The Trump Card...
- Thread starter muttly
- Start date
I don't know if it's really an "in-quotes" conspiracy, considering you have "well respected," "unbiased" journalists writing pieces (and making arguments on television) in defense of being biased for Hillary and against Trump, and why it's the right thing to do.
I guess so. But like a lot of things, people read into it what they want and will characterize it however they will. He didn't actually apologize in the article. He gave his opinion that the bombing was a big mistake. Never said he's sorry or apologized. But characterizing it what way is more better anti-Trump. It's like when he noted that Hillary nor anyone at the State Department can find those missing emails, and sarcastically said that maybe Russia could hack her server and find them. But that makes Hillary look bad, and so instead to characterize it as him literally and seriously asked Russia to hack Hillary's email server is more better anti-Trump. Remember the far-from full-throated “Yeah, I guess so" endorsement of invading Iraq that was spun as being an enthusiastic full-frontal endorsement of the Iraq War? People will spin whatever they want to suit their agenda. And when it gets repeated enough times, others will believe it.Irony of it is that the guy warming the crowd up for Trump recently in Palm Beach said:
"Trump doesn't apologize for America"
Funny huh ?
Kind of like how the "You'd be in jail" snark immediately got massaged, morphed and spun into a direct, credible threat to jail his opponent.
In any case, Trump and the campaign, including Suzanne Ryder Jaworowski herself, are saying the Serb magazine interview never happened, that it was fabricated.
Let's see if the Left, those in the media in particular, will apply the same fevered scrutiny of the possibility of fabrication to the Serb story as they do about the fabrication of Wikileaked Podesta emails.
I read it occasionally. They left a bad taste in my mouth when they banned any and all positive postings about Ron Paul. They've mostly become the anti-Trump Wing of the Townhall Media blogosphere. The writing style is like Wonkette, all style and no substance, where the jokes aren't funny because there's an agenda in the way. If you're a member of the First Gospel Anti-Trump Choir, you'll find it mostly hilarious, though, because it's speaking to, you know, the choir.Seriously, you should really check out RedState ... the stuff they are writing over there these days is just frickin' hilarious ...
Looks like they've been taking lessons from Wonkette.
And who says conservatives don't have a sense of humor ...
I read a lot of all kinds of different stuff, but I intentionally spend very little time on Websites that exist to intentionally play to my or any other's bias. Since they are, by and large, the same stuff over and over, feed-the-bias prose, just a few minutes is generally all it takes to get that particular point of view.
I don't often get sucked in by writers who are trying a little too hard to be funny, where they think a funny one-liner here or there can substitute for wit and intelligence, especially when the comment is mean-spirited (most of that writing style at Wonkette and RedState these days is mean-spirited).
I read this just today at Huffington Post, where the writer for some unknown self-ego-massaging reason felt the need to insert a mean-spirited insult.
That's just stupid. Everything in parentheses shouldn't be in the article. It doesn't add a thing to the story. And librarians aren't even known for wearing pocket protectors. The author of the piece has the same level of maturity as people in the GIF he posted in the story. The story isn't really even a story, other than to point out where, on a show that celebrates intelligence and trivia skills, Alex Trebek insulted a contested for enjoying and having fun with intellectual pursuits. Mean spirited.
I am aware of that, yes. I remember when she took it over to great fanfare.
The site isn't humorless in all facets, but I don't find it particularly funny when the agenda gets in the way.
The tastes, and the purposeful writing.
No there aren't. I read them for what they are. They are no less biased than any other agenda-based publication. They have their own hypocrisies. Then again, conservative religious right, how can they not? But at least the writing is mostly good, whether I agree with its sentiment or not.
I read a story there just today from David French, who oftentimes writes from the moral high ground, where he goes on and on about how Trump supporters have no one but themselves to blame for this.
"It’s time for some soul-searching. It’s not like you supported a pastor who claimed to be holy and fooled everyone. It’s not like you supported a “family values” politician who lived a double life. You supported a man who has loudly and proudly defied Christian morality his entire life. If you’re surprised, you have only yourself to blame."
So take that you right-wing religious evangelicals who have supported Trump. <snort>
The NRO came out against Trump early on, as soon as they saw him leading in the polls, and wholeheartedly endorsed Cruz. So they've been more or less anti-Trump since probably January. But they aren't singularly focused on taking him down. Hypocrisies
The Bonfire of the Hypocrisies is a piece that is humorous at times, but doesn't let an agenda get in the way. It's a good read. No Wonky writing, though.
On the release of the tape...
"The solid phalanx of the anti-Trump media clangorously ululated and screamed that he was a brutish monster too deformed for a zoo but too uncivilized to be loose in society. The crescendo was earth-shaking and the commentariat ranged from almost incoherent moral damnation to unctuous head-shaking, as if contemplating the most shocking electoral disqualification since Vice President Aaron Burr killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel in 1804. The point was not what Trump said, since such parlance, unfortunately, is routinely uttered by scores of millions of people, including a sizeable number of women, but the confirmation it was deemed to provide of his feral coarseness and temperamental and intellectual unsuitability to being president. All heterosexual men have a sexual interest in women, which is generally reciprocated. It isn’t the “objectification of women,” it’s sex, and if Megyn Kelly thinks she would hold her present position if she weren’t gorgeous, she’s mad."
See? Funny.
The one where he jokes abut dating a 10 year old girl when she's 20 years old? I think the quote will, absolutely (by the left and anti-Trump haters for sure), be put in the same contextual light of his past history and the more recent revelations, and be massaged and molded as part of a narrative to make Trump look as bad as possible. That's the whole purpose of digging up past dirt on someone and applying it to today's sense and sensibilities.
When Michelle Obama heard the audio of Trump's blowhard BS bragging about being a celebrity so they let him grab women by the genitals, she was shook to her core. Her core, now. Shook.to.her.core. Apparently, she's been living in a bubble her entire life as this was the most shockingly disturbing thing she's ever heard.
That, or there's a tad bit of overreacting and fake outrage going on. I think there's just a snotload of that going on with a lot of people. As it so well pointed out in the snippet I quoted above from NRO, "The point was not what Trump said, since such parlance, unfortunately, is routinely uttered by scores of millions of people, including a sizeable number of women..." What he said, about dating a future 20 year old, on the bus with Bush and the other things, was pretty crass and tasteless, but it's hardly the earth-shattering comments that people are making it out to be. It's not like it's come out that he dines on beer-battered babies for brunch, or that he weekly goes to the animal shelter and buys a dozen dogs and cats to use for flame-thrower target practice, or that he called the Rutgers women's basketball team "nappy-headed hoes," or any other core-shaking thing. There are countless conversations and reactions on television and in message boards around the Internet where people are shocked, shocked I tell you, at those comments. Many of them are just as shocked that locker room talk isn't restricted solely to a locker room. None of them have said anything like that, nor have they ever heard anything like that. They're lyin' hypocrites, the lot of them.
Maybe Trump should have said it was "trucker CB talk," then nobody would be shocked. <snort>
That's a classic logical fallacy, you know. The piece is about what he wrote, not about who wrote it. You can agree or disagree with the piece, but to do either because of who wrote it is the equivalent of replying to the poster and not the post. Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, and that's deplorable, therefore we should dismiss everything he wrote regarding the 'all men being created equal' thing and his comments on personal liberty. Really?
I have no political agenda. You may perceive in me any agenda you wish, and you may believe it to be true, but in the end the fact remains that I have no political agenda. The only agendas I put forth on these forums are the Code of Conduct, calling out lies, trying to see the other side of an argument, and pointing out hypocrisy when I see it.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
I see there is a new poll out from Fox News ... which I presume is part of the vast anti-Trump hate conspiracy and is controlled by the Clinton's and "international bankers" ...
I am so looking forward to that upcoming "Trump TV" with Steve Bannon at the helm ... so I can get the straight scoop ... the real low down.
I am so looking forward to that upcoming "Trump TV" with Steve Bannon at the helm ... so I can get the straight scoop ... the real low down.
Probably?
Some sort of?
Puleeze. There's no "probably" or "some sort of" about it. I've written about it many times in these forums. It's rank hypocrisy all around. Bush or Reagan does something and gets a pass, Obama does the same-exact-thing and he's the Antichrist.
Remember when Obama became the first president in the history of history to not lay a wreath at Arlington National Cemetery on Memorial Day? He was accused of dining on beer-battered babies by the same people who totally forgot that Bush Sr never attended a single Memorial Day service at Arlington, and the god of Republican gods Ronald Reagan only went to 4 of 8. Obviously, Bush Sr and Reagan hated the troops. They had no respect for them at all. <snort>
Watching you 2 bantering ...
....brings back memories of the good ole days in here....
....brings back memories of the good ole days in here....
Last edited:
As the latest release of hacked emails (by the Russians! Therefore what's contained in them are irrelevant!) reiterate, there's a clear and close relationship between Clinton and the press. Here's an excellent article that lays it all out, the coordination, and it's really ugly.
Did anyone else notice how it all happened with Miss Universe/Miss Housekeeping? In the debate Hillary mentions it out of the blue, and took Trump by surprise. You might have thought, "The media has some digging to do now." But they didn't have to, it was already dug. The stories were already written, just sitting there waiting to go. The whole thing was totally orchestrated, going back several months. Everywhere you looked, within hours of the debate, news outlets had top-story, full page accounts complete with full interviews for both print and video. This wasn't a story that percolated and then leaked, it was manufactured and distributed.
Did anyone else notice how it all happened with Miss Universe/Miss Housekeeping? In the debate Hillary mentions it out of the blue, and took Trump by surprise. You might have thought, "The media has some digging to do now." But they didn't have to, it was already dug. The stories were already written, just sitting there waiting to go. The whole thing was totally orchestrated, going back several months. Everywhere you looked, within hours of the debate, news outlets had top-story, full page accounts complete with full interviews for both print and video. This wasn't a story that percolated and then leaked, it was manufactured and distributed.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Already covered in the RedState article I linked earlier ... but without all the faux outrage ... and with much better humor.