• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: The Trump Presidency VI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shepherd Smith, Neil Cavuto and Mike Wallace have earned the “Fair and Balanced” moniker, IMHO.

Their shows are the only Fox News fare I listen to or watch. There’s a 2-hour “Business Block” I’ll sometimes catch if I’m out and about in the car on Saturday morning.

I really do think they provide balance to CNN, CNBC and PBS, that I also tune into.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
I caught this live yesterday in my car.

Neil Cavuto’s response to tweets he got in response to his previous day’s show wrap-up.

https://youtu.be/YwPsFgplIj8

Worth a watch. I think he handled it well.
Click to expand...

Ugh, that guy sucks. And his comments about Trump were so... innocuous. THAT's what constitutes a break from the party line? The response from viewers just goes to show how doctrinal and crazy some of them have become. They can thank Fox for that. And what's the deal with calling Cavuto fat? Have they not seen the president?
 
Fast Eddie B said:
Shepherd Smith, Neil Cavuto and Mike Wallace have earned the “Fair and Balanced” moniker, IMHO.

Their shows are the only Fox News fare I listen to or watch. There’s a 2-hour “Business Block” I’ll sometimes catch if I’m out and about in the car on Saturday morning.

I really do think they provide balance to CNN, CNBC and PBS, that I also tune into.
Click to expand...

How do you know? What is unfair or unbalanced about Hannity?
 
acbytesla said:
And while that may be true, the overall homicide rate is significantly lower. The fly in the ointment.
Click to expand...

I think you're going to have to explain that a bit better.

Trump specifically blamed recent spike in knife crime in London on restrictions on civilian firearm possession, ignoring the fact that, a) the laws of firearms here haven't significant changed for twenty years, and b) the UK clearly has less of a problem with knife crime than the US does. If the US has all those guns, why isn't knife crime a lot lower there than in the UK?
 
Last edited:
BobTheCoward said:
How so? It isn't a requirement that in the role of legislators that practical considerations need to be weighed. Those strategies produce unacceptable results.
Click to expand...

Wouldn’t it be better to replace practical with emotional? Legislators considering the practical would be wise and necessary.
 
logger said:
Wouldn’t it be better to replace practical with emotional? Legislators considering the practical would be wise and necessary.
Click to expand...

Considering the practical is unwise and unnecessary. If the answer that doesn't intrude on the rights of others is impractical,then each individual just has to suck it up.
 
Last edited:
BobTheCoward said:
Considering the practical is unwise and unnecessary. If the answer that doesn't intrude on the rights of others is impractical,then each individual just has to suck it up.
Click to expand...

Not really reality in government today. There are some practicalities in government doing some things, like building roads.
 
logger said:
Not really reality in government today. There are some practicalities in government doing some things, like building roads.
Click to expand...

The military
Emergency Services
Keeping the water clean
Keeping the air clean.
Research.(Want to talk about all the inventions that were the result of government funding?)

For all the bad mouthing the government, the list of benefits is almost endless. One only need to visit the countries with little government to recognize this.
 
acbytesla said:
The military
Emergency Services
Keeping the water clean
Keeping the air clean.
Research.(Want to talk about all the inventions that were the result of government funding?)

For all the bad mouthing the government, the list of benefits is almost endless. One only need to visit the countries with little government to recognize this.
Click to expand...

The government doesn't keep the air clean. They take ownership of the air and choose how many people they will allow others to murder with polluted air. If they just established courts to handle the crime of assaulting with pollution, polluters would not have permission to go around murdering Americans.
 
BobTheCoward said:
The government doesn't keep the air clean. They take ownership of the air and choose how many people they will allow others to murder with polluted air. If they just established courts to handle the crime of assaulting with pollution, polluters would not have permission to go around murdering Americans.
Click to expand...

If you think that you are incredibly ignorant. If you compare the air quality in LA, Dallas, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit before The Clean Air Act in the 70s to what it was a decade later or what it is today, you wouldn't say that. Could it be better? Absolutely. But without the government regulating pollutants, there is little or no incentive for anyone to care. Not when there is a profit motive to ignore the environment.
 
acbytesla said:
If you think that you are incredibly ignorant. If you compare the air quality in LA, Dallas, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit before The Clean Air Act in the 70s to what it was a decade later or what it is today, you wouldn't say that. Could it be better? Absolutely. But without the government regulating pollutants, there is little or no incentive for anyone to care. Not when there is a profit motive to ignore the environment.
Click to expand...

By setting a limit on pollution above what kills many Americans each year, the government is consciously choosing their benefit over the lives of others.

Changing a policy that legalizes X number of rapes to a lower number doesn't mean you are helping. You are part of the problem.
 
Trump aides “hired an Israeli private intelligence agency to orchestrate a ‘dirty ops’ campaign against key individuals from the Obama administration who helped negotiate the Iran nuclear deal”

People in the Trump camp contacted private investigators in May last year to “get dirt” on Ben Rhodes, who had been one of Barack Obama’s top national security advisers, and Colin Kahl, deputy assistant to Obama, as part of an elaborate attempt to discredit the deal.

The extraordinary revelations come days before Trump’s 12 May deadline to either scrap or continue to abide by the international deal limiting Iran’s nuclear programme.

Jack Straw, who as foreign secretary was involved in earlier efforts to restrict Iranian weapons, said: “These are extraordinary and appalling allegations but which also illustrate a high level of desperation by Trump and [the Israeli prime minister] Benjamin Netanyahu, not so much to discredit the deal but to undermine those around it.”

One former high-ranking British diplomat with wide experience of negotiating international peace agreements, requesting anonymity, said: “It’s bloody outrageous to do this. The whole point of negotiations is to not play dirty tricks like this.”
Click to expand...

:eek:
 
Just to be clear, when they say "last May," they mean May 2017. This was president Trump doing this:
Aides to Donald Trump, the US president, hired an Israeli private intelligence agency to orchestrate a “dirty ops” campaign against key individuals from the Obama administration who helped negotiate the Iran nuclear deal, the Observer can reveal. From link in previous post
Click to expand...

This is bothers me greatly.
Trump has repeatedly signaled his intention to scrap the Iran deal, denouncing it as “the worst deal ever.”
Click to expand...

How would Trump know? He has no experience in governing, international politics or disarmament agreements. None whatsoever. This is when his bullcrap becomes dangerous. He can blather on all he wants about whatever he wants, but when it's a subject with real consequences it would be better if he shut up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom