Caecus Posted February 22, 2017 Author Share Posted February 22, 2017 Trump has toyed with the idea of ending the Fed. With that in their minds I don't think they would seriously provoke him and risk getting destroyed for it. How do you know this isn't to plan? The media being constantly on him is something he has long since turned to his advantage and perhaps its simply going to the next stage. As the "Champion of the People" he needs to be attacked by the "Enemies of the People" which is the role the media will be playing in this story for now. People have tired of the media and this weariness only grows stronger as they persist in all this trivial nonsense. Perhaps Trump aims to become completely immune to the media so when he does something that they could legitimately attack hard on their blows are rendered so weak they are pointless. Perhaps he wants the continued destruction of their reputation to continue so he can safely defang them completely with a law change such as the one that would allow him to sue them all to oblivion if they do the same things they have been doing. Or maybe he just running his mouth as he is the world's top shitposter after all. How the !@#$ do you know it is to plan!? It's also a goddamn red herring. You've gone from "media is unfair to Trump" to "Trump is playing the media like a puppet." What happened to your argument that the media is unfair to Trump? That's what I have issue with. We have an incompetent shitposter as the leader of the free world. Congratulations America, you elected an internet troll to hold the nuclear launch codes. Not surprised, since the idiots here spent 6 months morning a dead gorilla. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fistofdoom Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 how are "media is unfair to trump" and "trump is playing the media like a puppet" mutually exclusive? Quote 01:05:55 <%fistofdoom> im out of wine 01:06:03 <%fistofdoom> i winsih i had port 01:06:39 <@JoshF{BoC}> fistofdoom: is the snowman drunk with you 01:07:32 <%fistofdoom> i knet i forgot somehnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 How the !@#$ do you know it is to plan!? It's also a goddamn red herring. You've gone from "media is unfair to Trump" to "Trump is playing the media like a puppet." What happened to your argument that the media is unfair to Trump? That's what I have issue with. We have an incompetent shitposter as the leader of the free world. Congratulations America, you elected an internet troll to hold the nuclear launch codes. Not surprised, since the idiots here spent 6 months morning a dead gorilla. As Fistofdoom says, those are not mutually exclusive things. They are only mutually exclusive if the media was pumping out puff piece after puff piece on him. You say incompetent but I do think you simply do not give him credit. You don't defeat the establishment backed up by the media, twice your money, and with even half your party against you if you aren't damn good. As the election went on and pundit after pundit (all wrong) said he would have to become "presidential" he stayed the course and listened to none of them. He was far smarter than those pundits and I'm pretty sure you were among such people saying he'd have to become presidential. He set up a bunch of promises and aggressively went after them to get all done (so much so the MSM even attacks him on keeping his promises and doing them so quick) within the first 100 days so his claim of honesty when it comes to 2020 is taken seriously even if he has shot his mouth for the last 4 years... and much more. Of course we hardly know if it is simply the man himself. The narrative that has been put out by his enemies is he listens to no-one and just shoots his mouth and his "minions" as they put it then scramble to craft something. However even if true there are clearly people he does indeed take advice from and their advice has proven extremely effective (knowing who to listen to is a positive trait). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 22, 2017 Author Share Posted February 22, 2017 As Fistofdoom says, those are not mutually exclusive things. They are only mutually exclusive if the media was pumping out puff piece after puff piece on him. You say incompetent but I do think you simply do not give him credit. You don't defeat the establishment backed up by the media, twice your money, and with even half your party against you if you aren't damn good. As the election went on and pundit after pundit (all wrong) said he would have to become "presidential" he stayed the course and listened to none of them. He was far smarter than those pundits and I'm pretty sure you were among such people saying he'd have to become presidential. He set up a bunch of promises and aggressively went after them to get all done (so much so the MSM even attacks him on keeping his promises and doing them so quick) within the first 100 days so his claim of honesty when it comes to 2020 is taken seriously even if he has shot his mouth for the last 4 years... and much more. Of course we hardly know if it is simply the man himself. The narrative that has been put out by his enemies is he listens to no-one and just shoots his mouth and his "minions" as they put it then scramble to craft something. However even if true there are clearly people he does indeed take advice from and their advice has proven extremely effective (knowing who to listen to is a positive trait). So, you are saying that maybe Trump is saying stupid shit "strategically" to bait the media. Without any evidence to back it up. Let me try and sum up everything you've said so far: 1. The media is unfair to Trump because they cover stupid shit he said instead of the actual policy stuff he's accomplished. 2. Trump is manipulating the media by having them cover stupid shit he said instead of the actual policy stuff he's accomplished. Ok. Then I don't know why you guys always complain about the media going after Trump if it's all part of the "grand strategy." If anything, you should be goading on the media. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fistofdoom Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 So, you are saying that maybe Trump is saying stupid shit "strategically" to bait the media. Without any evidence to back it up. Let me try and sum up everything you've said so far: 1. The media is unfair to Trump because they cover stupid shit he said instead of the actual policy stuff he's accomplished. 2. Trump is manipulating the media by having them cover stupid shit he said instead of the actual policy stuff he's accomplished. Ok. Then I don't know why you guys always complain about the media going after Trump if it's all part of the "grand strategy." If anything, you should be goading on the media. #1 sounds right #2 sounds like you're a i cant say that Quote 01:05:55 <%fistofdoom> im out of wine 01:06:03 <%fistofdoom> i winsih i had port 01:06:39 <@JoshF{BoC}> fistofdoom: is the snowman drunk with you 01:07:32 <%fistofdoom> i knet i forgot somehnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 So, you are saying that maybe Trump is saying stupid shit "strategically" to bait the media. Without any evidence to back it up. Let me try and sum up everything you've said so far: 1. The media is unfair to Trump because they cover stupid shit he said instead of the actual policy stuff he's accomplished. 2. Trump is manipulating the media by having them cover stupid shit he said instead of the actual policy stuff he's accomplished. Ok. Then I don't know why you guys always complain about the media going after Trump if it's all part of the "grand strategy." If anything, you should be goading on the media. Trump played the media like a fiddle during the election and that is fact. He is now President and is doing similar things so based off that I observed that perhaps there is a design to it all instead of it being simply shooting his mouth off randomly. Such an observation is not groundless as Trump clearly is excellent in this sort of field and we have his success during the election in regards to the media to look at, however ultimately we don't know which is why I said it could always be that it is indeed him just shooting his mouth off with no tactics involved. You spouting about evidence is completely pointless in regards to this and comes off as desperate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 22, 2017 Author Share Posted February 22, 2017 Trump played the media like a fiddle during the election and that is fact. He is now President and is doing similar things so based off that I observed that perhaps there is a design to it all instead of it being simply shooting his mouth off randomly. Such an observation is not groundless as Trump clearly is excellent in this sort of field and we have his success during the election in regards to the media to look at, however ultimately we don't know which is why I said it could always be that it is indeed him just shooting his mouth off with no tactics involved. You spouting about evidence is completely pointless in regards to this and comes off as desperate. Sorry, it's just when you guys secretly hope that Trump's doing something smart, to the rest of the world, he's a !@#$ing idiot beyond reasonable doubt. So, until there is some obvious indication for anything otherwise, I'm calling your "Trump is secretly smart" stunt bullshit. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Sorry, it's just when you guys secretly hope that Trump's doing something smart, to the rest of the world, he's a !@#$ idiot beyond reasonable doubt. So, until there is some obvious indication for anything otherwise, I'm calling your "Trump is secretly smart" stunt bullshit. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/idiot%20savant You seem to think being an idiot means you are stupid in all things. Not so. Even if you believe Trump a idiot its pretty clear that he is extremely skilled in selling himself and his message hence why he is now President. Of course I know you'll think, "but he never reached me so he can't be good at those things". The thing about that is you don't need to reach everybody. Trump no doubt quickly calculated that there are people out there who will hate and oppose him no matter what he says or does and there is way to reach them so he doesn't bother. He goes all in and inflames those people to the extreme which pulls in support from others who he can reach who are amazed that the madman is doing it. Look at him and his wall. With that alone he has lost any possible support of a large group of people so screw it, he'll rip up the TPP also. The people who get flustered by the TPP being ripped up are already lost, but those who have began to shift to him with the wall become only enraptured. In the election I saw even Bernie guys go to Trump (once Bernie dropped out) because Trump said he'd do populist thing after populist thing and many of those are very attractive to anyone on the left too. Many held of course saying things such as "making the live's of illegals hell isn't worth actually achieving any of our goals" (and then voted third party which in a way helped Trump as Clinton was the one losing their vote), but others happily believed that the end justifies the means... which did for those worried about the TPP. Trump ripped it up as he said he would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 22, 2017 Author Share Posted February 22, 2017 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/idiot%20savant You seem to think being an idiot means you are stupid in all things. Not so. Even if you believe Trump a idiot its pretty clear that he is extremely skilled in selling himself and his message hence why he is now President. Of course I know you'll think, "but he never reached me so he can't be good at those things". The thing about that is you don't need to reach everybody. Trump no doubt quickly calculated that there are people out there who will hate and oppose him no matter what he says or does and there is way to reach them so he doesn't bother. He goes all in and inflames those people to the extreme which pulls in support from others who he can reach who are amazed that the madman is doing it. Look at him and his wall. With that alone he has lost any possible support of a large group of people so screw it, he'll rip up the TPP also. The people who get flustered by the TPP being ripped up are already lost, but those who have began to shift to him with the wall become only enraptured. In the election I saw even Bernie guys go to Trump (once Bernie dropped out) because Trump said he'd do populist thing after populist thing and many of those are very attractive to anyone on the left too. Many held of course saying things such as "making the live's of illegals hell isn't worth actually achieving any of our goals" (and then voted third party which in a way helped Trump as Clinton was the one losing their vote), but others happily believed that the end justifies the means... which did for those worried about the TPP. Trump ripped it up as he said he would. The ability to sell himself and being stupid isn't mutually exclusive. Prostitutes can sell themselves, but not many of them make good Ph.D candidates. But regardless, everything you are talking about is a red herring. The issue is Trump says stupid shit. Media calls him out on stupid shit he says. You think that because the media calls out stupid shit he has said, media is biased. Biased suggest double standard. I'm saying that you put any schmuck up there and say the shit Trump said, and the media will be all over that regardless if that person is a democrat or republican. Give me an example of systemic media bias against Trump. And then tell me you honestly believe that if any other president did or said what he did, the media wouldn't be all over that. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fistofdoom Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Give me an example of systemic media bias against Trump. And then tell me you honestly believe that if any other president did or said what he did, the media wouldn't be all over that. ex: most of everything involving trump since he announced his candidacy covered by the media they sure loved obama even though he's done far worse in multiple different areas, including the nonstop wars that he campaigned on stopping Quote 01:05:55 <%fistofdoom> im out of wine 01:06:03 <%fistofdoom> i winsih i had port 01:06:39 <@JoshF{BoC}> fistofdoom: is the snowman drunk with you 01:07:32 <%fistofdoom> i knet i forgot somehnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 The ability to sell himself and being stupid isn't mutually exclusive. Prostitutes can sell themselves, but not many of them make good Ph.D candidates. But regardless, everything you are talking about is a red herring. The issue is Trump says stupid shit. Media calls him out on stupid shit he says. You think that because the media calls out stupid shit he has said, media is biased. Biased suggest double standard. I'm saying that you put any schmuck up there and say the shit Trump said, and the media will be all over that regardless if that person is a democrat or republican. Give me an example of systemic media bias against Trump. And then tell me you honestly believe that if any other president did or said what he did, the media wouldn't be all over that. Bloody hell. Him being able to sell and promote himself is something he is intelligent in. Likewise a Professional Wrestler could be an idiot but a complete genius in the ring who can get the crowd firmly behind him or his opponent if in the other role with his work. Even Prostitutes can be intelligent in their field even if they happen to know all of nothing in other matters. You might well consider yourself smarter than those people, but in their field it is you who is the idiot. I'm shaking my head at this level of ignorance from you. This is not hard to check if your memory has failed you so badly that you can't recall the election. http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/media/301285-media-and-trump-bias-not-even-trying-to-hide-it-anymore Trump eating a pizza with a fork would get more time than important Clinton issues going on at the same time. This was the level of nonsense that was going on. You seriously believe Trump is all that can be pointed at? How silly you are. Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul in America are hardly like Trump in temperament and had media bias set against them (though not as overwhelmingly apparent as they got nowhere near the coverage which Trump used to overload the media machine). In Great Britain Corbyn who is far as you can get from Trump got the full Trump treatment for ages and is still treated extremely negatively even today. You keep trying to push that it is Trump's fault for talking as he does but evidence makes clear that is not the case. What ties those men I've brought up together is them speaking out against the norms and establishment. It doesn't matter if they are left or right. It doesn't matter if they are quiet or loud people. It doesn't matter if they say "stupid shit" or are extremely well spoken. The media which is a arm of the establishment homes in on a enemy of theirs and attacks. ex: most of everything involving trump since he announced his candidacy covered by the media they sure loved obama even though he's done far worse in multiple different areas, including the nonstop wars that he campaigned on stopping Obama truly was the most insidious of Presidents for his ability to do things which if a Republican had done people would have been rioting in the streets over. Look at the powerful spying apparatus for example that Trump now has control over. It was strengthened by Obama and they just let it happen and now they want to complain that Trump has control of it? Lol. Guys like Caecus should stop wasting time on Trump and attack the scum that infests the Democrats, but perhaps he can't handle a harder target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 22, 2017 Author Share Posted February 22, 2017 Bloody hell. Him being able to sell and promote himself is something he is intelligent in. Likewise a Professional Wrestler could be an idiot but a complete genius in the ring who can get the crowd firmly behind him or his opponent if in the other role with his work. Even Prostitutes can be intelligent in their field even if they happen to know all of nothing in other matters. You might well consider yourself smarter than those people, but in their field it is you who is the idiot. I'm shaking my head at this level of ignorance from you. This is not hard to check if your memory has failed you so badly that you can't recall the election. http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/media/301285-media-and-trump-bias-not-even-trying-to-hide-it-anymore Trump eating a pizza with a fork would get more time than important Clinton issues going on at the same time. This was the level of nonsense that was going on. You seriously believe Trump is all that can be pointed at? How silly you are. Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul in America are hardly like Trump in temperament and had media bias set against them (though not as overwhelmingly apparent as they got nowhere near the coverage which Trump used to overload the media machine). In Great Britain Corbyn who is far as you can get from Trump got the full Trump treatment for ages and is still treated extremely negatively even today. You keep trying to push that it is Trump's fault for talking as he does but evidence makes clear that is not the case. What ties those men I've brought up together is them speaking out against the norms and establishment. It doesn't matter if they are left or right. It doesn't matter if they are quiet or loud people. It doesn't matter if they say "stupid shit" or are extremely well spoken. The media which is a arm of the establishment homes in on a enemy of theirs and attacks. Obama truly was the most insidious of Presidents for his ability to do things which if a Republican had done people would have been rioting in the streets over. Look at the powerful spying apparatus for example that Trump now has control over. It was strengthened by Obama and they just let it happen and now they want to complain that Trump has control of it? Lol. Guys like Caecus should stop wasting time on Trump and attack the scum that infests the Democrats, but perhaps he can't handle a harder target. So, media seems to focus coverage on people saying crazy things? Didn't you just prove my point? Bernie and Paul had intense coverage because both of them were politically batshit. Trump gets more coverage because he makes Bernie and Paul seem tame. You are making my point? Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 So, media seems to focus coverage on people saying crazy things? Didn't you just prove my point? Bernie and Paul had intense coverage because both of them were politically batshit. Trump gets more coverage because he makes Bernie and Paul seem tame. You are making my point? Oh boy. You equate "stupid shit" with the shitposting comments Trump makes and now are trying to turn it around and say its simply crazy policy. Well thats your angle at an end as you've just hanged yourself. If Trump's politically for wanting to build a wall, have a temporary ban, and other things is "politically batshit" and talking crazy then you really don't have any case here. For him to stop saying "stupid shit" would require him to morph into Clinton. Also Paul and Bernie suffered from more a lack of coverage than intense coverage. They weren't as aggressive as Trump and ultimately paid for it. Corbyn in Britain, a man also not aggressive enough is now considered by most to be pretty much finished. The media's memes of him is that he is a weak old man who can't lead... while also being a Stalinist like Tyrant at the same time. The media is disgusting. Stop dirtying yourself by defending them, the media are reviled by pretty much all for good reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 23, 2017 Author Share Posted February 23, 2017 Oh boy. You equate "stupid shit" with the shitposting comments Trump makes and now are trying to turn it around and say its simply crazy policy. Well thats your angle at an end as you've just hanged yourself. If Trump's politically for wanting to build a wall, have a temporary ban, and other things is "politically batshit" and talking crazy then you really don't have any case here. For him to stop saying "stupid shit" would require him to morph into Clinton. Also Paul and Bernie suffered from more a lack of coverage than intense coverage. They weren't as aggressive as Trump and ultimately paid for it. Corbyn in Britain, a man also not aggressive enough is now considered by most to be pretty much finished. The media's memes of him is that he is a weak old man who can't lead... while also being a Stalinist like Tyrant at the same time. The media is disgusting. Stop dirtying yourself by defending them, the media are reviled by pretty much all for good reason. LOL. Let me get this straight. You think that if Trump stop saying stupid shit, he would be Clinton? Still a red herring. Still a red herring. You still haven't given me an example of a "biased" media coverage of Trump and how you think the media would have responded any differently to anyone else. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fistofdoom Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 LOL. Let me get this straight. You think that if Trump stop saying stupid shit, he would be Clinton? Still a red herring. you literally got that twisted Quote 01:05:55 <%fistofdoom> im out of wine 01:06:03 <%fistofdoom> i winsih i had port 01:06:39 <@JoshF{BoC}> fistofdoom: is the snowman drunk with you 01:07:32 <%fistofdoom> i knet i forgot somehnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 LOL. Let me get this straight. You think that if Trump stop saying stupid shit, he would be Clinton? Still a red herring. Still a red herring. You still haven't given me an example of a "biased" media coverage of Trump and how you think the media would have responded any differently to anyone else. ??? Keep up. You just stated that "stupid shit" is defined as him talking crazy politically like Bernie, Ron, and such. As such he cannot stop talking crazy unless he becomes more standard, like Clinton for example. I gave you a link already. If you think 24/7 tidal waves of overwhelming negative coverage for a year+ (and we'll be getting 8 more years no doubt) is fair then what can really be said. You don't seem to realise that such a thing alone is bad enough. When negative stories of other parties/people either doesn't show up or gets a tiny fraction of whatever Trump has done then that is unfair yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 23, 2017 Author Share Posted February 23, 2017 ??? Keep up. You just stated that "stupid shit" is defined as him talking crazy politically like Bernie, Ron, and such. As such he cannot stop talking crazy unless he becomes more standard, like Clinton for example. I gave you a link already. If you think 24/7 tidal waves of overwhelming negative coverage for a year+ (and we'll be getting 8 more years no doubt) is fair then what can really be said. You don't seem to realise that such a thing alone is bad enough. When negative stories of other parties/people either doesn't show up or gets a tiny fraction of whatever Trump has done then that is unfair yes. Still a red herring. Oh, I'm sorry, I thought that link was a joke. That link (which is at least a year old and outside of the Trump presidency) looks at a narrow time frame at two or three news organizations. It implies that Clinton's emails and the wikileaks material was not covered by the media, which is objectively bullshit. So I'll ask again: "give me an example of systemic media bias against Trump. And then tell me you honestly believe that if any other president did or said what he did, the media wouldn't be all over that." 1 Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 You still haven't given me an example of a "biased" media coverage of Trump and how you think the media would have responded any differently to anyone else. (In "News" instead of "Opinion") (Southerners =/= KKK members and also fails to mention HRC's "mentor") (CNN isn't called racist for implying black = felon) (So anti-Muslim) No mention of donations in media. I'm sure if that's not enough, the CNN leaks will have something to convince you. I'm only 3 hours into it and it's hilarious! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fistofdoom Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 ^ glorious Quote 01:05:55 <%fistofdoom> im out of wine 01:06:03 <%fistofdoom> i winsih i had port 01:06:39 <@JoshF{BoC}> fistofdoom: is the snowman drunk with you 01:07:32 <%fistofdoom> i knet i forgot somehnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 24, 2017 Author Share Posted February 24, 2017 Systemic. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 These things have been blindingly obvious to anyone who has followed such things so will you at last just give it up? Beyond that your constant usage of "red herring" is in itself a distraction. I've addressed what you keep asking already. The media indeed can be biased against others who talk "stupid shit" which you have defined as anything that does not suit the Globalist ideology which can be Nationalism, Populism, (Real) Socialism, and such. However that does not excuse their bias against Trump. The fact out of the 3 I gave you the media beat 2 of them (and the third seems likely to lose), all people who are "quiet" unlike Trump's loudness I think shows again how you fail to understand that him being as he is, is not a weakness but a strength that allowed him to overcome the media. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 Caecus: The media is honest. Trump is treated fairly. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 26, 2017 Author Share Posted February 26, 2017 Caecus: The media is honest. Trump is treated fairly. "Considering that Trump hasn’t enacted any fiscal legislation, it’s a bit of a stretch for him to take credit for any changes in debt levels," Dan Mitchell, a libertarian economist and senior fellow at the Cato Institute, told us." Lol. Finish reading the article. He's taking credit for things he hasn't done. It's like you claiming to have had a part in that amazing pizza store moving into your neighborhood. I'm more worried about your selective reading than media bias. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 "Considering that Trump hasn’t enacted any fiscal legislation, it’s a bit of a stretch for him to take credit for any changes in debt levels," Dan Mitchell, a libertarian economist and senior fellow at the Cato Institute, told us." Lol. Finish reading the article. He's taking credit for things he hasn't done. It's like you claiming to have had a part in that amazing pizza store moving into your neighborhood. I'm more worried about your selective reading than media bias. So you are so shameless, okay. I'll not bother pointing at you having in the past talked about Obama having made X jobs when in actuality he had little to do with it, you won't admit to the double standard I know. He made a factual statement on something that happened, that is all, its true. The additional bit is an attack on the media as a worthwhile stat is not being mentioned due to it being positive for Trump. On the other hand were Trump and Obama reversed we know the media (and yourself lets not forget) would be on here declaring it. The media has not reported that the National Debt in my first month went down by $12 billion vs a $200 billion increase in Obama first mo. They have expanded it because putting anything like that down as simply true is something they simply cannot allow... but even then half true would be you'd think the harshest they could do and yet they put "mostly false" instead. This of course is nothing new. During the election Trump would get put down as false while Clinton making the same sort of statements would at the very least get half true and often even mostly true. Of course I'm sure you will deny this and challenge me to go digging up months old evidence for you to then just dismiss it too. No thanks on that. Its quite clear you blinded and deafened yourself to such things long ago to avoid facing up to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 26, 2017 Author Share Posted February 26, 2017 So you are so shameless, okay. I'll not bother pointing at you having in the past talked about Obama having made X jobs when in actuality he had little to do with it, you won't admit to the double standard I know. He made a factual statement on something that happened, that is all, its true. The additional bit is an attack on the media as a worthwhile stat is not being mentioned due to it being positive for Trump. On the other hand were Trump and Obama reversed we know the media (and yourself lets not forget) would be on here declaring it. They have expanded it because putting anything like that down as simply true is something they simply cannot allow... but even then half true would be you'd think the harshest they could do and yet they put "mostly false" instead. This of course is nothing new. During the election Trump would get put down as false while Clinton making the same sort of statements would at the very least get half true and often even mostly true. Of course I'm sure you will deny this and challenge me to go digging up months old evidence for you to then just dismiss it too. No thanks on that. Its quite clear you blinded and deafened yourself to such things long ago to avoid facing up to them. Obama bailed out the auto industry. Whether or not you agree with that on a philosophical basis, you can't deny he saved jobs. But that's a red herring and irrelevant. Meh, I would have personally rated it as "true, but misleading," but Politfact does present compelling evidence that the context of his statement makes it false. Trump looks at a narrow one month time frame where the debt is likely to fluctuate, especially since that damned Obama left him with 382 billion in the treasury. By sheer coincidence, I suppose, that number has fallen to 228 billion, corresponding to that drop in the national debt. But I digress. The national debt is going to go up. Anyone who knows basic addition can tell you. Again, Trump is saying something stupid and the media jumps on it. Your point? The difference between Obama and Trump was that when the national debt went up under Obama, Obama didn't go on twitter and say "the national debt is going down!" That's why Politifact didn't do a script on Obama, because Obama was honest, unlike Trump. You know what they did do a script on? Obama and his claim that the ACA costs weren't rising. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.