The OFFICIAL Trump/HRC/2016 General Election Thread...

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!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    ArcadiaGP

    Wanderer
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Jun 15, 2009
    31,729
    113
    Indianapolis
    I am not a Breitbart fan. They've strayed far from Andrew Breitbart's values. And they've shilled for Trump the entire election season. But they pale in comparison to traditional media. Breitbart is small potatoes. The alphabet soup of media outlets has been shilling for Democrats for decades. And they will continue to drown out whatever Breitbart does.

    I don't disagree...

    Look, I hate to make this comparison, and I promise I'm not doing it to compare Trump to Hitler or the Nazis... but the most prominent example of this, in history, has been Goebbels and his proximity to the internal workings of the party. Literally a minister of propaganda.

    Have there been other outlets with this sort of connection to the President, this high up in his cabinet/administration, that also controlled a "news" outlet?

    Is it as nefarious as Goebbels? Unlikely. Is it still an unreliable propaganda outlet? Now, absolutely.

    No, CNN/MSNBC/et al aren't any better... but now we have this on "our" side... that doesn't mean it's good.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    There's a better, contemporary, example: Putin's Russia. There are somewhat-free press resources, but the laws restrict what they can say, and they are generally denied real access to important people.

    But, there are state-friendly/-sponsored news outlets that get first dibbs on access and stories.

    I seen Bannon/Brietbart in that vein. They'll get revenue and eyeballs because they are perceived to have access.
     

    HoughMade

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 24, 2012
    36,191
    149
    Valparaiso
    There's a better, contemporary, example: Putin's Russia. There are somewhat-free press resources, but the laws restrict what they can say, and they are generally denied real access to important people.

    But, there are state-friendly/-sponsored news outlets that get first dibbs on access and stories.

    I seen Bannon/Brietbart in that vein. They'll get revenue and eyeballs because they are perceived to have access.

    Worked for CNN
     
    Last edited:

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    I don't disagree...

    Look, I hate to make this comparison, and I promise I'm not doing it to compare Trump to Hitler or the Nazis... but the most prominent example of this, in history, has been Goebbels and his proximity to the internal workings of the party. Literally a minister of propaganda.

    Have there been other outlets with this sort of connection to the President, this high up in his cabinet/administration, that also controlled a "news" outlet?

    Is it as nefarious as Goebbels? Unlikely. Is it still an unreliable propaganda outlet? Now, absolutely.

    No, CNN/MSNBC/et al aren't any better... but now we have this on "our" side... that doesn't mean it's good.

    I wanted to make this comparison, as well.
     

    NIGHTRIDER

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 28, 2015
    75
    8
    on the road
    I don't disagree...

    Look, I hate to make this comparison, and I promise I'm not doing it to compare Trump to Hitler or the Nazis... but the most prominent example of this, in history, has been Goebbels and his proximity to the internal workings of the party. Literally a minister of propaganda.

    Have there been other outlets with this sort of connection to the President, this high up in his cabinet/administration, that also controlled a "news" outlet?

    Is it as nefarious as Goebbels? Unlikely. Is it still an unreliable propaganda outlet? Now, absolutely.

    No, CNN/MSNBC/et al aren't any better... but now we have this on "our" side... that doesn't mean it's good.
    Why do you assume your on "our" side?You have been driving a wooden stake in "our " side for 6 months.When "your" Trump starts burning books in the streets,Let me know.
     

    ATM

    will argue for sammiches.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Jul 29, 2008
    21,019
    83
    Crawfordsville
    Why do you assume your on "our" side?You have been driving a wooden stake in "our " side for 6 months.When "your" Trump starts burning books in the streets,Let me know.

    Why single out GPIA7R when he clearly put "our" in quotes. :dunno:

    Why not pick on me? I've been driving wooden stakes into both "sides" for years now. (I used quotes there as well). ;)
     

    Tombs

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    12,294
    113
    Martinsville
    I don't disagree...

    Look, I hate to make this comparison, and I promise I'm not doing it to compare Trump to Hitler or the Nazis... but the most prominent example of this, in history, has been Goebbels and his proximity to the internal workings of the party. Literally a minister of propaganda.

    Have there been other outlets with this sort of connection to the President, this high up in his cabinet/administration, that also controlled a "news" outlet?

    Is it as nefarious as Goebbels? Unlikely. Is it still an unreliable propaganda outlet? Now, absolutely.

    No, CNN/MSNBC/et al aren't any better... but now we have this on "our" side... that doesn't mean it's good.

    Can be good, can be bad. Depends on what people do with their new found powers.

    I'd reserve judgment. Whining about it isn't going to make it go away regardless, especially when there's nothing to really attack yet.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    Why do you assume your on "our" side?You have been driving a wooden stake in "our " side for 6 months.When "your" Trump starts burning books in the streets,Let me know.

    Why single out GPIA7R when he clearly put "our" in quotes. :dunno:

    Why not pick on me? I've been driving wooden stakes into both "sides" for years now. (I used quotes there as well). ;)

    Wait, ATM, I took that a totally different way.

    I think Nightrider (with or without KITT) is an HRC supporter. Didn't look at any other posts, but if not, that post doesn't really make any sense.

    At least not to me.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Top Bottom