Trump Thread 2.0

[phillipj]

"Noam Chomsky, in an essay titled, “What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream,” argued that corporate media organizations attempt to “divert” people’s attention from serious matters. “What are the elite media, the agenda-setting ones? The New York Times and CBS, for example. Well, first of all, they are major, very profitable, corporations. Furthermore, most of them are either linked to, or outright owned by, much bigger corporations, like General Electric, Westinghouse, and so on,” wrote Chomsky. “They are way up at the top of the power structure of the private economy which is a very tyrannical structure. Corporations are basically tyrannies, hierarchic, controlled [sic] from above. If you don’t like what they are doing you get out. The major media are just part of that system.”"

That is a nutty comment. He may agree with me on free speech, but this country is the best that's ever been including all of its flaws. He certainly disagrees with that and I think he is a fucking nut for it.

That is such an accurate comment! Great commentary. And one you seem to agree with! Powerful interests and corporations control the big mainstream news, or they are corporations themselves, and manipulate it for their bottom-line and vested interests. Anyone reading this here is going to agree. But certainly speak out if you don't!

And, No!! The Country is not "the best it's ever been." How do you figure that? The country has never been so unequal. There has never been so many people incarcerated. The country has never been in so much debt, whether we are talking the government, or numbers of individuals. There's never been so many people bankrupted because they couldn't afford their medical bills! The country is probably more divided and polarized than ever before. Lifespan in this country is going down and infant mortality and those living below the poverty line is going up. The homeless population around me has gone up 20% in the past year, when I drive to work I often wonder if that person lying over there is dead on the sidewalk. Job quality is overall worse. Job availability is definitely worse. Pay has more or less flat-lined for decades!

Its called politics. I don't think he has had any more influence on media than any other White House in history. I just simply disagree with you on that.

Trump works closer and in tandem with Fox News specifically and other conservative news outlets -- OAN for example -- more than any other President in this country's history. He also gives these very manipulative, spun sources legitimacy they do not deserve on the largest most powerful platform available. Needs to be acknowledged.

Fine, I agree with you. It isn't acceptable. But it is the current game we are all playing in and we don't have a choice but to roll the dice, meander about and lay our cards down. I am open to talking about what we can do to curb political influence out of media and vice versa. One thing for sure would help is to break up DC completely. Leave the executive there, move congress to Minneapolis, move the senate to Billings and the SCOTUS to Phoenix. That will help. It will make lobbying MUCH more expensive for everyone involved. Another idea I have is we should get back to 1 rep per 30,000 people. That would flood the halls of government with so much gum that the whole works would essentially stop. Again, it would drastically increase the cost of lobbying. Another idea I have is to make public service, in any form, limited by social security number to no more than 15 years. That means being a staffer, being a congressman, being a state senator, being a county clerk, etc. I got ideas bro. Tons and tons of them. You want to fix the system, lets actually discuss ideas.

Term limits, ok! But some way, any way, to curb lobbying and campaign finance should be #1; but let's notice who are the only people talking about that seriously? Can you name someone? Hm. I can.

First, blame the DNC/MSM complex for that. One more item of proof that the DNC hated Bernie. In 2016, Donna Brazile literally called her media cronies to get the questions ahead of a debate for Hillary Clinton. I can't believe that you think Bernie cares about people in the manner you think. MIND BLOWN.

Oh I do, and it wasn't fair. And guess what?! Fox head Roger Ailes tipped off his buddy Trump on questions before his Presidential debate, too. I do not care for any of these people. Roger Ailes. Trump. Donna Brazille. Clinton. They deserve each other.

And, I very much do believe Bernie Sanders cares about real, everyday people. How do I know? I met him myself. He is a good man.

[roguetoaster]

When '86 amnesty was passed, the Democrats in congress lied to the American public and told them they would secure the borders. That NEVER happened. Hence, the 34 years is legitimate. I will hunt around for your information about whether legal immigration is sufficient or not. That we need growth from immigration at all is another topic that can be discussed. I would say that illegal immigration should never be accepted. Thousands of Angel parents would agree. Those are crimes that literally could have been prevented: Crimes that are committed by people who are not even permitted to be here. That can't be argued either. You can say, "Oh well, shit happens" but its of little comfort when literally the laws are there in place to prevent those types of crimes.



That first statement makes no sense. Walls are borders by definition. Walls kept the Mongols out. Helped the Soviets destroy Berlin. We can argue about what constitutes a waste of time and money regarding border enforcement, but border enforcement NEEDS to happen.

It's fine to say that whoever originated the "problem," but since it hasn't been "fixed" since then it likely wasn't an important enough problem to resolve for either party. Illegal immigration is going to happen, and much of it is simple visa overstays. While neither of us could reasonably prove it, I suspect that crimes perpetrated by illegals occur at a similar rate to citizens or legal immigrants.

Walls didn't keep the Mongols out, they still got it when the walls couldn't be manned or maintained effectively. In Berlin the wall was porous to say the least, but was effective symbolism to divide the people. The fact remains that walls by themselves don't work to stop people any more than a lock on the door of your house, as anyone who is determined will still get in. Clearly we cannot allow everyone is who wants in, but we can allow more people in legally, which takes some of the pressure off of border enforcement. Basically, I think that a we could reduce border violations in ways other than by throwing money at a silly symbol, or even by just adding many more LEOs in the area.

[marshallnoise]

Huh. You're fully agreeing with his core beliefs -- so, what are these other ideas that are so "nut-job"? ... You're also the guy quoting con man Dinesh D'Souza as some kind of viable source and idea-man a few pages back.

"Noam Chomsky, in an essay titled, “What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream,” argued that corporate media organizations attempt to “divert” people’s attention from serious matters. “What are the elite media, the agenda-setting ones? The New York Times and CBS, for example. Well, first of all, they are major, very profitable, corporations. Furthermore, most of them are either linked to, or outright owned by, much bigger corporations, like General Electric, Westinghouse, and so on,” wrote Chomsky. “They are way up at the top of the power structure of the private economy which is a very tyrannical structure. Corporations are basically tyrannies, hierarchic, controlled [sic] from above. If you don’t like what they are doing you get out. The major media are just part of that system.”"

That is a nutty comment. He may agree with me on free speech, but this country is the best that's ever been including all of its flaws. He certainly disagrees with that and I think he is a fucking nut for it.

Yes. He has certain connections, the cronies, the revolving door, that kind of influence. The administration works in tandem with them. And, no "it's not new" but don't look the other way.

Its called politics. I don't think he has had any more influence on media than any other White House in history. I just simply disagree with you on that.

No, not new to me, or anyone else. Both of us, we don't want the press colluding and propagandizing for any politician, or specific party agenda, do we? It's not admissible to me because both sides do it. Not acceptable.

Fine, I agree with you. It isn't acceptable. But it is the current game we are all playing in and we don't have a choice but to roll the dice, meander about and lay our cards down. I am open to talking about what we can do to curb political influence out of media and vice versa. One thing for sure would help is to break up DC completely. Leave the executive there, move congress to Minneapolis, move the senate to Billings and the SCOTUS to Phoenix. That will help. It will make lobbying MUCH more expensive for everyone involved. Another idea I have is we should get back to 1 rep per 30,000 people. That would flood the halls of government with so much gum that the whole works would essentially stop. Again, it would drastically increase the cost of lobbying. Another idea I have is to make public service, in any form, limited by social security number to no more than 15 years. That means being a staffer, being a congressman, being a state senator, being a county clerk, etc. I got ideas bro. Tons and tons of them. You want to fix the system, lets actually discuss ideas.

What do you think I think when I see highly coordinated knives-out for Bernie Sanders in the MSM?? Here you have someone standing up for under-privileged individual rights and against corporate dominance and what's the MSM reception? You get both "sides" and all their corporate and political backing submarining him as hard as they can. First you'll get a blackout on coverage. But, later, if you're succeeding, you get relentless, overly caricatured negative opinion or out of context coverage. Take your pick, will it be Chris Matthews on MSNBC and his exasperated "this is like the Nazis marching on France" or is it James Carville on CNN with gobs of airtime fear-mongering, or is it a more subtle Anderson Cooper hit job on CBS, or is it Fox News doing all that and worse... I have no love for any of these corporate news entities. They don't really care about us, just their bottom line.

First, blame the DNC/MSM complex for that. One more item of proof that the DNC hated Bernie. In 2016, Donna Brazile literally called her media cronies to get the questions ahead of a debate for Hillary Clinton. I can't believe that you think Bernie cares about people in the manner you think. MIND BLOWN.

[marshallnoise]

So now we're taking definitions based on interpretations IAW marshallnoise, got it. Now I see how you manage to make these arguments seem rational to yourself.

I have no idea what IAW means. Not hip enough I guess.

If you think I am making up definitions to suit my needs, you are wrong. You literally did that yourself as mentioned above.

All the things you accuse me of sure seem like they apply to you. I wonder why...?

[marshallnoise]

It is up for debate, and saying something opinion based like we have been in a crisis for 34 years should certainly be as the time frame is so great as to generally cast doubt on the assertion. I addressed this either in this thread or another in P&R and the numbers that we know show that legal immigration is clearly insufficient to meet growth needs, and that illegal immigration (as far as we can guess) is within acceptable/manageable limits for this country, and has probably declined in the last decade.

When '86 amnesty was passed, the Democrats in congress lied to the American public and told them they would secure the borders. That NEVER happened. Hence, the 34 years is legitimate. I will hunt around for your information about whether legal immigration is sufficient or not. That we need growth from immigration at all is another topic that can be discussed. I would say that illegal immigration should never be accepted. Thousands of Angel parents would agree. Those are crimes that literally could have been prevented: Crimes that are committed by people who are not even permitted to be here. That can't be argued either. You can say, "Oh well, shit happens" but its of little comfort when literally the laws are there in place to prevent those types of crimes.

Borders are not walls, and have almost never been so historically. The scale of the wall is more the issue of course, unless you can continually patrol the entire distance and respond to an attempted breach in say 10 minutes it's pretty much just a token affair, which means that it is an egregious waste of time and money.

That first statement makes no sense. Walls are borders by definition. Walls kept the Mongols out. Helped the Soviets destroy Berlin. We can argue about what constitutes a waste of time and money regarding border enforcement, but border enforcement NEEDS to happen.

[phillipj]

Chomsky is a nut job because of every single one of his ideas except for his defense of free speech. I agree, all media that is for profit is potentially and likely poisoned. Clearly the founders never intended the third estate to be incorporated. Which is why citizen journalism is more important than ever.

Huh. You're fully agreeing with his core beliefs -- so, what are these other ideas that are so "nut-job"? ... You're also the guy quoting con man Dinesh D'Souza as some kind of viable source and idea-man a few pages back.

Freedom of the Press is not supposed to be hindered by the government or shareholders.

But seriously dude, you think that the President has that kind of influence over these companies? I don't believe that. Trump is and always will be a blowhard. He pisses everyone off. I am cool with that.

Yes. He has certain connections, the cronies, the revolving door, that kind of influence. The administration works in tandem with them. And, no "it's not new" but don't look the other way.

You do realize that politics and media co-mingling has been happening for the better part of 50 years, right? George Stephanopolous? Karl Rove? James Carville? All of them are political operatives who have been in administrations and then moved to media. Is this really new to you?

No, not new to me, or anyone else. Both of us, we don't want the press colluding and propagandizing for any politician, or specific party agenda, do we? It's not admissible to me because both sides do it. Not acceptable.

What do you think I think when I see highly coordinated knives-out for Bernie Sanders in the MSM?? Here you have someone standing up for under-privileged individual rights and against corporate dominance and what's the MSM reception? You get both "sides" and all their corporate and political backing submarining him as hard as they can. First you'll get a blackout on coverage. But, later, if you're succeeding, you get relentless, overly caricatured negative opinion or out of context coverage. Take your pick, will it be Chris Matthews on MSNBC and his exasperated "this is like the Nazis marching on France" or is it James Carville on CNN with gobs of airtime fear-mongering, or is it a more subtle Anderson Cooper hit job on CBS, or is it Fox News doing all that and worse... I have no love for any of these corporate news entities. They don't really care about us, just their bottom line.

[LowR3V'in]

so who would be a non main stream media and can they be trusted.

[phillipj]

Also, the popular trend and agenda setting media -- whether you want to say 'MSM' is the traditional national NBC or CBS, CNN or MSNBC, or you want to contend it is Fox, etc. because they are so widespread and popular -- they **all** love Trump. Trump means ratings and clicks and $$$. It's funny you say that MSM is "Anti-America". What is that supposed to mean exactly? They are "pro-Money" !!

It might appear that they "hate" Trump (in actuality the media should do their job and go 1000% harder on him because he is an explicitly corrupt and inept President) but all of them deep down want him to win re-election -- they love keeping him at the front of every newscast and at the top of every headline. "Breaking News! Donald Trump said [insert BS here]" ... He gets more free airtime for utter nonsense and ineptitude than anyone in the country's history. There's only one huge reason for it: he's divisive and it makes tons of money. The late night TV hosts want him to win too, he's a goldmine for them.


CBS CEO Les Moonves:

"It may not be good for America, but Donald Trump is damn good for CBS. Man, who would have expected the ride we're all having right now? The money's rolling in and this is fun."

"I've never seen anything like this, and this going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It's a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going."

[cale]

Dude, you literally posted definitions from the dictionary trying to claim that being a large news corporation means Fox is part of the "Mainstream Media" when it clearly isn't and never has been considered the MSM. Do you have a spine in there? Anywhere?

So now we're taking definitions based on interpretations IAW marshallnoise, got it. Now I see how you manage to make these arguments seem rational to yourself.

[roguetoaster]

The truth is, and always has been, we have been in a state of immigration crisis since the Amnesty of '86. Its not up for debate. The system is broken and has been for decades. Not knowing the extent of a crisis does not mean there isn't a crisis.

And if you don't think walls work, why did CHAZ immediately establish borders? Fuck me man, seriously.

It is up for debate, and saying something opinion based like we have been in a crisis for 34 years should certainly be as the time frame is so great as to generally cast doubt on the assertion. I addressed this either in this thread or another in P&R and the numbers that we know show that legal immigration is clearly insufficient to meet growth needs, and that illegal immigration (as far as we can guess) is within acceptable/manageable limits for this country, and has probably declined in the last decade.

Borders are not walls, and have almost never been so historically. The scale of the wall is more the issue of course, unless you can continually patrol the entire distance and respond to an attempted breach in say 10 minutes it's pretty much just a token affair, which means that it is an egregious waste of time and money.

[marshallnoise]

Why are you trying to equate a few week protest zone to a $20 million dollar / mile border wall between countries that doesn't work?

Cause borders are "antiquated," right? You can't be serious, are you?

[marshallnoise]

Wait, seriously why is Chomsky a "nut job"? Realize you just used his very intelligent and accurate description to bolster your exact thoughts! Don't kid yourself! News Corp and Rupert Murdoch and the zillions of media entities they own, including Fox News, is not at all different. Chomsky so often excellently illustrates how corporations and huge monied interests run ALL of these media outlets, be it right themed or neo-liberal ones, to shape and make their own agenda which is all about **profit first**.

Chomsky is a nut job because of every single one of his ideas except for his defense of free speech. I agree, all media that is for profit is potentially and likely poisoned. Clearly the founders never intended the third estate to be incorporated. Which is why citizen journalism is more important than ever.

Also, you just said "seriously, no one has ever, ever contended that the MSM is anything other than parrots repeating the same narrative over" -- realize I just linked you to a prime example of how corporate-conservative Sinclair is doing this all over the entire US:

https://kinja-vh.akamaihd.net/i/prod...il/master.m3u8

Fox and Newscorp, and Sinclair, and the Tribune Co. and the enormous multitude of other heavy "conservative" outlets that are extremely wealthy / powerful / widespread are definitely not the little guys. They are the agenda-makers, too. And making it WORSE a number of these work hand in hand with this President and his Administration as an official Propaganda arm, they even trade staff back and forth in highly critical roles. For example, something like 20-25 people have gone through the revolving door between Fox and this White house. That's unprecedented & alarming.

See above man. I am not thrilled about any media outlet, never said anything of the sort. Freedom of the Press is not supposed to be hindered by the government or shareholders.

But seriously dude, you think that the President has that kind of influence over these companies? I don't believe that. Trump is and always will be a blowhard. He pisses everyone off. I am cool with that.

Regarding the bold section of your quote: You do realize that politics and media co-mingling has been happening for the better part of 50 years, right? George Stephanopolous? Karl Rove? James Carville? All of them are political operatives who have been in administrations and then moved to media. Is this really new to you?

[phillipj]

Why are you trying to equate a few week protest zone to a $20 million dollar / mile border wall between countries that doesn't work?

[marshallnoise]

I loved it when he criticized politicians for following talking points, media for quoting those talking points (although several shown were probably parroting), to defend a position from DT that there is an immigration crisis, which somehow justifies a solution from a millennia ago (which he also alluded to), only to then clearly state that we don't know how bad the crisis is in the first place. The remainder is opinion, which is that his show offers.

Also, you two should just get a room already.

The truth is, and always has been, we have been in a state of immigration crisis since the Amnesty of '86. Its not up for debate. The system is broken and has been for decades. Not knowing the extent of a crisis does not mean there isn't a crisis.

And if you don't think walls work, why did CHAZ immediately establish borders? Fuck me man, seriously.

[marshallnoise]

They along with nearly every other news outlet that tops the chart of most viewed, that includes the likes of CNN and NBC. I'm not suggesting Fox stands alone in garbage content, I'm just not accepting the bullshit sob story of MSM has it out for Trump when the #1 news source in the country has him on speed dial as his biggest supporters. You're just busy parroting Trump soundbites, try thinking critically for a change.

No no bro. My criticism of the MSM has nothing to do with Trump. They have been anti-America for decades now. They pushed the Ferguson lie, the "Very Fine People" lie, that reopening the economy will kill people, literally lie. No one is telling 100% the truth free from bias. The idea that Fox somehow is responsible for the MSM dividing our country is just as much bullshit though and that is what you asserted in the first place.

More assertion without substance.

Dude, you literally posted definitions from the dictionary trying to claim that being a large news corporation means Fox is part of the "Mainstream Media" when it clearly isn't and never has been considered the MSM. Do you have a spine in there? Anywhere?