The wrongful attack of CNN at the press conference

knothead wrote:You go Linda . . . . not sure where you (or othershoe) get the energy but I'll have what you are having . . . . . .  and make that a double please!
Good post.

RealLindaL wrote:

knothead wrote:You go Linda . . . . not sure where you (or othershoe) get the energy but I'll have what you are having . . . . . .  and make that a double please!
Good post.

Thanks, knot.  Kind support like yours helps keep the "energy" going, though it certainly does get discouraging sometimes, like talking to a wall.....

Telstar wrote:

RealLindaL wrote:

knothead wrote:You go Linda . . . . not sure where you (or othershoe) get the energy but I'll have what you are having . . . . . .  and make that a double please!
Good post.

Thanks, knot.  Kind support like yours helps keep the "energy" going, though it certainly does get discouraging sometimes, like talking to a wall.....

Maybe the best way to deal with a wall is to ignore it and go around it. There are sensible people you can talk to, just saying. 

RealLindaL wrote:

Telstar wrote:

RealLindaL wrote:

knothead wrote:You go Linda . . . . not sure where you (or othershoe) get the energy but I'll have what you are having . . . . . .  and make that a double please!
Good post.

Thanks, knot.  Kind support like yours helps keep the "energy" going, though it certainly does get discouraging sometimes, like talking to a wall.....

Maybe the best way to deal with a wall is to ignore it and go around it. There are sensible people you can talk to, just saying. 

Of course you're right, Tel, and I've been sorely tempted to do just that on more than one occasion.  (Actually, I've been pretty successful lately in not bothering to read PeeDawg's threads at all, so at least I'm making some progress. )  Still, sometimes it's hard to let the most outrageous things stand unchallenged, and/or not to lend another voice to the battle against unyielding ignorance.

As for "sensible people" to talk to, do you mean sensible conservatives?  Do we have one or two of those, at least?  Surely you don't mean I should only talk with those I agree with?  

knothead wrote:

RealLindaL wrote:

Telstar wrote:

RealLindaL wrote:

knothead wrote:You go Linda . . . . not sure where you (or othershoe) get the energy but I'll have what you are having . . . . . .  and make that a double please!
Good post.

Thanks, knot.  Kind support like yours helps keep the "energy" going, though it certainly does get discouraging sometimes, like talking to a wall.....

Maybe the best way to deal with a wall is to ignore it and go around it. There are sensible people you can talk to, just saying. 

Of course you're right, Tel, and I've been sorely tempted to do just that on more than one occasion.  (Actually, I've been pretty successful lately in not bothering to read PeeDawg's threads at all, so at least I'm making some progress. )  Still, sometimes it's hard to let the most outrageous things stand unchallenged, and/or not to lend another voice to the battle against unyielding ignorance.

As for "sensible people" to talk to, do you mean sensible conservatives?  Do we have one or two of those, at least?  Surely you don't mean I should only talk with those I agree with?  

sensible conservative, now I can say this could possibly rank as a classic oxymoron . . . . . . up there with military intelligence!

PkrBum wrote:The media has failed the nation. What was once investigative journalism from a neutral position is now skewed by partisans. Almost everything has a slant and bias... they've failed we the people.

PkrBum wrote:The media has failed the nation. What was once investigative journalism from a neutral position is now skewed by partisans. Almost everything has a slant and bias... they've failed we the people.

PkrBum wrote:The media has failed the nation. What was once investigative journalism from a neutral position is now skewed by partisans. Almost everything has a slant and bias... they've failed we the people.

Joanimaroni wrote:

PkrBum wrote:The media has failed the nation. What was once investigative journalism from a neutral position is now skewed by partisans. Almost everything has a slant and bias... they've failed we the people.

Absolutely.

othershoe1030 wrote:There's an even larger picture to be considered here too, which we should not lose sight of. It goes to the heart of the whole freedom of the press and reliability issue.

Before digital publishing we had print and radio and some TV reporting. Reporters competed among themselves for breaking news and scoops. They were largely self monitoring by their own editorial boards. There was competing pressure to break the latest news but with the extremely important and constant consideration that their reputation had to be maintained. News sources, as with people, in the long run don't have much more to stand on than their reputations for honesty and fairness.

Apparently the 35 page collection of memos from the MI6 agent had been circulating among news outlets and politicians alike for many months. None of them wanted to publish them because the information could not be verified. When the two page summary and its inclusion in the daily briefings for the president and the president elect was made known, BuzzFeed, as its editor said on the talk shows this morning, felt a need to let the public know what was behind the summary whether or not the information was accurate.

Now it looks as if the incoming administration is attempting to stir up and muddy the waters even more by trying to discredit all press, all information regarding them and their activities. How many times has Trump called the press "dishonest" and other similar names? At rallies on the campaign trail he has led his followers in booing and heckling against the press corps while they were  covering the event. This is a perfect cover and smoke screen for him to hide behind. If the public starts to doubt the authenticity of reports from news organizations then we are truly cut off from observing the workings of our government. To lump all news outlets together with the likes of BuzzFeed is self destructive insanity.

Carried to its extreme if the public completely buys into this idea that "the media" is bad and untrustworthy then what are we left with? It would put the public in the position of just reading tweets or listening to Kellyanne for the news. Of course it won't go that far but to undermine the press as Trump has done is to attempt to cut the legs out from under a very important and absolutely necessary element of our public discourse.

Markle wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:There's an even larger picture to be considered here too, which we should not lose sight of. It goes to the heart of the whole freedom of the press and reliability issue.

Before digital publishing we had print and radio and some TV reporting. Reporters competed among themselves for breaking news and scoops. They were largely self monitoring by their own editorial boards. There was competing pressure to break the latest news but with the extremely important and constant consideration that their reputation had to be maintained. News sources, as with people, in the long run don't have much more to stand on than their reputations for honesty and fairness.

Apparently the 35 page collection of memos from the MI6 agent had been circulating among news outlets and politicians alike for many months. None of them wanted to publish them because the information could not be verified. When the two page summary and its inclusion in the daily briefings for the president and the president elect was made known, BuzzFeed, as its editor said on the talk shows this morning, felt a need to let the public know what was behind the summary whether or not the information was accurate.

Now it looks as if the incoming administration is attempting to stir up and muddy the waters even more by trying to discredit all press, all information regarding them and their activities. How many times has Trump called the press "dishonest" and other similar names? At rallies on the campaign trail he has led his followers in booing and heckling against the press corps while they were  covering the event. This is a perfect cover and smoke screen for him to hide behind. If the public starts to doubt the authenticity of reports from news organizations then we are truly cut off from observing the workings of our government. To lump all news outlets together with the likes of BuzzFeed is self destructive insanity.

Carried to its extreme if the public completely buys into this idea that "the media" is bad and untrustworthy then what are we left with? It would put the public in the position of just reading tweets or listening to Kellyanne for the news. Of course it won't go that far but to undermine the press as Trump has done is to attempt to cut the legs out from under a very important and absolutely necessary element of our public discourse.

Wow!  GIANT WORD SALAD in a desperate effort to defend the indefensible.

With few exceptions, the media IS bad and untrustworthy.

Why deny facts?  Just go with the flow.

POLITICS
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters
TOM SILEO
Contributor
1:38 PM 08/28/2010

[...]

Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880.

By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863. The average Republican contribution was $744.

[...]

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/08/28/obama-democrats-got-88-percent-of-2008-contributions-by-tv-network-execs-writers-reporters/#ixzz4VsyXtAhq

LOTS more if you wish.

knothead wrote:They just may support the Democrats because they believe in freedom of the press which is now under assault.

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:They just may support the Democrats because they believe in freedom of the press which is now under assault.

Hahahahahaha

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:They just may support the Democrats because they believe in freedom of the press which is now under assault.

Hahahahahaha

It is funny in a sordid sort of way  . . .

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:They just may support the Democrats because they believe in freedom of the press which is now under assault.

Hahahahahaha

It is funny in a sordid sort of way  . . .

There's never been a president that went after whistleblowers harder than Obama. Holder went so far as to get rid of the leakers of their gun running to Mexican cartels and wiretapping reporters... and even their parents. I know you give them a pass... but you can't have it both ways. Sheeesh.

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:The media has failed the nation. What was once investigative journalism from a neutral position is now skewed by partisans. Almost everything has a slant and bias... they've failed we the people.

Me thinks Methinks we are all about to witness, close up and personal, an abject failure like this generation has never seen . . .  

RealLindaL wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:They just may support the Democrats because they believe in freedom of the press which is now under assault.

Hahahahahaha

It is funny in a sordid sort of way  . . .

There's never been a president that went after whistleblowers harder than Obama. Holder went so far as to get rid of the leakers of their gun running to Mexican cartels and wiretapping reporters... and even their parents. I know you give them a pass... but you can't have it both ways. Sheeesh.

Holder is a murderer now?????

Markle wrote:

RealLindaL wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:They just may support the Democrats because they believe in freedom of the press which is now under assault.

Hahahahahaha

It is funny in a sordid sort of way  . . .

There's never been a president that went after whistleblowers harder than Obama. Holder went so far as to get rid of the leakers of their gun running to Mexican cartels and wiretapping reporters... and even their parents. I know you give them a pass... but you can't have it both ways. Sheeesh.

Holder is a murderer now?????

How convenient it is for you to forget Fast and Furious and the deaths caused by those guns.

You've forgotten Benghazi too haven't you?

RealLindaL wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:They just may support the Democrats because they believe in freedom of the press which is now under assault.

Hahahahahaha

It is funny in a sordid sort of way  . . .

There's never been a president that went after whistleblowers harder than Obama. Holder went so far as to get rid of the leakers of their gun running to Mexican cartels and wiretapping reporters... and even their parents. I know you give them a pass... but you can't have it both ways. Sheeesh.

Holder is a murderer now?????

2seaoat wrote:President Bush initiated Fast and Furious under his ATF director.  I need to help some folks understand what constitutes the crime of murder.  Criminals who shoot people are the ones who commit murder.  Any fool knows in America the manufacturer, and the distributors of firearms are given product liability immunity and are not held responsible for the murders committed with their weapons.  It is amusing that the same fools argue that Chicago's gun violence is directly related to gun control, yet no mention of charging those responsible for distributing guns as murderers.  You just cannot make up the naive misuse of concepts when spewing political propaganda.  I have little patience for children pretending they know how to use grown up words.

Sal wrote:The ATF's policy of gun walking began during the Bush administration.

When it came to the attention of the Obama administration, it was immediately halted.

Just the facts.

Thank you, President Obama.