|
Post by icecreamdf on Feb 6, 2017 22:24:39 GMT
We have truly entered the Twilight Zone phase of the administration. That doesn't even make sense. The media knows that people will watch the news if there's been a terrorist attack, and their ratings will go up.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Feb 6, 2017 22:47:33 GMT
We have truly entered the Twilight Zone phase of the administration. That doesn't even make sense. The media knows that people will watch the news if there's been a terrorist attack, and their ratings will go up. To be fair I think the Making Sense car got left behind at the station on January 20.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Feb 6, 2017 23:04:17 GMT
So the list of things Donald Trump would not have people believe are: News Organizations The Courts The Pollsters US Intelligence Agencies Unemployment Numbers Election Results I don't know about anyone else but I'm sensing a trend here.
|
|
|
Post by icecreamdf on Feb 6, 2017 23:08:40 GMT
So the list of things Donald Trump would not have people believe are: News Organizations The Courts The Pollsters US Intelligence Agencies Unemployment Numbers Election Results I don't know about anyone else but I'm sensing a trend here. The trend is obvious. These people are being tremendously unfair to Donald J. Trump. Sad.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Feb 6, 2017 23:48:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kimalysong on Feb 6, 2017 23:54:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kimalysong on Feb 7, 2017 0:45:15 GMT
So protestors against Trump are all paid Any negative news or polls are all Fake And this country is no better than Putin
Good to know!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 1:50:25 GMT
So protestors against Trump are all paid Any negative news or polls are all Fake And this country is no better than Putin Good to know! Eegh... That would be what we call propaganda. I think it's good to share something that was pointed out to me a couple days ago, a thing called either whataboutism or whataboutery which can used as a means of deflecting criticism by citing an equally troubling incident from the accuser's own background without addressing the original issue. I'm sure people will have seen this pop up at least once and it's good to have an actual name you can attach to it when it happens.
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Feb 7, 2017 2:36:07 GMT
So protestors against Trump are all paid Any negative news or polls are all Fake And this country is no better than Putin Good to know! Ah, the old "anyone who does not prostrate themselves before my excellence is a great big doodyhead, so there" routine. It seemingly lacks a certain maturity but it's apparently very handy. I think it's good to share something that was pointed out to me a couple days ago, a thing called either whataboutism or whataboutery which can used as a means of deflecting criticism by citing an equally troubling incident from the accuser's own background without addressing the original issue. I'm sure people will have seen this pop up at least once It think it genuinely accounts for 80% of the total two hours of the man that I have been able to force myself to listen to. and it's good to have an actual name you can attach to it when it happens. Trumpery?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 2:37:41 GMT
So protestors against Trump are all paid Any negative news or polls are all Fake And this country is no better than Putin Good to know! Ah, the old "anyone who does not prostrate themselves before my excellence is a great big doodyhead, so there" routine. It seemingly lacks a certain maturity but it's apparently very handy. I think it's good to share something that was pointed out to me a couple days ago, a thing called either whataboutism or whataboutery which can used as a means of deflecting criticism by citing an equally troubling incident from the accuser's own background without addressing the original issue. I'm sure people will have seen this pop up at least once It think it genuinely accounts for 80% of the total two hours of the man that I have been able to force myself to listen to. and it's good to have an actual name you can attach to it when it happens. Trumpery? Trumpery certainly has a good ring to it.
|
|
|
Post by Ela on Feb 7, 2017 2:57:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Feb 7, 2017 5:32:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by icecreamdf on Feb 7, 2017 5:33:53 GMT
Well, obviously, that is all fake news. The media is the opposition party after all. Is it 2020 yet?
|
|
|
Post by ulyssessarcher on Feb 7, 2017 6:46:26 GMT
So the list of things Donald Trump would not have people believe are: News Organizations The Courts The Pollsters US Intelligence Agencies Unemployment Numbers Election Results I don't know about anyone else but I'm sensing a trend here. I agree with him on New Organizations, Pollsters, and Unemployment numbers(cause that systems just rigged), I would hope he would have better info than I do on US Intelligence Agencies. But I disagree with him on the courts(for the most part), and I wonder about the number of voters, and if we will ever know how many votes there were that there shouldn't have been, Tennessee said something like 57 total, that's a long way from 3 million, that's another system that needs fixed, but that's gonna cost out the uh huh
|
|
|
Post by ulyssessarcher on Feb 7, 2017 7:00:46 GMT
109,631,000 folks on some sort of government assistance that does not include veterans benefits. That's over 35% cnsnews.com/commentary/terence-p-jeffrey/354-percent-109631000-welfareThere are roughly 22 million Americans taking illicit drugs. thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/08/study-22-million-americans-use-illegal-drugs-3/I don't care if folks use drugs in their own home, with their own money, as long as they don't drive, I don't see much difference tween that and drinkin, and they aint botherin me. But when they spend my tax money buyin drugs, that does bother me. Drug test em, and forget their excuses. If they fail, they dont get a dime. They made bad choices, and that's on them, it aint my job to clean them up, it aint the governments either. If liberals want to pay for them, let them start up a go fund me account, yall can do what you want with your money, but I don't want a dime of mine goin to buy drugs for junkies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 7:40:48 GMT
Well, at least they weren't taken off the air the moment they said it. I got two emails today which were both about addressing the "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States" Executive Order. One was from my university's vice chancellor and the other was forwarded from a friend who received the message from a dating website he used. Highlights include: and; I'm surprised and kind of heartened by the reactions this has been getting from all manner of places, people are really standing up and doing something about it.
|
|
|
Post by rawlinsonend on Feb 7, 2017 8:08:48 GMT
Because like Trump himself it's a policy that's a disgrace to America and the world itself. I've been through the immigration system two ways when I married, America to Britain and the other way round. It's horrible and intrusive and exceptionally difficult. Even after being married and living in one country for years we would still get pulled up and questioned every single time we passed through immigration in America. Anyone who thinks immigration into either country is lax has either never been through the system or is invested in selling the lie that it is. I called America my home for a long time and I'm deeply ashamed of what Trump is making it. He's a fearmonger, he's come to power through lies, bigotry and ignorance. He's dragged politics into the gutter and it's going to take a long time to crawl back out. America has gone from its first black president to one endorsed by the KKK, how can that not fill you with shame.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Feb 7, 2017 11:27:21 GMT
109,631,000 folks on some sort of government assistance that does not include veterans benefits. That's over 35% That's not what the article says, or at least not at first. It says 109,631,000 live in households where someone receives welfare. It then goes on in the article to conflate households with individuals, in what appears to be a cynical move to exaggerate the numbers. The article could have talked about households, or it could have talked about individuals, but instead give a hugely inflated number by multiplying the individuals by household size.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Feb 7, 2017 11:36:22 GMT
109,631,000 folks on some sort of government assistance that does not include veterans benefits. That's over 35% cnsnews.com/commentary/terence-p-jeffrey/354-percent-109631000-welfareThere are roughly 22 million Americans taking illicit drugs. thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/08/study-22-million-americans-use-illegal-drugs-3/I don't care if folks use drugs in their own home, with their own money, as long as they don't drive, I don't see much difference tween that and drinkin, and they aint botherin me. But when they spend my tax money buyin drugs, that does bother me. Drug test em, and forget their excuses. If they fail, they dont get a dime. They made bad choices, and that's on them, it aint my job to clean them up, it aint the governments either. If liberals want to pay for them, let them start up a go fund me account, yall can do what you want with your money, but I don't want a dime of mine goin to buy drugs for junkies. Can you find anyone that supports the idea of purchasing of illegal drugs with tax money? Why on earth would you think liberals would support such a thing? Whilst were at it, do you have evidence that welfare money is used by a proportion (or all) of those illegal drug users to purchase drugs?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 12:05:18 GMT
109,631,000 folks on some sort of government assistance that does not include veterans benefits. That's over 35% That's not what the article says, or at least not at first. It says 109,631,000 live in households where someone receives welfare. It then goes on in the article to conflate households with individuals, in what appears to be a cynical move to exaggerate the numbers. The article could have talked about households, or it could have talked about individuals, but instead give a hugely inflated number by multiplying the individuals by household size. Ah, of course, the American hive mind! I should have realised.
|
|