wapo-fact-checker-gets-4-hillarys-for-ignoring-evidence-trump-didnt-mock-reporters-disability/
"The absence of a current Serge interview is the dog that didn’t bark. The only reason you will never see anything but a still photo of Serge is so that the media can trick the public into believing he has something like cerebral palsy.
In fact, his disability is almost the exact opposite of what Trump was doing: Serge has arthrogryposis, which locks his wrists in place, actually preventing movement."
Would you like to revise and extend your remarks, Chuck?
Drago: I think I might be quite happy to back off any notion that Ann Althouse (whom I presuppose would never endorse WND or InfoWars) if there was a groundswell of outrage here, from other members.
And your post has given me a really great idea for Atlhouse in the wake of the D.C. pizzeria incident; an Althouse poll:
Since the son of Gen. Michael Flynn (Ret.)* tweeted, “Until #Pizzagate proven to be false, it'll remain a story. The left seems to forget #PodestaEmails and the many ‘coincidences’ tied to it,” how do you regard what Flynn Jr. called #Pizzagate?
*Trump's announced National Security Advisor; his son Michael Flynn Jr. has been assigned a transition team email address.
A. #Pizzagate is and always was preposterous.
B. #Pizzagate is an important story and I believe that the people involved, per the WikiLeaks copies of Leon Panetta emails, are covering up a major scandal involving child sexual abuse.
C. #Pizzagate might be a real story, or not; I don't know, but there is nothing credible about it.
D. #Pizzagate might be a real story, or not; it is deserving of much more media attention and serious investigation.
Not really. Or, better put, only is still pictures. The videos make clear they are miles apart.
Yeah, the mocking wasn't in the same ballpark as the reporter's actual disability.
"Sad!"
How so?
I Callahan said...
trump-warns-hillary-wants-to-abolish-the-second-amendment
Chuck - is the above statement true or false, on it's face? Pick one or the other.
Oh my God that is so easy! It's false! It is patently, categorically false. Hillary did not propose, endorse, or suggest any repeal of the Second Amendment.
And a good gun rights proponent would never make the mistake, of making a false assertion about something so important. A good gun rights proponent would instead make the case about how fragile were the majorities in Heller and MacDonald, and proceed to talk about the importance of SCOTUS nominations and even Circuit Court of Appeals nominations. A good gun rights proponent would be careful, to have all of his facts correct and fully defensible in the face of an inevitable argument.
I think that Trump is himself not a gun guy, and not used to gun rights arguments. He once favored the 1996 Assault Weapons Ban. I think that Trump, "watching the shows," as he is wont to do, came up with some casual shorthand for Hillary's unreliable record of gun rights protection, and found that it played well in large audiences of low-information voters, to simply (and erroneously) say that Hillary wanted to abolish the Second Amendment. Efforts that would have been better put to challenging Mrs. Clinton on the real extent of her support for gun rights and especially gun possession rights in the face of local ordinances limiting those rights.
Real Republican Chuck is going to WaPo to disparage an elected president from his own party. You have issues, Chuck -- seek help or just admit to being a lefty troll.
Still no email from you. Are you afraid to share an address for fear it will reveal you as a prog operative or something? I can't figure it out.
Would you like to revise and extend your remarks, Chuck?
Yeah. I'd like to say that for anyone who thinks that Trump wasn't mocking the reporter, I would not want to play a round of golf with you. I would not want you as my law partner, nor as my neighbor. If you were my friend, and you clung to the view that Trump wasn't mocking that reporter, our friendship would probably be impaired, to some extent. I might enjoy having a drink with you, with the explicit understanding that I could verbally spar with you on this topic.
UpChuck: "Oh my God that is so easy! It's false! It is patently, categorically false. Hillary did not propose, endorse, or suggest any repeal of the Second Amendment."
Such sophistry! Maybe she never used the word "repeal", since even as POTUS she would lack the power to do that, but she sure as hell has long sought to weaken the 2nd, to the point of utterly destroying its underlying purpose:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/frankminiter/2016/08/11/proof-that-hillary-does-want-to-make-the-second-amendment-meaningless/#3ea287c64365
"...... Hillary Clinton said the Supreme Court got it “wrong on the Second Amendment.” When she said this Hillary must have been talking about the Heller and McDonald (2010) decisions. Both were 5-4 rulings by the Supreme Court. In Heller, the Court determined that the Second Amendment is indeed an individual right. In McDonald, the Court ruled that the individual right to bear arms also restricts state and local governments (not just the federal government). If Hillary thinks the high court got it wrong on these basic questions about the U.S. Bill of Rights, then she clearly would nominate Supreme Court justices who would agree with the minority opinions in both of those rulings. Both of those minority opinions argued vociferously that there is no individual right to bear arms. If a future Supreme Court rules that way then the Second Amendment will be gutted of meaning, or as Donald Trump says, “Abolished.”
QE Effing D
Fabi said...
Real Republican Chuck is going to WaPo to disparage an elected president from his own party. You have issues, Chuck -- seek help or just admit to being a lefty troll.
Still no email from you. Are you afraid to share an address for fear it will reveal you as a prog operative or something? I can't figure it out.
Fabi, I apologize. Most sincerely. You have been a total, standup ace about paying off a good and entertaining bet.
I was deer hunting in Northern Michigan when you supplied your email address, and then I forgot where to find it. I did get a nice eight-point buck this year. I've really been lucky. I did not hunt last year as my father passed away at that time, but the previous three years, I shot a nine-point, an eleven-point, and a ten-point. Did you buy me something already? (If you have, I accept it sight unseen as payment in full.) If you are awaiting instructions from me, I have made arrangements with the best family-owned little liquor store owner in Royal Oak, Michigan (Goes by the unlikely name of Bevereage Warehouse) to accept a credit card from you and hold your purchase for pick up by me.
Chuck said...
Would you like to revise and extend your remarks, Chuck?
Yeah. I'd like to say that for anyone who thinks that Trump wasn't mocking the reporter, I would not want to play a round of golf with you..
***************
Heh. IOW you are asking me, "Who are you gonna believe? Me, or your lyin' eyes?"
You're obviously a callow and milk-whiskered youth. As for golf: you're not ready to carry any grown-up's clubs, let alone play the game.
Fake News: Trump supporters who go to Trump rallies are violent
Real News: James O'Keefe catching the Democrat operatives on Camera bragging about inciting violence at Trump rallies.
You see the the truth right in front of your eyes. It's a duck. It's quacking. You knew it existed but here it is on film. And the MSM calls it "heavily edited" or call O'Keefe "discredited". An independent responsible media would have dove into that story deeply. It's corrupt. People got hurt. The media treated it like it was not big deal.
There is no reason the MSM. They're no better than any other self-proclaimed journalist.
So, to recap: "lifelong Republican" Chuck identified 1 individual on this blog making an assertion and described that individual as a "crowd".
Because if there is one thing "lifelong Republican" Chuck cannot abide it is "fake news"!
#ThisIsHowYouGetTrump
wholelottsplainin':
Shorter version; the Trumpkins liked the simple, direct, inaccurate, laughable claim. They didn't care about the inaccuracy, or the laughability factors. They just wanted their point to be made for them by Mr. Trump.
You understand; I am a gun owner, a Republican, and a gun rights proponent. I am happy with the Heller/MacDonald line of cases. You won't be able to argue gun rights with me; I'll be on your side.
I just don't buy the stupid parts of the Trump messaging.
Yes or no; Hillary Clinton did or did not propose a repeal of the Second Amendment. Yes or no. None of your "gutted of meaning" bullshit. Because I don't think that the Second Amendment was "gutted of meaning" for many decades before Heller, and while I'd hate to see Heller overturned, and while I might even agree that any new decision might amount to a "gutting" of the Second Amendment, we don't even have such a case on the Court's docket as yet. So "gutting" doesn't count and don't try that one again with me. Yes or no; Hillary Clinton proposed a repeal of the Second Amendment.
I would expect that Trump will continue to triple down on avoiding the MSM dem operatives resulting in those dem operatives (and "lifelong Republican" Chuck) continuing to lose their marbles.
The only question is who the real mastermind(s) behind Trump's stray voltage strategy is or are?
No one said Hillary was proposing a repeal of the second amendment.
She would abolish the second amendment without proposing it. She would put more liberals on the court and theyd abolish it, in effect.
I did not have sex with that woman.
Since when did this blog have so many political neophytes?
It's Trump
There he goes again!
Loll lolollolol
CNN is losing its collective democrat-party media mind over Trump.
eric said...
No one said Hillary was proposing a repeal of the second amendment.
Go back to my post at 11:31, eric. I had it right. Trump said that Hillary wanted to "abolish" the Second Amendment. And now you are playing the word games in which "abolish" is different from "repeal." Of course she was not going to repeal the Second Amendment. Trump wanted his followers to gloss over the details, and he wanted shorthand. So he used the word "abolish"; you think that makes Trump correct. I say it makes Trump misleading. And I stand by every word of what I have previously written here. Hillary Clinton clearly likes the idea of reversing the existing case law. But she never proposed repeal or "abolition" of the Second Amendment. She'd like judges who interpreted the Second Amendment as she did.
Yancey Ward asked: "Who is the audience for Trump's tweets?"
I'm on Twitter and I follow Trump, so I get to read all his tweets.
@Chuck, I see I missed your response at 12:36. I've been busy.
All I was sayin' is that Muslim immigration into the US has not been an unmixed blessing. If one is a homophobe, like you for instance, then one might applaud the enterprise of young Mr. Mateen last June. If one believes that gay men have the same right to live as heterosexual males, then one might be horrified by Mateen's attack on gay men in Orlando. If one wants to attend class at Ohio State and not have to take an "incomplete" because one is in the hospital recovering from stab wounds, then one might reasonably feel that the Obama administration let in at least one too many Muslims. At the moment non-radical Muslims have no skin in the game. Somewhere along the line that needs to change, I think. Just sayin'
Tweets and Trump
I don't follow tweets but then I'm Old School. All the outrage over tweets just goes right by and goes right past a lot of other Trump supporters.
Chuck's comprehensive list of Trump outrages that were not tweets.
I simply assume that the media is lying by pruning, selecting or outright lying. I don't waste my time getermining which it is. That kind of rejection is New School. (And Chuck always has something like this list going which is why people call him a Democrat. I can't decide whether he is a Democrat troll or a gadfly.)
How I Follow Trump
I watched Trump speeches to see if he made sense when you heard him speak and he is easy to follow and very entertaining. But he was making serious points and, to me, his cabinet picks show he meant what he said. "Mad Dog" Mattis as head of Defense. "Charter School" De Vos as Sec. Education. And so on. His Thank you tour speech shows he knows the MSM was, is and will be distorting his views. It starts with him saying Thank you, Ohio and saying "Didn't we have a great time fighting Hillary?" What an amazing way to view the continual trashing the media threw at him - name-calling, tweet wars, lies, false polling - all summed up "Didn't we have a great time fighting Hillary?" "But now we have to get down to business and I'm here to get your support for the next stage." But then he goes into a whole segment in which he mocks the media and their prescriptions for his behavior. It's quite funny. But his point is: the media is untrustworthy about him. And there's more
Anyhow Trump's moved on. Watch it here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akOpXknRIQk
Then you will know where it's all going next. You won't figure that out from the formerly dominant media. They will just be running behind him.
Brando,
"This idea that the press is afraid it's going to be obsolete because the president (and presumably all future politicians, following his example) is going to just use social media is absurd. "
That's not the point. The point is that social media gives someone like Trump much more control over the news than has been the case in the past. It's not total control, but it makes it much easier to get a different version of an issue in front of the public. That takes away the ability of the "MSM" to set the agenda.
Simple answer for a very simple question. No, Hillary did not propose to repeal the 2nd Amendment. I would like her better if she had. That would have been the honest and decent way to ban guns: pass a constitutional amendment first. She did however propose to gut the 2nd Amendment, to void it, to make it meaningless, to take away guns without first getting the constitutional right to do so, by appointing judges who would misinterpret the 2nd Amendment in just the way she wants it misinterpreted. There may be better words than 'abolish' to cover what she wants to do, but it's not a bad description. It's certainly not the same thing as 'repeal', and Chuck is being utterly dishonest in pretending that it is.
@Chuck,
Yes or no; Hillary Clinton did or did not propose a repeal of the Second Amendment. Yes or no. None of your "gutted of meaning" bullshit.s is parsing, Chuck. C'mon.
In 1994, the Dems tried to run on a platform of gun control -- and got hammered. They've learned from their political mistakes.
But, they still don't believe in the 2nd Amendment, and will try, incrementally, step by step, either by courts or left-wing legislatures or by executive order by regulation to limit the 2nd Amendment. You know that! That's how they do things!
That's why and how, abortion on demand is legal; any why and how, gay marriage is now a constitutional right (may be a decent gesture, but certainly not guaranteed in the Constitution).
Trump is not a lawyer and not a career politician. He speaks more loosely than most lawyers and politicians. That's a feature, not a bug!
The NRA endorsed Trump for good reason. Hillary and the Dems are not faithful to the 2nd Amendment. Everyone knows this.
Chuck blabbitied:
That's yet another claim about me that you can't back up. (Along with, "Chuck is a Democrat;" "Chuck is a Hillary supporter;" and "Chuck is a paid troll from the Democrats."
I'm a Republican
You prove it. Out yourself. Tell us your real name. We can look you up for party contributions, bar accreditation and all that good stuff. If we did it, you'd scream Doxx! So you do it.
Yancey: I am on Twitter too and I follow Trump so I get his tweets when the Twitter algorithm deems it appropriate to distribute it to me.
I have it purchased and wrapped for shipment, Chuck -- but it's a Glenmorangie Lasanta, so I'll be happy to enjoy that myself and will call your store in the morning and have them set aside something nice for you with my compliments. Cheers!
Blogger Dr Weevil said...
There may be better words than 'abolish' to cover what she wants to do
--
Undermine, neuter, circumvent...
Boy we have a lot of instances of Chuck taking Trump literally AND seriously. For God's sake we ALL agree Trump mocked the reporter. Get it right. He MOCKED the reporter. Where we disagree is if he was also mocking the guy's disability. I say no. I've seen him make the same gestures for non-disabled people. The only common factor was he mocked them for changing their views in the face of Trump quoting them. Weasels deserve to be mocked.
And yes, gutting the 2nd amendment, invalidating the 2nd amendment, whatever. Nobody actually thought Trump was saying she had proposed a repeal of the 2nd amendment. Stop being so damned literal, try to understand the MEANING in the words. SHE WANTS YOUR GUNS! Trump wants to strengthen the right to bear them. It's easy if you stop kicking at the goads.
walter,
"Gut" has been popular with Dems. Short and nasty, like Rahm Emanuel.
FullMoon,
I consider that as having my Project Greta green-lighted. It wouldn't be an assault at all, if Greta never thought it was an assault.
OOh, now I get it. After realizing your previous threats of assault might reasonably be construed in a court of law as indicative of prior intent and pre-planning, you are now sliding over into preparation of a temporary insanity plea. Gold, Chuck, Gold.
Take it from me ,Chuck, NEVER, EVER, announce in advance plans for any sort of criminal enterprise. Also, do not brag to your friends, or on the internet. after the event, if you manage to escape arrest.
12/5/16, 2:26 PM
Arrest! Fox security will blow his brains out! If any.
Please, Chuck, I don't want to be liable for abetting or inciting you, but if you do come, please post. My old office is across 49th Street and...well, the street vendors don't sell popcorn...roasted chestnuts, or those glazed cashews, I shall munch as I watch you bleed out.
Should you somehow make a clean getaway, I'll meet you in the Rock Center concourse...
walter:
'Neuter' is good, but I think 'circumvent' is too weak, and 'undermine' way too weak. I'm pretty sure she wants to ignore entirely the clear meaning of the Second Amendment and take away most, if not all, of the guns in private hands in the U.S. (Hasn't she commended Australia for doing exactly that?) I still like 'gut' and 'void', but 'neuter' is good, and 'abolish' is only bad in so far as it suggests some kind of official act, like 'repeal', but without going through the actual constitutional repeal process. Then again, a Supreme Court decision is an official act.
Just asking, but if SCOTUS were to "abolish" the second amendment by saying that it applies only to "well regulated militia", couldn't we all join "militia" and get our guns anyway?
Besides the original question is "what does Hillary want," not "what salami-slicing approach will she take to effectually get as close to it as possible." I'm sure she'd LIKE to abolish, repeal, cancel, annihilate, undo, nuke, erase, the 1st, 2nd, and any other parts of the Constitution that get in the way of her and hers.
Aren't you, Chucky?
sinz52 said...
Yancey Ward asked: "Who is the audience for Trump's tweets?"
I'm on Twitter and I follow Trump, so I get to read all his tweets.
Same here.
Sure, johns, as soon as you take your militia oath to Der Fuehrerette.
As a practical matter, how would the authorities take away the guns ? Molon labe, and all that. I personally do not own any guns, but I can't prove I don't. So how would I convince the confiscation regime to let me alone ? Of course, by the time it came to that, there would be nothing to stop an exhaustive warrantless search of my property.
Of course, by the time it came to that, there would be nothing to stop an exhaustive warrantless search of my property.
Or of your soul, for that matter. It would certainly make it easier to get to the bottom of #pizzagate.
Or of your soul, for that matter. It would certainly make it easier to get to the bottom of #pizzagate.
My soul ? I sold it years ago.
the Trumpkins liked the simple, direct, inaccurate, laughable claim.
Glad I was working today. Chuck, why not go haunt some left wing blog where you will feel more at home ?
"What garbage from the Althousians. Professor Althouse should be so ashamed of what she has developed at this point.
Just a bunch of trashtalk saying that I am a leftwing Democrat. And saying, 'But what about Obama?' 'And what about Hillary?'"
Struck by this because it's exactly the kind of overwrought indignation that a moby, who's not nearly as clever as he thinks, would vent. Gee, maybe Chuck isn't a Lifelong Republican aftewr all.
Professor Althouse does a fine job. If you are so inclined, an equivalent or greater blog is yours for the making.
'Since when did this blog have so many political neophytes?'
Since Rush Limbaugh brought it to national attention.
And you people voted for this doofus.
"What garbage from the Althousians. Professor Althouse should be so ashamed of what she has developed at this point."
Well....yes. They've been that way for quite sometime. I don't know how she can stand most of her commenters.
Chuck, Michael K wants to turn Althouse's blog into a boring echo chamber.
Wherein Chuck shares with us a bunch of stories that are mostly inaccurate to prove the media is accurate.
This is the real problem with media in the US. Once your credibility is shot all your reporting will be dismissed, both the good and the bad. The fact that they did it to themselves is the sad part.
Funny, Bob, that's also Chuck's problem.
I hope he tweets his worthless self to oblivion. Yes, a billionaire can be worthless, and he is a prime Trump steak example. America elected a fraudster for president (See Trump University for a prime steak example).
Right Trumpit, and we could have had a corrupt, enabling speechifyer instead.
Damn..
"
Blogger Dr Weevil said...walter:'Neuter' is good, but I think 'circumvent' is too weak, and 'undermine' way too weak.
--
Skewer?
Trumpit:
As opposed to the Noble Laureate Barack Obama? That guy was no fraudster at all. After all, people really can keep their respective doctors, right?
The Nobel was inherently pre-fraud.
From an article where they say trump is too isolated, doesn’t have policy written by wise men, executed on by others, is incapable of both understanding and thinking deeply about any given topic, like foreign affairs. I can see it now, the Senate advise and consent being reduced to an argument over what hashtag to use.
People said the same thing about how destabilizing Martin Luther's 96 principles he nailed to the Wittenberg door were. Which freed the serfs from the oppressive priesthood and the church. The social networks and fake news driving clicks being our Guttenberg. The elites knew that once this match was lit, their days were numbered. Couldn't happen to a nicer group of people. the Dems and their press. The party of stupid bullies. Granted this led to the inquisition for this heresy. Well, progress always has a cost. Whoda thunk the iPhone would have led to the demise of the left.
I actually love the idea of a great, free press doing investigative journalism, asking important questions, and providing honest information to us.
Unfortunately, that isn't what we have for the most part. I thought they would learn something with this election, but it seems like not. CNN is still spending days covering Trump and his associate's tweets, and trying to get them to apologize for them.
Now, I don't love all the tweets. But haven't we learned that CNN badgering him isn't going to do anything, so they are wasting our time? There are plenty of things going on in this world to cover.
And #pizzagate went into full "Conspiracy Theory Denial" today, with a man being arrested there brandishing an AR-15 "assault like" rifle, saying he was "self investigating" the Conspiracy, "but found nothing"
--- nice and conveniently wrapped up, with the media saying "see what this fake news leads to". At the same time Congress passes a bill demonizing "Russian influenced fake news". Conveniently, the traffic camera looking directly at Comet Pizza was disabled the day before. The perp is also an "actor" with actual acting credits.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2625901/
The owner of Comet Pizza has not sued anyone for massive Defamation even though there are hundreds of videos detailing the Pedophile behavior there.
How does a "Pizza Shop Owner" get to be one of the 50 most influential in DC?
Why do Podesta and his brother have child torture art in their homes?
Why is Scotland Yard not investigating he and his brother, who look exactly like the Composites drawn of the men suspected of kidnapping Madeleine McCaan ? Isn't that what the Composite is for? Why did Podesta delete all of his emails up to the day she disappeared?
http://victuruslibertas.com/2016/11/do-john-and-tony-podesta-have-a-conn...
https://steemit.com/wikileaks/@ausbitbank/besta-pizza-is-owned-by-andrew...
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1453433
Andrew Breitbart tweet before death adds fuel to online speculation of D.C. sex-trafficking ring:
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/28/andrew-breitbart-tweet-bef...
Breitbart tweets in question:
https://i.sli.mg/C9U1nQ.jpg
http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/11/04/erik-prince-nypd-ready-make-ar...
I'm sure the paid troll, "Chuck", will be along soon to "discredit" all of the mountain of "circumstantial evidence".
Chuck:
There is a difference between an act being assholish and an act being a lie.
(And calling an act one, when it is the other, is both. :D )
Cheers. Largo.
Unknown said...
"And you people voted for this doofus."
Only because your doofus fucked everything up. Unless, of course, you're a public employee. Then everything is GREAT!
Trumpit and Unknown, your tears and rage are so sweet. I feel like it's been Christmas morning everyday since the election.
I want to thank you both for the great happiness you give me every time you post.
Here's a Christmas present for the two of you. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sW85ZcswiqM
Creepy Joe Biden. Touchy Feely
https://twitter.com/BluegillRises/status/802623472589357056/video/1
Chuck said...
Congrats on the eight-point buck. Out of curiosity, what did you use and what was the distance? I have not had the privilege of going deer hunting yet, poor timing/availability. Oh well.
I am trying to schedule a buddy of mine and I to go boor hunting in the near future. Looking forward to that. Down here in FL, you can schedule with outfits that get you in (air boat), completely dress your take, and gets you back out for a very fair price. The boor are such a nuance they almost pay you to get rid of them.
I hunt in far northern lower peninsula Michigan, where rifles are allowed. (Southern lower Michigan, like Ohio and a number of Midwestern states do not allow rifles.) My deer rifle is an ordinary Remington 700 ADL bolt action, chambered in .270 Win. It shoots flat and straight. Leupold 3x9 scope. This deer was close; 83 yards. One shot.
If you go boor hunting in Florida, I'd like to see you bag a Charlie Crist. If you go boar hunting, and it turns out to be fun, I'd like to hear more about it, what you hunted with and where you went. I wish you much fun and success in all your hunting.
I don't get to go as often as I would like. I have to be content with dispatching Armadillos on the property. In Florida, you are permitted to dispatch the critters and since they are non-indigenous it is [in fact] illegal to transport and relocate them. I have gotten as many as 12 in a two week period and as few as 1 in 3 months. They make a mess of the place so I get no complaints from the neighbors.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा