(08-03-2018 08:49 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(08-03-2018 07:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2018 07:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Oh I think Trump is rude and obnoxious, and generally an a-hole. He's just a typical New Yorker. I think the racist/sexist stuff is largely manufactured.

It is manufactured. I doubt he ever considers race, or gender in anything he does. He focuses on his objective, goes after it no holds barred, uses whatever leverage he has, and doesn't give up until he gets what he wants. That's all business. What people hate and why they have failed in attacking him is because he is not any of the usual labels they use to marginalize a candidate or official they don't like. And, he doesn't play politics. Even infidelity doesn't stick to him because he doesn't pretend to be moral. But if he tells you he is going to do something then watch out and get out of his way because he intends to get it done.

How do you pin down a guy who doesn't claim to be a better person than everyone else, treats everyone the same way, even if it is rudely and directly, and does what he says he will do?

The left has none of their old character flaw labels that apply. He doesn't even pretend to play by some set of rules or fairly. He simply does what is necessary to accomplish his ends, but apparently does it legally. He's their worst nightmares rolled into one, Relentless, Competent, Capable, and Unflappable!

you smarty farts write more words........I simply say XACLY! what he is....

if his posit/premise/thinking is wrong, he'll listen.........that's XACLY! what he does......

then he steers in that direction......

I really don't understand the personality bs.....it means ZERO.....just like ZERO = 0.......

I don't write for you Stinkfist. You would only require a succinct factual statement. I have to assume those who are blinded to fact, incapable of a logical deduction, and wholly sold out to their emotions not only need the facts, but need them explained in detail and carefully, and in as non threatening of a way as possible so as not to damage them while I'm trying to enlighten them.

Were I, yet in my own words, just to hit them with a sharp jab of truth, they couldn't absorb it. Marinating in the truth is the only hope they have.

Trump might be a hardass but I bet you he is also damn fair as well.

(08-03-2018 09:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2018 08:49 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(08-03-2018 07:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2018 07:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Oh I think Trump is rude and obnoxious, and generally an a-hole. He's just a typical New Yorker. I think the racist/sexist stuff is largely manufactured.

It is manufactured. I doubt he ever considers race, or gender in anything he does. He focuses on his objective, goes after it no holds barred, uses whatever leverage he has, and doesn't give up until he gets what he wants. That's all business. What people hate and why they have failed in attacking him is because he is not any of the usual labels they use to marginalize a candidate or official they don't like. And, he doesn't play politics. Even infidelity doesn't stick to him because he doesn't pretend to be moral. But if he tells you he is going to do something then watch out and get out of his way because he intends to get it done.

How do you pin down a guy who doesn't claim to be a better person than everyone else, treats everyone the same way, even if it is rudely and directly, and does what he says he will do?

The left has none of their old character flaw labels that apply. He doesn't even pretend to play by some set of rules or fairly. He simply does what is necessary to accomplish his ends, but apparently does it legally. He's their worst nightmares rolled into one, Relentless, Competent, Capable, and Unflappable!

you smarty farts write more words........I simply say XACLY! what he is....

if his posit/premise/thinking is wrong, he'll listen.........that's XACLY! what he does......

then he steers in that direction......

I really don't understand the personality bs.....it means ZERO.....just like ZERO = 0.......

I don't write for you Stinkfist. You would only require a succinct factual statement. I have to assume those who are blinded to fact, incapable of a logical deduction, and wholly sold out to their emotions not only need the facts, but need them explained in detail and carefully, and in as non threatening of a way as possible so as not to damage them while I'm trying to enlighten them.

Were I, yet in my own words, just to hit them with a sharp jab of truth, they couldn't absorb it. Marinating in the truth is the only hope they have.

my response was paying homage in 'my way'....

I love reading your prose.....it's spot on.....and you're right,....they couldn't handle it.....

if only the ones that appear in print could do that, eh?

I mostly agree that it doesn't much matter if President Trump is "rude", "obnoxious" or "an a-hole". But Owl 69/70/75 left off the most serious descriptor. Our president is incoherent.

That may not be a problem for you, stinky. You and the president appear to speak the same language. But, for many of us, President Trump is only doing okay in his job when he should be doing great. He is squandering an opportunity to better lead this country simply because he lacks (or is too lazy to use) the most basic logic and communication skills. If this were a season of Celebrity Apprentice, he'd be justified in firing himself.

Here's Kimberly Strassel's take: https://www.wsj.com/articles/failure-to-...533251094.

(08-04-2018 07:02 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  I mostly agree that it doesn't much matter if President Trump is "rude", "obnoxious" or "an a-hole". But Owl 69/70/75 left off the most serious descriptor. Our president is incoherent.

That may not be a problem for you, stinky. You and the president appear to speak the same language. But, for many of us, President Trump is only doing okay in his job when he should be doing great. He is squandering an opportunity to better lead this country simply because he lacks (or is too lazy to use) the most basic logic and communication skills. If this were a season of Celebrity Apprentice, he'd be justified in firing himself.

Here's Kimberly Strassel's take: https://www.wsj.com/articles/failure-to-...533251094.

Interesting.
Some of us think President Trump is doing a great job, in spite of the daily BS thrown at him. I love his direct approach. It's about time we had someone with balls in the Oval Office.
I certainly don't agree with everything he says nor his way of saying things but I almost always agree with the premise and intent of his statements.
I thinks he's exactly what this country needs, especially right now.

(08-04-2018 07:02 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  I mostly agree that it doesn't much matter if President Trump is "rude", "obnoxious" or "an a-hole". But Owl 69/70/75 left off the most serious descriptor. Our president is incoherent.
That may not be a problem for you, stinky. You and the president appear to speak the same language. But, for many of us, President Trump is only doing okay in his job when he should be doing great. He is squandering an opportunity to better lead this country simply because he lacks (or is too lazy to use) the most basic logic and communication skills. If this were a season of Celebrity Apprentice, he'd be justified in firing himself.
Here's Kimberly Strassel's take: https://www.wsj.com/articles/failure-to-...533251094.

We just had eight years of a great orator (some say) who didn't know how to get things done. IMO that was a good thing, because I didn't want to have to follow where he was trying to lead. I think that's a vastly overrated skill as far as a president is concerned.

https://youtu.be/ue_WQcFJd8U

(08-04-2018 02:40 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

This 24 second clip comes from a lecture she gave at Harvard that lasted more than an hour. That is yet another example of where the dishonest right-wing wants to strip away every bit of context from what she has to say in order to paint her as bigoted and advance their political agenda through race-based tactics. That has been a standard plank of right-wing politics for more than a half century.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...Trump.html

"Imagine if I tweeted that I wished to ‘cancel black people’?

Or boasted: ‘It’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old black men.’

Or spoke of ‘dumb*** f***ing black people marking up the internet like dogs p*ssing on fire hydrants.’

Now imagine me also tweeting ‘all women must die’, ‘all women are equally garbage in my eyes’ and ‘all women are trash that will never be loved.’

How long do you think I would stay in my job as Editor-at-Large of DailyMail.com - one second or two?

And how much vitriolic, sanctimonious criticism would the New York Times pour on my head after I was fired – one bucket or two?

Finally, imagine the ridicule that would envelop me if I tried to excuse my disgusting, loathsome, racist misogyny by saying I was only responding to trolls with satirical ‘counter- trolling’?

All of this sounds vaguely preposterous, right?

I mean, no journalist in their right mind, given the current hyper politically-correct climate world we live in, would even contemplate behaving in such a manner?

Yet that is exactly what Sarah Jeong, a well-known Asian writer at The Verge, did...."


"It’s a very real thing – I’m currently in LA, where half the people I meet spontaneously foam at the mouth at the mention of his name - and utterly self-defeating for those who suffer from it.

As I have regularly warned, perpetual outrage over everything Trump does diminishes the power of necessary outrage over things that are genuinely outrageous – like the appalling child separation immigration policy.

It’s also plays right into Trump’s hands if the same media that spends so much of its time being faux-outraged at him refuses to apply the same standards to its own staff that it demands from him.

The New York Times decision to hire racist, sexist, profanity-loving man-hater Sarah Jeong doesn’t just makes the paper look ridiculously hypocritical, it weakens them and makes Trump stronger."

(08-04-2018 09:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...Trump.html

"Imagine if I tweeted that I wished to ‘cancel black people’?

Or boasted: ‘It’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old black men.’

Or spoke of ‘dumb*** f***ing black people marking up the internet like dogs p*ssing on fire hydrants.’

Now imagine me also tweeting ‘all women must die’, ‘all women are equally garbage in my eyes’ and ‘all women are trash that will never be loved.’

How long do you think I would stay in my job as Editor-at-Large of DailyMail.com - one second or two?

And how much vitriolic, sanctimonious criticism would the New York Times pour on my head after I was fired – one bucket or two?

Finally, imagine the ridicule that would envelop me if I tried to excuse my disgusting, loathsome, racist misogyny by saying I was only responding to trolls with satirical ‘counter- trolling’?

All of this sounds vaguely preposterous, right?

I mean, no journalist in their right mind, given the current hyper politically-correct climate world we live in, would even contemplate behaving in such a manner?

Yet that is exactly what Sarah Jeong, a well-known Asian writer at The Verge, did...."


"It’s a very real thing – I’m currently in LA, where half the people I meet spontaneously foam at the mouth at the mention of his name - and utterly self-defeating for those who suffer from it.

As I have regularly warned, perpetual outrage over everything Trump does diminishes the power of necessary outrage over things that are genuinely outrageous – like the appalling child separation immigration policy.

It’s also plays right into Trump’s hands if the same media that spends so much of its time being faux-outraged at him refuses to apply the same standards to its own staff that it demands from him.

The New York Times decision to hire racist, sexist, profanity-loving man-hater Sarah Jeong doesn’t just makes the paper look ridiculously hypocritical, it weakens them and makes Trump stronger."

The problem here Bullet is that this politically correct world is only demanding accountability for one side, their opposition. So you had better bet your bottom dollar that they not only contemplate behaving in such a manner, but that they do it intentionally to try to provoke an emotional response from you so that you might be labeled and dismissed as a bigot or hate monger.

What they don't respond well to, and aren't prepared to handle, and absolutely go ballistic over, is a calm, logical, coherent, and understandable response that leaves them as the ones responding emotionally and looking like the bigots and hate mongers they are.

Every time that happens brother, a bell goes off, and another angel gets his wings, to quote It's a Wonderful Life. Why? Because the current evil in our midst digs their own public opinion graves a little bit deeper every time they lose their cool whether the bogus media calls them on it or not.

"A soft answer turneth away wrath." And the real hate mongers who want an object to hate and destroy in order to try to make up for their own personal deficits simply can't handle the truth when it is delivered in peace. They can't beat it and they know it. Christ taught it. Ghandi practiced it. And those pretty little hippie girls putting daises in the barrels of the National Guard's Springfield O3/A3's did more damage to the Viet Nam war effort than all of the Weather Underground did with bombings.

(08-04-2018 09:55 PM)Momus Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 02:40 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

This 24 second clip comes from a lecture she gave at Harvard that lasted more than an hour. That is yet another example of where the dishonest right-wing wants to strip away every bit of context from what she has to say in order to paint her as bigoted and advance their political agenda through race-based tactics. That has been a standard plank of right-wing politics for more than a half century.

"She regrets it, and The Times does not condone it.”
https://www.news.com.au/finance/business...7d6939f2e0
Even the leftist pond scum had to apologize.

Global news story!

(08-04-2018 09:55 PM)Momus Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 02:40 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

This 24 second clip comes from a lecture she gave at Harvard that lasted more than an hour. That is yet another example of where the dishonest right-wing wants to strip away every bit of context from what she has to say in order to paint her as bigoted and advance their political agenda through race-based tactics. That has been a standard plank of right-wing politics for more than a half century.

And your point is?

Did she say those words, or not? It's pretty hard to place that statement in any context that does not make it racist, sexist, and obnoxious. But go ahead and feel free to give it a try.

(08-05-2018 06:26 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 09:55 PM)Momus Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 02:40 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

This 24 second clip comes from a lecture she gave at Harvard that lasted more than an hour. That is yet another example of where the dishonest right-wing wants to strip away every bit of context from what she has to say in order to paint her as bigoted and advance their political agenda through race-based tactics. That has been a standard plank of right-wing politics for more than a half century.

"She regrets it, and The Times does not condone it.”
https://www.news.com.au/finance/business...7d6939f2e0
Even the leftist pond scum had to apologize.
Global news story!

"Regretting" it is not good enough.

(08-05-2018 09:16 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 06:26 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 09:55 PM)Momus Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 02:40 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

This 24 second clip comes from a lecture she gave at Harvard that lasted more than an hour. That is yet another example of where the dishonest right-wing wants to strip away every bit of context from what she has to say in order to paint her as bigoted and advance their political agenda through race-based tactics. That has been a standard plank of right-wing politics for more than a half century.

"She regrets it, and The Times does not condone it.”
https://www.news.com.au/finance/business...7d6939f2e0
Even the leftist pond scum had to apologize.
Global news story!

"Regretting" it is not good enough.

I agree with you. There are a gazillion legal Tech writers out there. Moreover any lawyer who specializes in this practice, who isn't a racist, would have a good hire for the editorial board. She doesn't even have a legal practice.

Lulz

She's a goner now, this will get her fired

(08-05-2018 09:23 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 09:16 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-05-2018 06:26 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 09:55 PM)Momus Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 02:40 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

This 24 second clip comes from a lecture she gave at Harvard that lasted more than an hour. That is yet another example of where the dishonest right-wing wants to strip away every bit of context from what she has to say in order to paint her as bigoted and advance their political agenda through race-based tactics. That has been a standard plank of right-wing politics for more than a half century.

"She regrets it, and The Times does not condone it.”
https://www.news.com.au/finance/business...7d6939f2e0
Even the leftist pond scum had to apologize.
Global news story!

"Regretting" it is not good enough.

I agree with you. There are a gazillion legal Tech writers out there. Moreover any lawyer who specializes in this practice, who isn't a racist, would have a good hire for the editorial board. She doesn't even have a legal practice.

for the life of me, I can't figure out why......lmmfao at idiots....

Journalists are held to higher standards. Is that fair? No. But it comes with the job. Same goes for law enforcement. Same goes for a judge. Same goes for a public servant. We don't cut ethics and morality corners on these sorts of positions.

She should GTFO. If she doesn't the NYT should go bankrupt.

Even if it is true that she was simply lashing out at abusers what she said was unacceptable.

The good new is that the NYT is going broke anyways.