Jump to content

The Media's Portrayal of Trump and His Presidency


Nanker

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, bbb said:

I actually didn't know that Shepard Smith and Don Lemon were gay. 

 

How could you not know that those two were flaming fudge packers?

 

I knew it the second I saw their faces and it was confirmed the second they opened their mouths.

 

But in all fairness, we have the ability to change the channel when they are on the airwaves if we don’t like them.

 

America offers us great freedoms and one of them is the ability to never hear a word those two gay men say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, njbuff said:

 

How could you not know that those two were flaming fudge packers?

 

I knew it the second I saw their faces and it was confirmed the second they opened their mouths.

 

But in all fairness, we have the ability to change the channel when they are on the airwaves if we don’t like them.

 

America offers us great freedoms and one of them is the ability to never hear a word those two gay men say.

 

Why does anyone care who they like to !@#$?

 

Seriously.

 

Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

Why does anyone care who they like to !@#$?

 

Seriously.

 

Why?

Jesus. Because, the great book of fairy tales foretold about a carpenter sent by the sky fairy that it was bad.

 

Also said gluttony is a sin and so is judgement upon others but who is really keeping track?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

Right...  I haven't been paying attention...

 

Explain, in your own words, why someone's sexuality is relevant.

 

This should be good.

 

I did in another thread.

 

Simply put, the gay community hates Trump about as much or more so than any other group of people.

 

An individual can be gay all they want, but they continue their blind hate for Trump, so they will get called out individually and deservedly so.

 

You want me to leave their sexuality out of it............ fine. 

 

But if the people in the gay community are going to call the President all sorts of names, people will fire back on them. If they (and you) can't take the criticism of folks fighting back, then they shouldn't say anything in the first place.

 

Just look at all the names Don Lemon has called Trump the last two years for example. And you don't expect any push back?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, njbuff said:

 

if it's not relevant, you haven't been paying attention.

 

Their sexual preference is completely irrelevant, and quite honestly it only gives the left the ammo they desire to label people homophobes, among other things.

 

We can do better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LABillzFan said:

 

Their sexual preference is completely irrelevant, and quite honestly it only gives the left the ammo they desire to label people homophobes, among other things.

 

We can do better.

 

I get it. Gays are human too. But tell them the President is human too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, njbuff said:

 

I did in another thread.

 

Simply put, the gay community hates Trump about as much or more so than any other group of people.

 

An individual can be gay all they want, but they continue their blind hate for Trump, so they will get called out individually and deservedly so.

 

You want me to leave their sexuality out of it............ fine. 

 

But if the people in the gay community are going to call the President all sorts of names, people will fire back on them. If they (and you) can't take the criticism of folks fighting back, then they shouldn't say anything in the first place.

 

Just look at all the names Don Lemon has called Trump the last two years for example. And you don't expect any push back?

 

Criticism of individuals is fine, as it pertains to things that are relevant.

 

The sexuality of individuals isn't !@#$ing relevant, and the fact that you're using sexual orientation as a pejorative is ugly and wrong.

 

It's group think, and identity politics, and bigotry (though I'll allow that it may not be intentional).

 

It's reasonable, and desirable, in my opinion, to push back against lies and gaslighting by prominent members of the mainstream media.

 

It is not in any way appropriate to haul sexual orientation into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

Criticism of individuals is fine, as it pertains to things that are relevant.

 

The sexuality of individuals isn't !@#$ing relevant, and the fact that you're using sexual orientation as a pejorative is ugly and wrong.

 

It's group think, and identity politics, and bigotry (though I'll allow that it may not be intentional).

 

It's reasonable, and desirable, in my opinion, to push back against lies and gaslighting by prominent members of the mainstream media.

 

It is not in any way appropriate to haul sexual orientation into it.

 

Ok, guys like Lemon are bad people because they are dishonest "so-called" journalists and sexual orientation has nothing to do with it.

 

Is that more politically correct for you? I will leave the gay bashing out of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, njbuff said:

 

I get it. Gays are human too. But tell them the President is human too.

 

Regardless of sexual preference, the people who hate Trump aren't going to be persuaded away from that thinking...and calling them fudge-packers only furthers their resolve and makes discourse much more difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LABillzFan said:

 

Regardless of sexual preference, the people who hate Trump aren't going to be persuaded away from that thinking...and calling them fudge-packers only furthers their resolve and makes discourse much more difficult.

 

Actually, I shouldn't talk............

 

I am a one-eyed cyclops and shouldn't be making fun of anyone.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, njbuff said:

 

Ok, guys like Lemon are bad people because they are dishonest "so-called" journalists and sexual orientation has nothing to do with it.

 

Is that more politically correct for you? I will leave the gay bashing out of it.

 

It's not that it's politically correct, it's that it's a relevant factual accounting that leaves no room for rejection based on perceived bigotry.

 

If you want to hold someone's feet to the fire, you have to pin them down.  You can't do that when you introduce things like sexual orientation, race, sex, etc.  Arguing with leftists is like nailing Jello to the wall.  It's easiest to do when you first freeze the Jello.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, joesixpack said:

 

:lol:

 

You can't have a discourse with a progressive. It's pointless.

 

 

The argument isn't only for those participating in the argument, it's also for the reader who may not have made up their mind.

 

I would also offer that not everyone on the left is lost.  I would argue there is a sizable portion of that intellectual community who simply are what they were raised to be, and have not been exposed to counter arguments in a medium which forces them to think, and gives them a chance to respond.  I live in an area that is amongst the most progressive in the country, and I have these sorts of discussions with people holding views opposing mine all the time, and have found that given an opportunity for reflection over a long period of time, people can, and do, change their minds.

 

In fact the entire #walkaway movement was founded on exactly that idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

In fact the entire #walkaway movement was founded on exactly that idea.

 

I have my doubts about the scope of that movement. It will remain to be seen as to how large and effective it is. I will say it's commendable that you TRY to reach those people. I wouldn't have the patience to do it.

 

 

Edited by joesixpack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...