Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Thread Closed 
Trump Administration
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
RiceLad15 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,546
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 103
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #13101
RE: Trump Administration
(07-28-2020 11:30 AM)At Ease Wrote:  
(07-28-2020 10:53 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I'm not sure which situation has me chuckling more - Donald Trump inviting himself to throw out the first pitch via press conference, only for it to not happen, or you spending so much time to write such a spirited defense of a rather comedic occurrence, despite it being plausible for a person who is infamously impulsive and vain.

Sure, this is all a lie by the NYTimes that's relying solely on POTUS' most ardent opponents as unnamed sources. Yeah, that seems a lot more likely than Trump wanting to take back the spotlight and saying he is going to do something before checking everyone's schedule.

Ehgads.

Yeah, I was going to ask, which is a worse look for Trump and his supporters? These tweets, or the responses to post #13093 above?



Yup, Trump is just getting out of the way of the experts and letting them do their jobs.
07-28-2020 11:31 AM
Find all posts by this user
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 35,448
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 966
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #13102
RE: Trump Administration
(07-28-2020 10:53 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I'm not sure which situation has me chuckling more - Donald Trump inviting himself to throw out the first pitch via press conference, only for it to not happen, or you spending so much time to write such a spirited defense of a rather comedic occurrence, despite it being plausible for a person who is infamously impulsive and vain.

Forest:Trees Lad.

There is a clear difference between defending Trump and attacking the times. You know this. Quit playing this stupid game.

I'm very clearly attacking the Times, who go to such ridiculous lengths to try and find fault in every little thing that Trump says.... but you also have some blame in that as well, because it is your clicking on and then reposting the story... seeking MORE clicks... which is precisely why the Times writes such drivel. Clicks = money.

I didn't click on the link. I simply read what you said it said... and I can tell simply by what you said it said that it's written by someone seeking clicks, not reporting news. All I'm trying to get YOU to do is to recognize it and to stop feeding it... and I see that as being worth the 90 seconds it takes me to post things like this. Probably less than it took for you to find the link, read the link, create the thread and repost the link.

The fact that I do this and this is your response doesn't make me chuckle... It makes me feel bad for the future.
07-28-2020 11:33 AM
Find all posts by this user
At Ease Offline
Banned

Posts: 17,134
Joined: Jun 2005
I Root For: The Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #13103
RE: Trump Administration
Today's corruption stories:

Quote:President Donald Trump's reelection campaign has "disguised nearly $170 million" worth of campaign spending "by laundering the funds" through companies led by the former campaign manager Brad Parscale or created by Trump campaign lawyers, a new complaint with the Federal Election Commission says.

The 82-page complaint, filed Tuesday by the Campaign Legal Center, contends that the Trump campaign's spending practices have the practical effect of masking payments — in violation of federal campaign-transparency rules — to various advertising contractors and senior Trump campaign staff and family members, including Lara Trump, the wife of the president's son Eric Trump, and Kimberly Guilfoyle, the girlfriend of Donald Trump Jr.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-ca...fec-2020-7

Quote:Under intense White House pressure, Senate Republicans agreed Monday to allocate $1.75 billion in their coronavirus relief bill toward the construction of a new D.C. headquarters for the FBI.

But top Senate Republicans immediately began distancing themselves from the provision after it was made public, saying they weren’t sure why the White House repeatedly insisted on putting it in the bill.

In calling for a new “Washington, DC headquarters facility,” the provision reflects President Trump’s ongoing interest in building a new headquarters for the FBI downtown, rather than a secure campus in the suburbs that was envisioned before he took office.

At a news conference Monday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) initially denied that the FBI money was in the bill, but then was notified by reporters that the language was in fact included.

Before Trump was elected, officials at his company raised concerns about a competing hotel possibly being built in place of the Hoover Building should the FBI relocate to the suburbs.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/...-congress/
07-28-2020 11:46 AM
Find all posts by this user
RiceLad15 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,546
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 103
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #13104
RE: Trump Administration
(07-28-2020 11:33 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(07-28-2020 10:53 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I'm not sure which situation has me chuckling more - Donald Trump inviting himself to throw out the first pitch via press conference, only for it to not happen, or you spending so much time to write such a spirited defense of a rather comedic occurrence, despite it being plausible for a person who is infamously impulsive and vain.

Forest:Trees Lad.

There is a clear difference between defending Trump and attacking the times. You know this. Quit playing this stupid game.

I'm very clearly attacking the Times, who go to such ridiculous lengths to try and find fault in every little thing that Trump says.... but you also have some blame in that as well, because it is your clicking on and then reposting the story... seeking MORE clicks... which is precisely why the Times writes such drivel. Clicks = money.

I didn't click on the link. I simply read what you said it said... and I can tell simply by what you said it said that it's written by someone seeking clicks, not reporting news. All I'm trying to get YOU to do is to recognize it and to stop feeding it... and I see that as being worth the 90 seconds it takes me to post things like this. Probably less than it took for you to find the link, read the link, create the thread and repost the link.

The fact that I do this and this is your response doesn't make me chuckle... It makes me feel bad for the future.

This post is why I have pointed out how condescending and fatherly your posts often are - see the bold. You're acting as if you're trying to enlighten me.

But more importantly, there is a clear difference between attacked the Times and defending Trump. In this instance, you're using a grab bag of less believable methods to attack the Times by suggesting they are lying or using dishonest sources. Go ahead and attack them for reporting on something you think isn't valuable (like you just did), but you tried to argue that they talked to AOC or intentionally misrepresented what happened.

That is a bridge to far that goes beyond attacking the Times and defending Trump.

Honestly, this type of reporting does matter, because it provides further insight into the psyche and disposition of the POTUS. And POTUS has a lot of power and influence, so it's good to understand his psyche - for better or worse.
07-28-2020 11:51 AM
Find all posts by this user
At Ease Offline
Banned

Posts: 17,134
Joined: Jun 2005
I Root For: The Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #13105
RE: Trump Administration
(07-28-2020 11:33 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I didn't click on the link. I simply read what you said it said... and I can tell simply by what you said it said that it's written by someone seeking clicks, not reporting news. All I'm trying to get YOU to do is to recognize it and to stop feeding it... and I see that as being worth the 90 seconds it takes me to post things like this. Probably less than it took for you to find the link, read the link, create the thread and repost the link.

The fact that I do this and this is your response doesn't make me chuckle... It makes me feel bad for the future.

All you can keep doing is God's work.

[Image: PastorsprayforTrump1.jpg]
07-28-2020 11:56 AM
Find all posts by this user
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 49,482
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 724
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #13106
RE: Trump Administration
(07-28-2020 11:51 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Honestly, this type of reporting does matter, because it provides further insight into the psyche and disposition of the POTUS. And POTUS has a lot of power and influence, so it's good to understand his psyche - for better or worse.

Whooosh.

It provides a discussion into the psyche and disposition of the POTUS according to the biases and whims of the author, which is taken as substantiated fact by those willing to be fooled.
07-28-2020 12:47 PM
Find all posts by this user
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 35,448
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 966
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #13107
RE: Trump Administration
(07-28-2020 11:51 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  This post is why I have pointed out how condescending and fatherly your posts often are - see the bold. You're acting as if you're trying to enlighten me.

Lad.... first... Did you not consider what YOU wrote that prompted that comment?

I'm not sure which situation has me chuckling more .... you spending so much time to write such a spirited defense of a rather comedic occurrence.

So you're laughing at me and you don't find THAT insulting? I guess I should call you a petulant child, since you call me condescending and fatherly?

If I said... I'm laughing at you (which I did in response) I would expect you to take offense to it. That's why I specifically did it.

Quote:But more importantly, there is a clear difference between attacked the Times and defending Trump. In this instance, you're using a grab bag of less believable methods to attack the Times by suggesting they are lying or using dishonest sources. Go ahead and attack them for reporting on something you think isn't valuable (like you just did), but you tried to argue that they talked to AOC or intentionally misrepresented what happened.

That is a bridge to far that goes beyond attacking the Times and defending Trump.
How does an obviously farcical interpretation of their 'official familiar with his response' 'defend' Trump rather than attack the Times? They didn't even use the old 'White House Official', merely 'official'.... which I clearly noted could be quite literally ANY 'official' person who had been informed of his comment, including someone highly critical of him like AOC.

How you read that as 'defense' of Trump rather than an indictment of the clear bias by the times is really beyond me.


Quote:Honestly, this type of reporting does matter, because it provides further insight into the psyche and disposition of the POTUS. And POTUS has a lot of power and influence, so it's good to understand his psyche - for better or worse.

Talk about a bridge too far. So you feel you get insight into people's psyche by unsubstantiated perspectives from unknown sources? Or does it simply add weight to the opinion you already had? If they said they thought he was brilliant and humble, would that similarly give you insight? The CEO of Goya foods recently essentially did that, and the left responded by boycotting it. It seems not everyone agrees with your 'insight' comment... or maybe they think only anonymous sources give insight?

News: Facts. Trump said this.
Opinion: Speculation as to 'why' he said that, clearly identified as a possibility or opinion. It MIGHT have been because of Fauci
Opinion being presented as News: the presentation of that speculation as 'fact'.... aka Tabloid journalism or similar.

Let me try and demonstrate the difference:

Trump started talking recently about fulfilling the open invitation he's had to throw out a first pitch for the Yankees. Although he hadn't yet confirmed it with either the Yankees or his staff, he told reporters that he was going to do it on the 15th. Given that Fauci recently did that for the Nats, some have speculated that perhaps Trump's ego makes him need to try and get back into the spotlight.

That is a news story that includes clear opinion.... so it's still news.

What you quoted above is not.

Here are the things I have trouble with in the snippet of the story you gave

1) the 'official'. The use of 'White House Official' to imply some sort of inside knowledge or weight is all but ubiquitous within the media. The fact that they instead claim 'an official familiar with his response' jumps out to me. Not WH Official, not Party Official, not Presidential Office Official... but 'official familiar with what he said'... that literally to me could be anyone.

2) Other than they're familiar with his reaction (does that mean someone told them about it, or they were present for it?) is there anything that causes you to believe that this person actually HAS any insight into Trump's psyche? If it doesn't, and I don't see that it does, then your response above is completely moot.

3) 'the problem' that although Trump had already had his people reach out to the Yankees, that they didn't confirm a date... so Trump's 'I think I'm doing that 8/15' is somehow a 'problem'.

All of this is completely unrelated to WHY he's doing this... but does it not seem likely that when Trump's people reached out to them... that they said things like...
a) is the offer still good?
b) what dates are available?
and c) that 8/15 was likely among those dates.... but as it had not yet come back to Trump, that nothing was finalized?

So the only 'problem' is that apparently Trump told reporters that he thought he would do this 8/15, apparently AFTER confirming that the Yankees would still allow it and that the date was open, but BEFORE making it official. As if that matters one bit. Yeah, I thought I'd do it the 15thm, but then something came up on MY schedule (when it was really on the Yankee's schedule) so we moved it to the 24th. NO Mr President, you can't do that because you told a reporter that you 'think' you're doing it the 15th... so now it's the 15th or never... yeah right.

So yes, I see this as just another attempt to add 'volume' (Trump's 'problem') to a complaint (Trump's ego) in order to tap into the large and voracious appetite for dirt from the left.... which is tabloid journalism... not news. I would and have said the same about others... I remember a lot of people making issues about Obama and his 57 states comments... to which I very clearly said... I don't know if he got tongue tied or was simply tired or whatever else, but we all know... especially as someone who was born in the 50th state (like my mom was, though before it was the 50th state) and went to elementary school there, not long after it became a nation (like I did)... that he knows there aren't 57 states.

I saw that as the same sort of 'add on' to legitimate complaints about his policies.

At Ease is only demonstrating my point by adding nothing at all to the conversation other than memes, name calling and drivel. You and I lad, frequently get into it... but we also frequently add meaningful commentary in the process. Some fairly regularly do not at all.
(This post was last modified: 07-28-2020 02:14 PM by Hambone10.)
07-28-2020 01:59 PM
Find all posts by this user
At Ease Offline
Banned

Posts: 17,134
Joined: Jun 2005
I Root For: The Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #13108
RE: Trump Administration
Of potential interest to our olds:


07-28-2020 02:10 PM
Find all posts by this user
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 69,908
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 2089
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #13109
RE: Trump Administration
(07-28-2020 11:51 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Honestly, this type of reporting does matter, because it provides further insight into the psyche and disposition of the POTUS. And POTUS has a lot of power and influence, so it's good to understand his psyche - for better or worse.

By someone who doesn't have a clue about that psyche or disposition, but does know how to express biases as facts.
07-28-2020 02:49 PM
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 




User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.