Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
9 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House The Trump Presidency

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Trump Presidency
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2979 of 4573 (856437)
06-30-2019 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 2958 by Tanypteryx
06-25-2019 12:12 PM


Re: Trump's Embrace of Foreign Interference Draws FEC Response
The clear benefit to Russians is Trump lifting economic sanctions and not adding new ones.
And that's bad how? Is it a Democrat policy to automatically hate on Russia?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2958 by Tanypteryx, posted 06-25-2019 12:12 PM Tanypteryx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2984 by JonF, posted 06-30-2019 7:44 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2980 of 4573 (856438)
06-30-2019 7:21 PM
Reply to: Message 2964 by Percy
06-25-2019 3:22 PM


Re: Trump's Embrace of Foreign Interference Draws FEC Response
JonF has already answered your question about why Russia interfered in support of a Trump presidency, but regardless of their motivation there is no doubt they did it.
Nope, the answer wasn't there. No details at all about Russia's motivation.
By the way, Forbidden is a conservative conspiracy-nonsense website and is in no way affiliated with ABC News, business or otherwise.
Report: Former Obama officials are currently advising Iran on how to counter President Trump - TheBlaze
https://www.infowars.com/...eat-trumps-foreign-policy-report
https://starpolitical.com/...ow-to-defeat-u-s-foreign-policy
https://conservativefighters.org/...-counter-president-trump
403 Forbidden
https://trueconservativepundit.com/...t-trump-foreign-policy
Report: Obama Administration Alumni Advising Iranian Regime on Dealing with Trump
Zerohedge
Need more? I'll bet you can poison those wells faster than I can put them up, and... I'm out of time for another weekend.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2964 by Percy, posted 06-25-2019 3:22 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2983 by JonF, posted 06-30-2019 7:38 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


(1)
Message 3081 of 4573 (858388)
07-19-2019 11:05 PM
Reply to: Message 3064 by Percy
07-18-2019 7:24 AM


Trmp in 2020!
Just curious, if Trump is a wannabe communist tyrant, wouldn't you say he's the first leader in the history of the world to seek that position by advocating less government regulation, more free marketing, and maintaining an armed citizenry?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3064 by Percy, posted 07-18-2019 7:24 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3082 by AZPaul3, posted 07-20-2019 12:06 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 3083 by Theodoric, posted 07-20-2019 7:04 AM marc9000 has replied
 Message 3086 by ringo, posted 07-20-2019 11:55 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 3087 of 4573 (858545)
07-21-2019 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 3083 by Theodoric
07-20-2019 7:04 AM


Russia is not communist. The symbol was not meant to represent the USSR, which does not exist anymore. Thus, could not be supporting donnie. It is to represent Putin and Russia.
These things really are not that hard to figure out.
I'm not seeing your claim in any definitions of that emblem. Do you have any sources that say the emblem's meaning is changeable over time?
quote:
an emblem consisting of a crossed hammer and sickle used especially as a symbol of Soviet Communism
Hammer and sickle Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
and;
quote:
Three out of the five currently ruling Communist parties use a hammer and sickle as the party symbol: the Communist Party of China, the Communist Party of Vietnam and the Lao People's Revolutionary Party. All of these use the yellow-on-red colour scheme. In Laos and Vietnam, the hammer and sickle party flags can often be seen flying side-by-side with their respective national flags.
I bolded the word "currently" for you there. Also from this Wiikipedia link;
quote:
At the time of its creation, the hammer stood for the proletariat and the sickle for the peasantrycombined they stood for the worker-peasant alliance for socialism.
Hammer and sickle - Wikipedia
SOCIALISM?? That ideology that all the current Democrat candidates are embracing? When Trump stood at the podium and stated that the U.S. would never become a socialist country, did you notice that Nancy Pelosi, sitting behind him, did not stand up and cheer?
I'm trying to understand how the left can become so unhinged that they would try to associate Trump with socialism/ communism, when that is exactly what the DEMOCRATS are embracing.
Since I got 3 dances and 0 answers to my question, let me ask it one more time, since no one here seems to take exception to the claim of Message 3064, wouldn't you say he's the first leader in the history of the world to seek a socialist/communist position by advocating less government regulation, more free marketing, and maintaining an armed citizenry?
(if you believe tariffs are only a socialist/communist activity, then I can't help you)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3083 by Theodoric, posted 07-20-2019 7:04 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3088 by jar, posted 07-21-2019 5:50 PM marc9000 has replied
 Message 3089 by JonF, posted 07-21-2019 5:52 PM marc9000 has replied
 Message 3092 by ringo, posted 07-22-2019 11:56 AM marc9000 has replied
 Message 3163 by Theodoric, posted 07-30-2019 8:43 AM marc9000 has seen this message but not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 3093 of 4573 (858657)
07-22-2019 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 3088 by jar
07-21-2019 5:50 PM


Is there Social Security?
Does Medicare exist?
They are mild forms of socialism that the U.S. has adopted into its capitalist system, long after the midway point from it's founding to today. A basic definition of socialism looks like this;
quote:
Socialism; any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
Socialism Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
The absolute socialism that todays Democrats espouse is government involvement in production and distribution of goods. That is several levels above Social Security, which is paid into during the lives of its recipients.
Are there public highways?
Yes. Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution authorizes their construction and upkeep.
Are there Municipal Fire and Police Departments?
Are there street lights?
Those are basics in any organized society, they are not socialist.
Sorry Charlie but all of those are Socialist Programs.
All countries in the world have them, and not all countries are recognized as socialist. Public water, street lights etc, aren't in the same league as the socialist programs today's Democrats promote.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3088 by jar, posted 07-21-2019 5:50 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3095 by jar, posted 07-22-2019 3:16 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 3094 of 4573 (858662)
07-22-2019 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 3089 by JonF
07-21-2019 5:52 PM


No he's looking for an oligarchy.
The hammer and sickle emblem is not representative of an oligarchy.
quote:
Oligarchy; is a form of power structure in which power rests with a small number of people.
Oligarchy - Wikipedia
So you believe Trump is seeking to channel power into only himself and... his children etc? Do you know of any other world leader who has sought to do that by advocating less government regulation, more free marketing, and maintaining an armed citizenry?
ABE did you notice the alleged actions you listed are the antithesis of socialism or communism? Except for the armed citizenry.
IT WAS MY POINT! And an armed citizenry is also the antithesis of socialism or communism. Any leader who seeks to become a socialist, communist, or promote oligarchism is going to do the opposite of what Trump is doing. I suspect there are lots of former world leaders who sought to increase the size and scope of government by doing exactly what todays Democrats espouse, not what Trump is doing. I'm looking for examples of past hammer-and-sickle tyrants who achieved their diabolical ends by doing what Trump is doing. If you don't know of any, then it's pretty laughable that you and others here claim that Trump is a wannabe tyrant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3089 by JonF, posted 07-21-2019 5:52 PM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3099 by JonF, posted 07-22-2019 3:44 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 3096 of 4573 (858666)
07-22-2019 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 3092 by ringo
07-22-2019 11:56 AM


I believe tariffs are not "less government regulation". They are more government regulation. I believe tariffs are not "more free marketing". They are less free marketing.
There is a big difference between conducting foreign affairs ("regulating commerce with foreign nations"- it's in the Constitution) and meddling in the personal lives of the citizens. ("erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance", and "declaring themselves with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever" - it's in the Declaration of Independence)
Trump's holding the line on EPA regulations alone is a contributing factor in today's record setting economy.
"New offices, swarms of officers, power to legislate" - climate change, anyone?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3092 by ringo, posted 07-22-2019 11:56 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3100 by ringo, posted 07-22-2019 4:55 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 3097 of 4573 (858668)
07-22-2019 3:27 PM
Reply to: Message 3095 by jar
07-22-2019 3:16 PM


How are they different?
They don't directly seek to control the production and distribution of goods.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3095 by jar, posted 07-22-2019 3:16 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3098 by jar, posted 07-22-2019 3:43 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 3101 of 4573 (858694)
07-22-2019 10:03 PM
Reply to: Message 3098 by jar
07-22-2019 3:43 PM


Sorry but how do they control the production and distribution of goods?
With climate change mandates. They're not really started yet, except for selling fear among students in all levels of education. There's no facet of production and distribution of goods that can't fall under future climate change mandates.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3098 by jar, posted 07-22-2019 3:43 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3103 by jar, posted 07-23-2019 8:50 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 3102 of 4573 (858696)
07-22-2019 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 3099 by JonF
07-22-2019 3:44 PM


To most people a hammer and sickle represents the USSR, not Trump.
I agree, yet I was the only one to point out the glaring error in Message 3064
The Trump administration has officially argued there is no such thing as congressional oversight.
What's your source for that - looks like fake news to me. I suspect that was twisted and distorted out of a comment of his that a congress focused on NOTHING but bringing down a president needs to have its "congressional oversight" reigned in from time to time.
Even when Republicans held the House and Senate he's ruled by executive order.
Here is the Wikipedia chart that shows all presidential use of the executive order. It shows that Trump's use of it is nothing unusual. What he has often used it for is 2 things that most other presidents haven't had to; 1) To help reign in witch-hunts against his presidency, and 2) to reverse at least some of the damage that Obama did, as in foreign agreements that weren't in the best interests of the U.S. and advancing the Keystone XL and Dakota Access Pipelines that Obama thwarted.
No matter what you label it Trump’s destroying our entire system.
We have most all Democrat presidential candidates promising to give free health care to illegal immigrants, we have a Muslim, America hating congresswoman with a turbine wrapped around her head that the news media adores, every Democrat presidential candidate agrees that we're going to have to make serious changes in our lifestyles to combat climate change, and you're worried about Trump destroying our entire system?
We're looking at a new Gilded Age. Rich old white men and their corporations in charge
Nothing new about the Democrat party's anger and jealousy of "rich old white men and corporations". They've hated them for over a century.
Have you noticed that "less regulation" benefits business and harms the country
When the public voluntarily buys the products and services that business provides, it doesn't harm the country.
(hey, who needs breathable air or drinlawater, amirite?)
We HAVE breathable air and drinkable water. But we also have special interests who have a financial stake in selling fear about those things.
Here's what a free-market economist has to say
There are liberal free market economists. Trump won on many issues, and one of them was his claim that foreign countries have been taking advantage of the U.S. for too long. Even if his new ideas on tariffs have short term challenges, I for one am willing to see how his ideas work, compared to the ideas of the former swamp dwellers who have spent us $22 trillion in debt.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3099 by JonF, posted 07-22-2019 3:44 PM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3104 by JonF, posted 07-23-2019 9:46 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 3111 by JonF, posted 07-23-2019 5:01 PM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 3164 by Theodoric, posted 07-30-2019 8:45 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 3878 of 4573 (875851)
05-08-2020 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 3874 by Percy
05-06-2020 11:30 AM


Re: Maybe a little planning is called for?
Basically, they're doing whatever Trump feels like doing at any particular moment. Planning? Strategizing? Organizing? What's that?
If he planned, strategized, organized, then absolutely refused to take into consideration any new information or changes in statistics, you'd heap praise on him for that?
Several times, including just recently, ABC"s David Muir proclaimed that "PRESIDENT TRUMP REVERSES COURSE". Just like your USA Today headline uses the term "reversal" - it's an egregious lie. All he did was delay an action until a later date based on new information.
These news outlets do this to mislead casual swing voters, trying to imply that Trump flails about, doing 180's based on whims. As long as the swing voters aren't paying much attention, it works for them. But when those who ARE paying attention take note of this and point it out to others, then it tends to cancel out any gains the crooked news media made. Polls taken of news media approval tend to bear this out. It's like when Trump stopped travel from China back in January, and was immediately called a xenophobe, racist, bigot, etc. by many Democrats and their puppets in the news media. Now those same people have REVERSED COURSE, (proper use of the term) and say Trump didn't act soon enough to slow or stop the spread of the virus. A LOT of swing voters noticed that course reversal.
It's going to be a fun campaign season!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3874 by Percy, posted 05-06-2020 11:30 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3883 by Percy, posted 05-08-2020 5:13 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 3879 of 4573 (875852)
05-08-2020 9:30 AM
Reply to: Message 3876 by vimesey
05-07-2020 9:29 AM


Re: No surprises there, then
So the metric is popularity. Not efficacy and success in saving lives, but popularity. Because lives don’t matter as much as Trump getting re-elected, do they ?
Stubbornly refusing to make adjustments based on new information goes along with dictators like Kim Jong Un, not U.S. presidents.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3876 by vimesey, posted 05-07-2020 9:29 AM vimesey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3880 by vimesey, posted 05-08-2020 9:54 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 3882 by JonF, posted 05-08-2020 1:14 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 3888 of 4573 (875950)
05-10-2020 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 3883 by Percy
05-08-2020 5:13 PM


Re: Maybe a little planning is called for?
Planning, strategizing and organizing while changing course as circumstances require is what competent management would do. It is not what Trump is doing. He can't do course corrections because he has no set course to begin with.
There have been many diseases to unexpectedly hit the U.S. since it's founding. A quick comparison of what Trump has / is doing to what 3 (4?) past presidents have done indicates that his course is much better set and established than past presidents in past cases. The three that would probably be the most comparable would be the 1918 pandemic (Wilson), the 1968/69 pandemic of Johnson / Nixon, and the 2009 swine flu (Obama). Here's a good link that refers to the 68?69 one;
Woodstock Occurred in the Middle of a Pandemic | AIER
This is fairly brief and a good read, I won't c/p it all. But this is the main point;
quote:
The only actions governments took was to collect data, watch and wait, encourage testing and vaccines, and so on. The medical community took the primary responsibility for disease mitigation, as one might expect. It was widely assumed that diseases require medical not political responses.
and;
quote:
Which raises the question: why was this different? We will be trying to figure this one out for decades.
Was the difference that we have mass media invading our lives with endless notifications blowing up in our pockets? Was there some change in philosophy such that we now think politics is responsible for all existing aspects of life? Was there a political element here in that the media blew this wildly out of proportion as revenge against Trump and his deplorables? Or did our excessive adoration of predictive modelling get out of control to the point that we let a physicist with ridiculous models frighten the world’s governments into violating the human rights of billions of people?
OF COURSE everyone knows the 2020 one is blown out of proportion as revenge against Trump. OF COURSE Trump has done far more, invested more time, involved more people than did Wilson, Johnson, Nixon, or Obama. They were under no pressure to do anything. It would have been laughable for Wilson, Johnson, or Nixon to do anymore than they did, because the public actually knew then much better than they know now, that there's no Constitutional authority for a president to meddle in medical issues.
I disagree with Trump that spending a few more trillion of our grandchildren and great grandchildren's money so today's generation can continue to enjoy it's air conditioning and new car lifestyle without interruption in the face of a problem no different than over a dozen past problems is the right thing to do, the "general welfare" clause not withstanding. I can't believe that only one congressman raised some reservations about that. Thomas Massie represents my district. (Yes, I'm proud) He'll be easily re-elected too.
If Trump was competent and effective and doing what was good for the country then we'd have effective medical supply, testing and contact tracing strategies, but we don't.
It's not the presidents job to take over private sectors of the economy.
Trump has resolutely refused to follow the advice of medical experts in these areas.
The high profile medical people that are involved in this are not politicians, and I believe them when they say that they have no political motivations. But they are grilled by Democrats and the news media to a much more intense extent than the medial experts in 1918, 1969, and 2009. Of course they have to answer loaded questions honestly, "will wearing masks, shutting down businesses, social distancing, keep at least some germs from spreading?" Their answers are then pounced on by the news media, and Trump is further hammered on.
marc9000 writes:
Several times, including just recently, ABC"s David Muir proclaimed that "PRESIDENT TRUMP REVERSES COURSE". Just like your USA Today headline uses the term "reversal" - it's an egregious lie. All he did was delay an action until a later date based on new information.
Reverses course on what in particular? Only if you describe what you're talking about can it be discussed.
I'm talking about what your link referenced, Trump's decision to delay the winding down of the Corona Virus Task Force, based on input from his credentialed advisors.
You mean like this Trump same-day 180:
That's not a 180, not a reversal. To continue on indefinitely doesn't mean it will go on forever. It just means it will wind down at a later date. The term "reversal" means to change to an OPPOSITE direction, condition, or position. To abandon one direction and all things associated with that direction. There's nothing opposite in delaying the same decision until a later date. The term "reversal" used this way is fake news. During all the confusion of the Obama administration's reaction to the swine flu, Obama promised 100 million doses of a vaccine by a certain date, yet after plenty of supply problems and unforeseen circumstances he pared that down to 40 million. Did the news media describe that as a "reversal"? You know the answer.
And Trump's reason for the switch? Because the task force is popular. Not because this effort chaired by Mike Pence is doing essential work leading and coordinating the virus response effort (or would if Trump would let them) but that it's popular. Everyone else thinks the task force should continue in operation because of the important work it is doing.
Can you prove that or is it just a left wing talking point? Could it be that his advisors told him its work is not yet complete, and he agreed with them that it's important?
Trump only liked the task force as long as it provided him daily TV opportunities to spread propaganda, lies and misinformation. The embarrassments he created for himself grew more and more severe, finally culminating in his bleach/disinfectant/light comments that forced him to cease the daily circus, the circus being Trump, not the other people who spoke. Once the task force ceased providing him a daily propaganda opportunity, he lost interest. Of course he wanted to cancel it, because he doesn't care about the country, only what gets him before the cameras.
A U.S. president, especially Trump, doesn't need to create special opportunities to get before cameras, he can get in front of them anytime he wants. The purpose of those press briefings, (if the news media would actually do its job) is to provide the public with information about what's actually going on. It never has been before 2016, and is not supposed to be, an attack fest by the news media. That's the reason he discontinued it, but he put up with it for awhile, he enjoyed it - he's quick witted and he's good at it. But it became nothing more than violent squabbling similar to what sometimes goes on in 3rd world countries, not the example that the U.S. should set to any foreigner that might be watching in this age of communications. In normal circumstances, a question like (paraphrasing); "Since more people have died from this disease than died during the Vietnam war, do you think you deserve to be re-elected?" would have been an embarrassment to the person who asked it, it wouldn't have made the person an instant hero to millions of others whose hatred of Trump consumes any logical thinking they might be capable of. Her heroism only lasted about a half minute. Trump showed no discomfort at all, he just went over some of the things he's done in response the problem.
Trump is an "ideas man", that's what successful businessmen are. He was looking at, talking to a medical person when he was tossing out ideas concerning bleach / disinfectant / light. He was in no way implying that people should make new medial decisions on their own. That so many of his haters twisted that to mean that people should inject themselves with anything, showed him that he STILL can underestimate the stupidity of some of the people he's dealing with. Again, if it were only one, or a small group of people who would recognize their own embarrassment and learn from it, the briefings could continue, but when the entire Democrat party jumps on board the stupid bandwagon, inspired by only one person, it seems to shield that person from embarrassment. Trump can see that continuing those briefings serves to do little more than embarrass the entire U.S. liberal faction in front of any foreign entities that might be watching.
marc9000 writes:
As long as the swing voters aren't paying much attention, it works for them. But when those who ARE paying attention take note of this and point it out to others, then it tends to cancel out any gains the crooked news media made.
It isn't clear what you're talking about.
I'm talking about the fake news improper use of the term "reversal".
marc9000 writes:
Polls taken of news media approval tend to bear this out. It's like when Trump stopped travel from China back in January, and was immediately called a xenophobe, racist, bigot, etc. by many Democrats and their puppets in the news media.
You're repeating a false complaint manufactured by Trump and being a willing dupe in the bargain. If you really think this true then try to track down news articles from right after Trump's January 31 announcement of the China travel restrictions that report what you're claiming. You'll have a hard time doing it because they don't exist.
quote:
This is no time for Donald Trump’s record of hysteria and xenophobia hysterical xenophobia and fearmongering, said Biden the day after the travel restrictions were imposed.
CNN ran a story warning that the US coronavirus travel ban could backfire and have the effect of stigmatizing countries and ethnicities.
The Chinese Communist Party’s official mouthpiece, the People’s Daily, called the ban racist.
WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus warned it would increase fear and stigma, with little public health benefit.
Coronavirus criticisms of Trump are sickening: Devine
This is another false Trump manufactured complaint.
No, it's something I noticed all by myself. Do you now need links showing how Pelosi and others have claimed that Trump didn't act soon enough?
Is there anything he says that you won't buy?
You and I both have sources we "buy". Yours is the Washington Post's and the NY Times. Trump is in his 70's, is a billionaire, and donates his salary. I really do believe he's concerned about the country. Your sources are not billionaires, they're after money, ratings, and sensationalism gets it for them. And to satisfy their satanic hatred of one man, a hatred that most Christians like myself can't fully understand.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3883 by Percy, posted 05-08-2020 5:13 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3889 by Percy, posted 05-11-2020 5:43 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 3896 of 4573 (876179)
05-13-2020 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 3889 by Percy
05-11-2020 5:43 PM


Re: Maybe a little planning is called for?
Wow, Marc, you've outdone yourself. I'm not going to waste time on most of the nonsense and paranoia, just touch on the few least irrational points.
I had a glimmer of hope that you just might acknowledge your carelessness, but I knew there wasn't much chance. Safe to say that you'll be more careful in the future when you tell someone they won't find links / proof for something just because you don't know about it, or choose to ignore it.
Given that over 80,000 have already died in a few short months, that the pandemic will likely continue at least another year, that unemployment is rising toward 20%, and that the deficit will likely exceed $4 trillion this year, in what way is the pandemic blown out of proportion?
A lot of corruption is involved in death counts, most of the deaths are the result of old age. We're not told, (it's probably not possible to distinguish between) the deaths that happen due to natural causes with only the covid19 virus present versus the deaths that are actually caused by the virus. And hospitals get more money for covid19 deaths - lot of money flying around. The other things you mention, unemployment, deficit, they've been caused by the panic, not the disease.
marc9000 writes:
It's not the presidents job to take over private sectors of the economy.
Public health is a private sector responsibility now?
Now?? Yes, just like it was in 1918, 1968, and 2009.
Deciding to close down the task force in the morning and then deciding to keep it open later in the day is a reversal.
It's a reversal in one minor decision, not a "course reversal". That decision was about 1% of the entire "course".
Accusations of all politicians, especially presidents, lying is about as old as the U.S. itself. "Bush lied, people died", Bill Clinton was "an unusually good liar", Richard Nixon, Andrew Johnson, it's always been there. But prominent news anchors lying is a pretty new thing. And I'm not the only one who thinks it's a SERIOUS problem.
Something's going to have to be done about it. Now that "the right of the people peaceably to assemble" (that's in the First Amendment) has crashed, we'll see how long "or of the press" manages to stay alive. Maybe it's time for a Fake News Task Force. As there are more and more news channels and opinion shows, it's getting harder and harder to distinguish between who is a journalist versus who is an opinionated commentator. This News Task Force (a committee) could consist equally of Democrats and Republicans, and could clearly designate who is who, and hold the news anchors accountable. Muir would have to sit out a few weeks, maybe also pay a heavy fine, for his Lie about Trump's "course".
What's manufactured is Trump's complaint that Democrats reversed course concerning whether the Trump administration acted early enough.
And here's the evidence, combined with my earlier link, that shows it's not manufactured.
Dems are Saying Trump Didn't Act On the Virus Soon Enough, So Here's a Supercut of How Serious They Were Taking It Themselves – RedState

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3889 by Percy, posted 05-11-2020 5:43 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3897 by Percy, posted 05-14-2020 8:38 AM marc9000 has replied
 Message 3899 by NosyNed, posted 05-14-2020 9:29 AM marc9000 has replied
 Message 3901 by Percy, posted 05-14-2020 11:23 AM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 3908 of 4573 (876261)
05-15-2020 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 3897 by Percy
05-14-2020 8:38 AM


Re: Maybe a little planning is called for?
You are living in your own dreamworld. I think you still lack a way to reliably identify what is actually true about the real world.
I think I do better on a liberal forum, outnumbered by about 30 to 1, than you would on a conservative forum outnumbered in about the same way. If it was anywhere near 50/50 here, you'd have taken a pretty good beating for denying something you clearly did only a few messages ago.
These are bald assertions unsupported by any evidence. You're blindly following Trump's lead in setting the stage for denying the virus is causing many deaths in order to justify reopening the economy not because deaths are overstated but because he believes that provides the best path to reelection.
Reopening the economy isn't only good for his reelection, the country's survival depends on it. I know the left wants it closed as long as possible, the House wants three more trillion to try to keep as many people idle as possible until November. Sink the ship to drown the captain. Some, but not all of them, realize they're on the same ship. Their plan? - swim over to the nearby communist ship, get yanked on board by the arrogant, armed agents, and collect their little tidbits of free stuff. Won't take them long to wish they were back on the Trump ship.
You don't really seem to care about people taking ill and dying, only about making up a set of "facts" that leads to Trump's reelection.
As you don't seem to care about children of the unemployed going hungry, about families going bankrupt, about small business owners losing everything, about people losing their life savings. With each day that goes by during this shutdown, more business owners reach the point of no return, that if everything opened back up tomorrow, their former lifestyle is completely through. Do you have no understanding at all for the enthusiasm some people, restaurant owners as one example, have for their chosen lifestyles?
marc9000 writes:
Percy writes:
Public health is a private sector responsibility now?
marc9000 writes:
Now?? Yes, just like it was in 1918, 1968, and 2009.
Percy writes:
Why are you wallowing in error like this? Public health is a public responsibility. It's in the name.
But the name isn't anywhere in the Constitution. It was nowhere to be found in 1918, 1968, or 2009 in any talking points. It's a brand new talking point invented by today's Democrat party, almost exclusively used as a weapon against Trump. Businesses weren't closed by the Obama administration in 2009.
You're straw manning now. No one said the entire course was reversed.
Muir said Trump "reversed course". He didn't specify that he reversed only part of the entire course. It's naturally taken by Muir's viewers, especially his targets, the ones who are only casually interested in politics, that he reversed the entire course of all he was doing concerning the virus outbreak.
So you're saying he didn't reverse one decision, he reversed on course. That must mean he has many courses. Did he reverse the stimulus course? Nope, no reversal there. Did he reverse his course to find out what China knew, and the time he spends deciding on what action to take against China? Did he reverse working with governors and the task force to help determine when is the best time and the best step by step procedure to open up their economies and get people back to work? It's beginning to appear that he has many more courses than Obama did back in 2009.
But this was just one example of Trump's schizophrenic approach to governing. Sometimes he acts on what was last said to him, other times he acts on impulse, other times out of anger. It's "China's doing a great job" one day and "China's responsible for the pandemic" the next. It's "we have to shelter in place" in the morning and "Free Michigan" in the afternoon. This contradictory ping-ponging between positions stems from the lack of any centralizing plan or philosophy. The "plan" is whatever Trump feels is politically expedient at the time. It works very well for him politically, but for the country not so well.
Most of the reason for his "ping ponging", is the constant changing going on with others who make decisions, he isn't a dictator, the political process involving lots of others make a lot of the decisions. As one example, the Michigan governor recently ruled that the state must remain locked down, but that states supreme court overruled her.
Mainstream news anchors haven't changed.
It's been a gradual change. But from the 60's to today, it's very stark. The difference between those like Chet Huntley and David Brinkley versus Don Lemon and Anderson Cooper is night and day.
As I've posted to many people many times, I'm not going to watch a video without a strong reason. Video's are an extremely slow way to communicate information unless they're very visual. I can read far faster than a video, so please summarize the information from the video you think important and provide the video as a reference, just as the Forum Guidelines say you're supposed to do.
That's exactly what I did. I led into the video with;
quote:
But prominent news anchors lying is a pretty new thing. And I'm not the only one who thinks it's a SERIOUS problem.
Then the vids clear description was;
quote:
Why No One Trusts the Mainstream Media
Then I followed that headline with this remark, complete with a follow up on how it could be done.
quote:
Something's going to have to be done about it.
It wasn't as picture perfect a way to follow that one forum guideline as can be done, but you have to admit, it's a much better job than you did with Message 3901. (well I take that back, you probably won't admit it) That video is only 5:20 long, it had a lot of information. And it was quite visual, Sharyl is pretty hott.
Here's some reading on her, if you insist;
Ex-CBS reporter: Government agency bugged my computer
and;
quote:
In nearly 20 years at CBS News, she has done many stories attacking Republicans and corporate America, and she points out that TV news, being reluctant to offend its advertisers, has become more and more skittish about, for instance, stories questioning pharmaceutical companies or car manufacturers.
Working on a piece that raised questions about the American Red Cross disaster response, she says a boss told her, We must do nothing to upset our corporate partners . . . until the stock splits. (Parent company Viacom and CBS split in 2006).
Ex-CBS reporter’s book reveals how liberal media protects Obama
I remember her well as a news anchor decades ago, she's older than she looks. She's one of the very few over the years who bucks the dishonest trend in one-sided news reporting.
You're proposing the destruction of an independent news media where truth is whatever the controlling party says it is. Your proposal will be agreeable to you only for as long as the party you prefer is in control, then you'll start blaming your News Task Force for fake news.
No, as I said, it would consist equally of Republicans and Democrats. There would never be a controlling party concerning what the committee would do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3897 by Percy, posted 05-14-2020 8:38 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3921 by Percy, posted 05-16-2020 2:27 PM marc9000 has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024