Not even his anti-gun talk?
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
The [Current Year] General Political/Salma Hayek discussion thread, part 4!!!
- Thread starter PaulF
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
- Status
Straw man alert. Your response did not address Kut's quote. Its almost like you didn't read it. Kut's addressing the "opposition" and who they are; the assertion was that it is a construct of the MSM. It isn't.
So, Bug, do YOU consider the media an enemy of the people?
I don't. There is a significant left bias, which is superseded only by the green bias. Bashing Trump draws eyeballs.
But, more importantly, they also get things right sometimes. ("Right" as in "correct.") Blind pigs and acorns, kinda, but to dismiss the MSM on EVERY SINGLE THING is as blind as accepting them on every little thing.
That's a conversation all to itself. The president gave us a figure of 200 remains to be returned. We got back 55. So where did that 200 figure come from? Did North Korea punish us for something, or did the WH just make that number up? Further, HOW do we know exactly who those remains belong to? We got 55 sets, and ONE dog tag. For all we know, North Korea has stuffed those boxes with gulag victims, kindnapees, soldiers from either side, or whomever. I'm not exactly one to believe North Korea to be an honest broker, and I'm completely without confidence in this administration calling it out (indicating naivety).
I disagree. I do not think he is naive. I think it more likely he would be delusional.
Because the GOP is more than Donald Trump (hopefully)...
Update: Florida House Candidate Melissa Howard admits diploma is fake | News | mysuncoast.com
Florida GOP state rep candidate faked her diploma from Miami of Ohio, somehow got caught (gasp), and is staying in the race.
T'would be another tally on the crazy meter if she wins.
Update: Florida House Candidate Melissa Howard admits diploma is fake | News | mysuncoast.com
Florida GOP state rep candidate faked her diploma from Miami of Ohio, somehow got caught (gasp), and is staying in the race.
T'would be another tally on the crazy meter if she wins.
We certainly do not yet know the identities of the remains from north korea. But President Trump does not do the identification himself so it is silly to blame him for what north korea does. The remains are in Hawaii right now where a lab is working on the identification. Any comment on the identities is premature and prejudicial.
Look, I understand how pleasant it is to go around spiking the ball after much of what Obama did, and what Hillary would have done. Believe me I do.
At the end of the day though, Trump isn't President forever, and eventually the pendulum always swings back the other way. We could actually take this time to try to change hearts/minds, or we and go around spikeingthe football as so many on the left did for all eight of Obamas years. We all saw how well it worked out for them in the last election, but that shoe will eventually be on the other foot.
I'm talking about how funny it is that some people can completely miss the reality of the media left end bias or even try to deny it. Not sure where you get spiking from that but whatever you mean I'm sure it makes sense.
Last edited:
It’s not ignoring the bias, it’s eating it up hook, line and sinker.
If two scoops of ice cream is breaking news and you are upset about that there is a problem.
If all you rely on for info is 90% negative it’s just confirmation bias.
Quick Example: Look at the Time rag covers for the difference in coverage.
It’s media driven tone, and to not be able to see it’s one sided means you are likely on that side.
Trust in mainstream media polls always have higher numbers trust from democrat respondents.
I don't disagree with you at all. My point goes to how to respond to it.
Reponding to it with: "The glorious uncriticizable Donald shall continue to kick all you stupid asses forever and ever amen, because you are deranged idiots. " sets us up for a return of the favor down the road.
Conversely, acknowledging when he ACTUALLY screws up actually takes the wind out of the MSM's histrionics.
Finger pointing and mocking are a poor substitute for an actual rational discussion. For whatever reason, it seems to me like a bunch of people think that because the MSM gave up on any sort of integrity, that makes it OK to do the same thing back.
Last edited:
Cenk Uyger is one that comes to mind - he even claimed the media is biased in favor of the right. Now that, there is funny.
I could also find posts on INGO that claim the Chicago Tribune and NY Times are not biased. Again, very funny.
I have never said this 'funnyness' justifies anything - not sure where you got that.
Well, I meant here on INGO. I don't think anyone here would defend the entirety of the MSM as not being at least left-leaning. (Except maybe Fox. Maybe.)
Naturally, that's even relative, though. Some are dramatically more left than others. And for some - and I'd usually put the NYT in this bucket - their opinion stuff is left, but there fact reporting is generally just that. It should be read as coming from a left-leaning entity, but their fact stuff is usually pretty good.
The problem - as I see it - is when ALL reporting is flat out rejected as being the enemy of the people. That turns things into a Trump echo chamber. And that's not a good thing, either.
What we have now in the media IN GENERAL is an anti-Trump echo chamber. Hardly a good thing for our country. Nice twist though.
I think the above entirely situation dependent. I would agree that it is wrong, morally, for the media to spread disinformation or unjustly attack the president in order to create public animosity. That is bad for the health of the nation, and confidence in the press. However, it should be expected, and considered a "good" thing, when the criticisms are valid. But this a dynamic that works both ways. When president falls off the turnip wagon, and goes on his tirades, lies, or subverts the truth, that is also (and IMO more of) a bad thing, as he is supposed to be beholden to us, collectively. The press isn't bound by such notions.
Fargo , although I'm going to steal your post it is not my intention to single you out in what follows. It's just a good starting point for what I want to attempt to illuminate
I'm pretty sure I won't surprise many people if I reveal that I am an unrepentant Trump supporter, think he is accomplishing some good and useful things and that I in no way regret my vote and look forward to voting for him again
What I have trouble understanding is why the people having second thoughts about Trump; or those who never voted for him anyway, need me to jump on their bandwagon. An enormous amount of time and energy is spent on this forum to document they ways Trump has fallen short of many peoples standards in many different areas. That's fine, I do not begrudge people the time they wish to spend in that pursuit; I just wonder why they seem to need my approval. All of that effort seems targeted at convincing folks like me that they are right and I am wrong. Sometimes it feels like they want me to question my own morality because I support Trump but Trump does [variously defined by various people] bad things. It has an uncomfortable feel of proselytizing with a goal of conversion, that they feel they are saving me from sin or error.
All should feel absolutely free to support the president, as I do, or take him to task; I guess I just don't see why some can't stand alone but seem to be seeking a Greek chorus for their viewpoint
I have even toyed with the idea of polling the suggestion of having shorthand icons we could include in our signatures - perhaps a black star for Trumpers, a red star for never Trump and a green star as for Trump but with reservations. It could probably save a lot of time and finger fatigue
But alas, I fear people would not/could not clearly and honestly sort themselves and we would end up with even more arguments about nuance - or worse yet, wind up with 53 star colors instead of three
So to sum up, I'm perfectly fat, dumb and happy as a Trump supporter. Engage me on where you disagree with my beliefs and I'll happily join the fray, just get over the idea that you can convince me to join your side (or that some of your own legitimacy depends on doing so)
Again, I wish to emphasize that this is not directed at Fargo or any particular member specifically. Just a general observation
Not directed at you Bug:
What troubles me about both ends of this is the "conviction without integrity" aspects apparent in both ends of the argument.
I decry this going both ways as I believe that right/wrong and truth/falsehood both do matter and SHOULD matter to anyone who cares about their country. The alternative is a tribal bloodbath as the political pendulum swings.
I maintain that it is perfectly rational to support trump or to oppose him. I myself am torn both ways.
What I decry is tribalism over integrity.
Judge Donald on his actual merits/shortcomings and judge Hillary by the same standard. Lose the "but Hillary/Donald/libs/righties/MSM did..." as a justification and actually judge both sides by the same measure.
Integrity dies to the shouts of "but they did it".
I absolutely agree. But as I said, I think believing or knowing one supports the right things is not dependent on the approval of others (or at least it shouldn't be)
If you believe you are right, you will stand alone if need be
ETA: On the subject of "but Bush..." or "but Obama..." for me at least the double standards for judgement, the hypocrisy with which some develop newfound zealotry to excoriate a particular behavior makes it particularly tempting to point out. I don't use it so much to excuse the behavior as to question the veracity of the complainant. Ad Hom is always about the man
Last edited:
I absolutely agree. My argument here is not really political, it is more that the same principles and rules HAVE TO apply to everyone on both sides or history tends to show we end up in a pretty barbaric place.
Trump is neither the 2nd Coming nor the Antichrist, but you would never guess that from some of the religious tribalism being encouraged on both sides.
ETA: Hypocrisy should be pointed out and excoriated, but never used as a justification for ones own bad behavior. I'm pretty sure we are in agreement on this.
- Status
