|
It’s not even that the policies of the GOP will end up reducing healthcare access as a secondary effect - their aim is to literally, directly reduce the amount of people with healthcare.
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 01:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 19:40 |
|
|
please stop quoting people on my ignore list tia
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 01:17
|
|
|
I don't get it. How does the fact that the current Republicans are monsters lead to tribalism and a rejection of caring about if things are true or not becoming okay things for people to do on the left? Like, a lot of the Republican agenda is way worse than not caring about lies, but they never would have mutated into being what they are today if they hadn't embraced a post-truth tribalist outlook on politics. The scary thing about that mindset isn't that it's bad in and of itself, it's that holding it allows the worst types of people and policies to thrive within you. Our reaction to seeing this happen to the Republicans shouldn't be to go "oh hey, let's do this too".
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 01:36
|
|
|
OtspIII posted:I don't get it. How does the fact that the current Republicans are monsters lead to tribalism and a rejection of caring about if things are true or not becoming okay things for people to do on the left? Would you please give an example of the mainstream left outright disowning truth and actively using lies and falsehoods to push a political agenda? Jill Stein doesn't count. People are acting like as of yestereday, the mainstream left decided facts aren't real and nothing is true, but those same people have yet to provide a shred of evidence to that effect. Dead Reckoning posted:Having a functioning democracy depends on a few things, including shared core values, tolerance of dissent, and a consensus to respect the truth even if it disagrees with what we want. Not caring about the truthfulness of information as long as it is convenient to your argument is directly corrosive to the last one. What event, exactly, are you talking about? Try to be specific.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 01:41
|
|
|
At this point are all the "loving LIBS are just the SAME" people just straight up ignoring the administration's response to the book and the fact that the author claims he has audio tapes of everything At first I was just amused by the book, now it's looking likely that it's all completely true
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 01:43
|
|
|
I will readily agree that the tone of the book is slanted toward mockery. But that has fuckall to do with factual claims. So all this hand wringing about how the left, writ large, has abandoned Truth and Objectivity is based on.....?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 01:49
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/nytmike/status/949078007179825152
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 01:50
|
|
|
Michael Schmidt of the NYT sat down with Trump at Mar-a-Lago as he was preparing that loving bomb of a story. https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/949080501163384832 Mueller knows a lot of details that we don't even have a clue about, though that might not be "enough". Trump's gonna blow his lid. Lots of poo poo how Trump wants Sessions to "protect" him in this thing. facialimpediment fucked around with this message at 01:55 on Jan 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 01:51
|
|
|
facialimpediment posted:Michael Schmidt of the NYT sat down with Trump at Mar-a-Lago as he was preparing that loving bomb of a story. So to zoom out for a second- imagine if the Mueller investigation substantiates all of the horrible poo poo that’s swirling around Trump, and even uncovers a few more things that were even worse that the GOP helped cover for. We as a nation will find ourselves at the crossroads of seriously examining a political party system that allowed this man to get elected, as well as a media caste that essentially gave him free advertising, and being trapped in a tribalistic FAKE NEWS NO YOU’RE THE FAKE NEWS cycle of refusing to acknowledge, let alone believe, the depths to which we’ve sunk. If we go down the latter road, we might as well get Civil War II out of the way because there’s probably no way to save this country as it has existed for the majority of the previous century.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:04
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Would you please give an example of the mainstream left outright disowning truth and actively using lies and falsehoods to push a political agenda? Had a post for a response and got distracted by school. This isn't what we are saying, this isn't about the media as much as it is accepting that everything about the book is fact and even if there a discrepancies, they are little white lies in the grand scheme and the end justifies the means. The author has a rather spotty record in which he pretty much admits to making things up to make the story more entertaining. At least two of his sources have denied quotes attributed to them and this is far from the first time he has had trouble with sources and quotes. If he has recordings then this will all be moot. The concern is that there will turn out to be made up stuff in the book which will only solidify the feelings of the Trump base and continue down the path that he started of eroding trust in the main stream media. I realize that the book probably isn't on the level of disinformation of conservative news however that doesn't make bad journalism acceptable. I am uncomfortable pushing over so far as to accept a loss in integrity or standards in the interest of results. That being said, I hope the entire thing is absolutely true.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:06
|
|
|
That’s a pretty good goalpost walk, all things considered.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:11
|
|
|
You can’t control fake news until you regulate it. Last I checked, FCC is a captured entity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:12
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Having a functioning democracy depends on a few things, including shared core values, tolerance of dissent, and a consensus to respect the truth even if it disagrees with what we want. Trump hates all of these things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:12
|
|
|
lightpole posted:The author has a rather spotty record in which he pretty much admits to making things up to make the story more entertaining. Also citation would be super cool for the author saying he's a liar.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:24
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:So it happens that the party you support is right about literally every issue, and the positions of your political opponents are morally equivalent to mass murder? Jesus loving christ, listen to yourself. oh word? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:32
|
|
|
^ ^ ^ e: You're at least as irritating as he is, n4i mlmp08 posted:Also citation would be super cool for the author saying he's a liar. The introduction to the exact book we're talking about : Michael Wolff posted:Many of the accounts of what has happened in the Trump White House are in conflict with one another; many, in Trumpian fashion, are baldly untrue. Those conflicts, and that looseness with the truth, if not with reality itself, are an elemental thread of the book. Sometimes I have let the players offer their versions, in turn allowing the reader to judge them. In other instances I have, through a consistency in accounts and through sources I have come to trust, settled on a version of events I believe to be true. Eugene V. Dubstep fucked around with this message at 02:36 on Jan 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:33
|
|
|
Yea he’s stating that the story is about how contradictory the WH staff are and masking the truth is policy. He’s not admitting to embellishing anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:36
|
|
|
Speaking of which, the documentary Voyeur on Netflix is pretty awesome for showing the flaws of relying on a single, unreliable source
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:37
|
|
|
at the date posted:^ ^ ^ lmao that’s not what you think it says.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:44
|
|
|
Imagine claiming to be a paragon of truth and how ignoring truth could hurt the left while using false claims to say that an author openly admitted to being a liar. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:49
|
|
|
at the date posted:^ ^ ^ lmao. "Why yes, I'll just outright say I'm a liar while slandering the POTUS, who's known to sue anyone for the dumbest of things". -what you think he's saying E: Any you think apparently his editors/publisher are that dumb as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:51
|
|
|
Yeah, again, there's no way this publisher would leave themselves open to a massive libel suit like that. Either he corroborated a lot of the claims, or he had recordings. And based on what is being said: He did have tapes. You publish a tell all non-fiction about the sitting POTUS, you'd better have your legal ducks in a row. Especially one as sue happy a Donald Trump. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 02:57 on Jan 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:55
|
|
|
The irony of being supposedly worried about truth while also making unsubstantiated claims that the author of this book is a slanderer and then running from those claims later is pretty rich. It would’ve been super easy to just wait instead of making claims that it’s falsified with no evidence to that effect. mlmp08 fucked around with this message at 03:04 on Jan 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
It appears almost 100% of all the Bannon and the deputy chief of staff’s quotes are totally legit. The rest of it is questionable and probably should be looked at with an extremely Bannon-tilted worldview in mind. Doesn’t mean it isn’t legit but something to keep an eye out for.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 02:59
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:The irony of being supposedly worried about truth while also making unsubstantiated claims that the author of this book is a slanderer and then running from those claims later is pretty rich. Did you read that quote? He's not "confessing" to lying in the sense that he claims he's just repeating what he's told, but he doesn't guarantee the truth of what he's writing, and until I actually hear the tapes I'm skeptical of poo poo like "Trump didn't know who John Boehner was." Also, again, this would not be the first time he invented quotes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Wolff_(journalist)#Criticism
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:03
|
|
|
^^^^the guy stating that some of the material may be not true isn’t him lying or fabricating. He’s writing about what people have told or said to him. How are you conflating this with dishonesty? It’s a caution to the reader that he’s presenting some stuff as it was relayed to him. Let’s be real. If there was any president to have completely glossed over having a journalist hang around the White House, it’s Trump. Not that I’m approaching everything in the book as gospel. I’d wager what we’ll primarily get out of it is a better look into the insanity. Get mad about policy. Gawk at a gossipy book. bloops fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Jan 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:04
|
|
|
at the date posted:"Trump didn't know who John Boehner was." The author never said that. Why do you make these things up?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:15
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:The author never said that. Why do you make these things up? Michael Wolff posted:“You need a son of a b---h as your chief of staff. And you need a son of a b---h who knows Washington,” Ailes told Trump not long after the election. “You’ll want to be your own son of a b---h, but you don’t know Washington.” Ailes had a suggestion: “Speaker Boehner.” (John Boehner had been the speaker of the House until he was forced out in a tea party putsch in 2015.) “Who’s that?” Trump asked. now pls gently caress off
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:18
|
|
|
http://www.businessinsider.com/trumps-spokesman-quit-because-he-thought-air-force-one-meeting-was-obstruction-of-justice-2018-1
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:18
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:So all this hand wringing about how the left, writ large, has abandoned Truth and Objectivity is based on.....? I was annoyed with people in this thread praising the ability to piss off the right with facts-whether-they're-true-or-not, not the left as a whole. I think DR needs to look at the idea that the GOP as an organization has gone completely off the rails and doesn't exactly represent a lot of people who consider themselves conservatives. The national-level GOP is basically indefensible right now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:19
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Bro_Pair/status/949083609184415744
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:20
|
|
|
In other news, Ajit Pai canceled his CES appearance due to death threats.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:21
|
|
|
I will say this: If that publisher did publish it without a good legal once over, its going to be hilarious to see them reamed in court
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:23
|
|
|
at the date posted:now pls gently caress off What is sarcasm or a joke, asks the goon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:23
|
|
|
at the date posted:now pls gently caress off Can you read? mlmp08 posted:Such as? Multiple people, including yourself, have made the claim that Wolff is making stuff up wholesale. But when asked to defend that position, you all generally just resort to generalities, personal attacks, and either deliberate or misguided misreadings of the English language.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:23
|
|
|
Way to call yourself out
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I will say this: If that publisher did publish it without a good legal once over, its going to be hilarious to see them reamed in court At least we have something to look forward to either way. Edit: Before anyone flips their poo poo again, that argument won me over and I doubt the inaccuracies in the book are the intentional fault of the author.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
Michael Wolff gets a bunch of second- or third-hand rumors, massages them, punches up the dialogue, publishes it as "now I don't know if this is true or not..." and then, absolutely 100% predictably, dozens of excerpts from his book are reprinted as sourced information. By the time it reaches the average retard like mlmp08, they're slurping it up as fact with basically no discouragement or disclaimer from real journalists. The journalists reporting the "excerpts" are using the same excuse as Wolff himself: we're just reporting on what Wolff said, who is just reporting what [anonymous White House staffer] said, who heard it from someone else, and there is no accountability anywhere. e: To be clear, I am calling Michael Wolff a liar, because I can't imagine most of the conversations he reports with quotation marks around the dialogue actually occurred (or were reported to him) in the words he prints. That on its face just doesn't seem credible. Beyond that, I'm also calling him and his publisher unscrupulous for all the above reasons. Eugene V. Dubstep fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Jan 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:27
|
|
|
at the date posted:Michael Wolff gets a bunch of second- or third-hand rumors, massages them, punches up the dialogue, publishes it as "now I don't know if this is true or not..." and then, absolutely 100% predictably, dozens of excerpts from his book are reprinted as sourced information. By the time it reaches the average retard like mlmp08, they're slurping it up as fact with basically no discouragement or disclaimer from real journalists. The journalists reporting the "excerpts" are using the same excuse as Wolff himself: we're just reporting on what Wolff said, who is just reporting what [anonymous White House staffer] said, who heard it from someone else, and there is no accountability anywhere. We'll find out if/when it goes to court. I suspect Trump's threats will lead to no actual filings, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 19:40 |
|
|
UP THE BUM NO BABY posted:Way to call yourself out I'm assuming you're joking. In case you weren't, I was referencing my past feelings about the Boehner quote, but dumbasses have decided that the Boehner stuff counts as proof that actually journalists/liberals/Wolff are just as anti-truth as the current administration, while having nothing to back up such claims.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 03:28
|
|