The Media Industry

Two points on this. First, the "both sides" outrage in Charlottesville was always overblown. Everyone just assumed that Trump was equating the "Jews will not replace us" crowd with their opponents. However, I've never seen any indication that he wasn't referring to people who simply showed up in support of the Confederate memorials. Well, that's guys like @Htown77. He may be full of crap on the matter, but he's not a neo-Nazi. Here's the other thing. One can oppose the neo-Nazis and still be very rotten. See Josef Stalin and pretty much every Marxist-Leninist activist or leader in the last 100 years.

Second, let's assume for the sake of argument that Trump actually was talking about the neo-Nazis. Trump and the media aren't in equivalent positions. Trump is a politician with his own agenda, some of which is bad and some of which is good. He isn't there to be fair or even truthful. The media is supposed to be on the side of the truth, and they expect to be given that level of credibility. Getting things right is supposed to be their top priority, not driving a political narrative, but clearly the latter was more important to them than the former.

 

This is exactly true.
"The media is supposed to be on the side of the truth, and they expect to be given that level of credibility."

But what is going on is frightening dangerous and sad. I do not know what the regular person can do

 

Imagine the psychological reset that must take place if Trump is truly proven to have NOT colluded with Russia. The emotional almost lust-like investment in his impeachment has been forcefully used to invalidate his Presidency. How can we get people to go back to basic value systems and not dynamiting everything?

I don't understand not being able to report the truth as it is. The ego trip of emotional maturity is alluring to me. I am guilty of bias but I want to conquer it. In the end, the media bias is a human bias. I find it amusing to see how professional athletes heap scorn on the media (I noticed Durant chastising the media) for misleading, headline grabbing stories; yet those same athletes wish to believe the media without question when it comes to their politics.

All the regular person can do is fix their own filter. Take your time with information. Back away from your emotional hang-ups (identify them first). See what happens. The Jussie and MAGA hat wearing teenagers are PERFECT examples.

But whose going to do all of that? People live to justify their beliefs, not challenge them.

 

Similar to the everyone from Mexico is a rapist/criminal comments.

 

by.
be fair. Trump never said that

 

The Libs have an incentive to "study more the reputation of their own wit than the success of another's business" as Hobbes said. In other words, Libs live off of ideas, not for ideas. They are more interested in being politically relevant than in being cognitively correct, because relevance pays better in their world. The Libs receive a political benefit, economically (being elected) and psychically ("people are discussing my bull---t"-AOC) from their ideas even if they are wrong and will not work in the long run.

Sometimes, differentiating their ideas is taken to an extreme, silly degree like the "Green New Deal", and they embarrass themselves.

To differentiate their ideas they always try to discredit alternatives with articulation instead of evidence. "Trump's a Nazi"; "A wall is immoral"; "Amazon is greedy".

They also need to define their "problem" as a "crisis" to bolster expediting the use of their "expert solutions", which have no empirical support, such as the need to correct "disparate income levels or there will be a revolution" or "climate change will kill us all in 12 years". Those solutions, if the problem even exists, cannot be solved by the interactions of millions of Americans over time. The solution must be forced upon them by government.

 

Somewhat similar to that, but I think that was a worse comment. He pretty much took a large group of people (illegal immigrants from Mexico) and led with calling them rapists, criminals, etc. and then tossed in an obligatory "and some, I assume, are good people." I think that's harder to defend.

 

Here is what Trump actually said
"When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

 

I agree @Mr. Deez and @Horn6721 that it is very difficult to defend his choice of words. I can see how someone would take it the worst possible way. He f'd up on that one.

 

True or not, that is an impressive set of words...

 

I could have gone East Texas and just said they are full of shite.

 

If he had phrased it even slightly differently it would not be so much in question
I hope / wish he has learned to be a tad more circumspect.

 

The so-called "Superintendent," Eddie Johnson has already suggested that if Smollett apologized and paid a fine, that will be "justice." (I still say my idea for the punishment would be more effective)

Maybe 3 hours of community service again?

If there is a bigger cesspool of politics than DC, it has to be Cook County

 

All he had to say was this:

"I swore on a Bible to uphold the Constitution. Our immigration laws are covered by that oath. We welcome immigrants from all countries but they must be properly vetted. I will never waiver from that. We cannot have scores of people being transported by ruthless human-traffickers entering our country at will. I don't have to describe the risks that are inherent in such an enterprise. If you support me, I will vigorously work to funnel all immigrants to the ports of call that are capable of receiving them in the manner to which I am bound and in the most humane manner possible given our resources."

 

My memory is not a precision instrument. I am more than willing to be pressed down into the proper footing.

 

By
I am sending this very well written draft and your resume to the Trump reelection campaign
cuz we know Trump is open to curbing his mouth.

 

Thank you! Ha... it's just so obvious to me. He could have made it a central plank on his platform without the insults. There is no need to justify our immigration laws in that manner. Sure, we need to fix some things such as the Dreamer's. Assuming he agrees with this he could have also said:

"The Dreamer situation is a consequence of human migration. I fully understand wanting a better life and what better place than the United States. I support a well-defined, achievable path to citizenship for all the Dreamers. But we cannot continue with this open wound. I will sign a bill from Congress that takes care of the Dreamer's and slams the door on the growth of this problem. We must control our borders. But we cannot move forward absent our esteemed Democrats to stand-up and define their immigration vision in terms of how many and how we vet them. I need a commitment and a clear idea of where you draw the line. Otherwise, we will use all the tools currently available, including deportations to control our borders. Further, I will not use executive orders to change the law as it now stands. Call your Congressman."

 

You're HIRED



and not to demean your well written speeches for him
But it is not hard
His NY ego just kicks in and he goes brain dead

 

Show me the money. Ha...

I don't feel slighted. I'm just a regular person and I just think it's common sense; common sense that we are begging for. I worked for a real estate developer for twelve years and it's a crazy, risky business environment. It takes a certain breed to survive. Trump reminds me of my former boss in how his combative ego displays itself. Ironically, my former boss is a Liberal. But they are so similar.

Kamala and AOC have presented us similar sloppy forms of communication. I don't know if it's just who they are or if Trump taught them well. Because his style worked. I was shocked that he won the nomination. And to me, if there is any form of design behind his style it's that it continues to work on an acceptable level to him.

But he can use the bombast (bully pulpit) and just tell the truth in a very firm, confident, just watch me defend the Constitution manner. I believe his personality would be well designed to say these things if he cared to redirect himself. We would benefit as a country, it would stop feeding the media trolls and his agenda would be served.

 

Basically, these kind of people are above the law. When you retort, "What about them?" then you have exempted yourself. That's anarchy.

 

If you're a Republican who has differences with Trump and publicly expresses those differences and even voted against Trump, I have no problem with that. That's me. That's Jonah Goldberg. That's Ben Shapiro. However, there is a group of NeverTrump Republicans who not only take issue with Trump and even vote against him but also adopt the mentality and take cheap shots on behalf of the political Left. They actually work against conservative policy. For these people, I have to doubt their integrity and their sincerity (either before or after they flipped). I have a hard time buying a principled flip from conservative to shrill, political hack for the Left. Navarro fits into this group. Ditto for Max Boot and Jennifer Rubin.

 

I wonder if Obama had a son if he would look just like Jussie Smollett?

 

That wouldn't be DJT though. It's quite amazing the lengths y'all are going to explain away a foundational element of Trump's character and campaign. Trump's racism goes back a long ways (Central Park Five).

 

The fact that you think that this is a sign of Trump's racism is just as ridiculous as you thinking people who want the wall are xenophobes.

 

Whether he is a racist or not, it's not racist to enforce our laws. Obama deported over three million people.

What I'm doing is taking a shot at being his speech writer to see if there was a way to manage the situation without all the gaffes or however you would describe them.

I just looked it up. I see Trump's statements. I also saw that NYC refused to settle under Bloomberg then later they did under De Blasio. Is Bloomberg a racist too?

 

Investigators say Hasson repeatedly studied a manifesto authored by Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian right-wing extremist who killed 77 people in a 2011 bomb-and-shooting rampage. Prosecutor Jennifer Sykes claimed Thursday that Hasson would also log onto his government computer during work and spend hours searching for information on such people as the Unabomber, the Virginia Tech gunman and anti-abortion bomber Eric Rudolph. Hasson also allegedly Googled topics like "most liberal senators," "best place in dc to see congress people," and "civil war if trump impeached"

Coast Guard officer ordered to jail, accused of being 'domestic terrorist'

 

Glad they caught him. I don't know what the maximum penalty is for this but he should get it. No opportunity for parole either. In the end, if you can't execute him or put him away for life then I'd settle for institutionalizing him for life in a mental hospital because he doesn't sound like the type who will ever be of sound mind.

 

If this guy was actually planning to kill, I'm glad they've stopped him. However, I'm not sure what they'd charge him with at this point other than perhaps misuse of government property. Has he actually broken weapons laws or drug laws? If so, go after him. However, I don't see a case against him yet for the big concern, which is that he's about to go on a shooting rampage. He hasn't hurt anyone or even tried to. He has a list of "traitors" and has talked about "focused violence." But I'm not seeing a specific plan of action.

I do think the guy is dangerous as hell, and I'd be on him like white on rice. However, they may have jumped him too early to really throw the book at him.

 

Read somewhere that he's an opiod addict so they probably have him on some drug charges, at a minimum.