Who wants to live in big cities?
- Thread starter Goose cock
- Start date
As contrary as this may sound to my last post- I do not agree Obama was the worst President ever. Bush Sr or Jimmy Carter get that designation from me... Obama did a lot of really great things to help bring America back from the financial ruin caused by Bill Clinton’s policies that forced banks into unsound lending practices. Obama was perhaps the greatest orator I have seen and did a wonderful job of communicating with America in a way that made everyone “feel good”, Obama got Bin Laden- say whatever you like, he ordered the raid, he made the call he gets the credit- Obama did plenty of good and had great intentions... Where he failed was on foreign policy. He let America get taken advantage of on every deal he signed with allies and enemies alike (IRAN amirite?) and after bent over and let everyone have a turn he went on a world wide apology tour. He lit the fires of division that are burning in this country today and Trump’s unabashed push back against that has stoked the flames into an inferno. Obama made mistakes but he was far from our worst president, I truly believe he is a good man and full disclosure- remember when I said in my last post I voted for Trump? I voted for OBAMA in his first term as well. I don’t think I voted at all during his second term because I was about sick of his BS, thought his VP was an absolute FOOL and hated the Republican candidate...
I certainly have an issue with privacy on my phone. My bank account was hacked last week. It also represents the free exchange of information... Background checks do not.
Phone privacy is absolutely an issue. It’s also a tool to exchange information. Background checks offer no such trade off.
So you don't have a problem with giving a gun to whoever wants one regardless of their criminal past?
You kinda did...with no background checks how are you going to control who is allowed to buy guns?
Well you said “give guns”. I don’t give guns to anyone. I don’t know anyone that does... I don’t have all the answers. ...As a law abiding citizen, I value my privacy, and I know the NRA is fighting against that encroachment.
People’s inability to think for themselves is the biggest enemy. The people telling you the media is the enemy are just trying to get you to look at the news sources that slant their way.
While he did roll back some requirements the economy didn’t change on any significant level. Things have continued on the same path they had been for years. They did slow some post 2016 but that’s just a result of everything hitting a peak. Growth forever just can’t happen so that’s just a natural leveling of the curve.
In terms of the trade deals I would encourage you to actually read what they are and not just the celebration of something new happening.
See, I disagree on this. There are people trying to sell you on their media, and the other side has people trying to sell you on their media.
Neither is truthful, and I believe both are destructive.
IMHO, the media is fanning these flames more than just about anyone, and so yes, I do think they (agenda driven media) are the enemy of a free, peaceful nation.
Now each side chimes in with "the other side are really the bad ones". And they're both right.
We’re you just as concerned with his favorite networks doing the same thing? You can’t sing the praises of someone attacking the media while extolling the virtues of another network that is doing the same thing. He doesn’t just attack the media for positive change but anything he doesn’t think is “nice”.
In terms of faith speaking and doing are two different things. When Paula White is your spiritual advisor I don’t think that speaks much to your faith.
Actually we agree on this. People have promoted the current media mess and they all think it’s just one way. That why I said the people are really their own worst enemy because they’ve fostered a culture where they don’t want to think and want things spoon fed to them.
I did not directly mention anything about one media network over another in my comments, much less “extole the virtue” of one vs another- what are you talking about?
If you want my take on the media- News no longer exists in America today. Perfect example- yesterday I turned on the news and Fox had nothing but violent looters trashing NYC and all of their talk and headlines focused on the out of control terrorism engulfing US cities... Then I tubed to CNN and it was all about how “Evil Trump gases peaceful protests for a photo opp”. So- which is it? Are our cities overrun with anarchist terrorist organizations trying to kill us all or is the government attacking peaceful protesters with military force?
NEWS= FACTS
Our media today is no longer “news”, it is all opinion pieces slanted to illicit the most violent reaction from their target audience. The news is sowing the seeds of division in this country and social media takes it to a whole other level as people can just unfollow any view points they disagree with and have their feeds filled with all manner of unchecked nonsense that reinforces what they already believed creating an echo chamber effect that causes us to actually believe no opinions are right or should matter but our own. This leads to what we see in the streets today- lost souls thinking they are the only ones who are right and must FORCE their opinions on the rest of America and that no matter how awful their actions are they are justified doing them because they think their opinions are FACTS.
That is my take on the media- Fox and CNN can both catch these hands (as the kids say these days... Or is that old now too?)
I'll buy that. I just use the phrase "enemy of the people" when I discuss the press, but I see where you're saying that's on the public for clamoring for it.
But I do believe strongly that slanted news with agendas are a very bad thing for our country. Even into "enemy" type areas...
Of course- so, which one? More importantly though why? See that is the issue here- how do any of us know which is more true? We rely on the news to tell us the truth and when they put their own political slant on the news we get to the point where two different stories are being told about the same events depending on which channel you watch... Where do we get the facts from now?
I agree with that. My point is the “taking on the media” is one sided and if the big push is on getting back to news that pressure needs to be applied across the board not just because you like the slant one does over the other. My biggest concern is the growing number of people who see Fox News as too balanced. When people start looking for the most extreme spin possible the problem isn’t the media.
USTR.gov will have the agreements. Not the most exciting reads but it’s there.
Who is thinking for them?. It's no cop out, I said media... All Main Stream Media.
Oh sure- there should be sweeping reform to how news is reported. I think the government can do it without limiting free press too. There is a rather simple solution that harkens back to those ancient rags we used to call “news papers”- they reported the facts in one clearly labeled section of the paper and then if you wanted to read dear abby or editorial opinions.. there was an “opinion” section. Simply require that for media to be identified as “news”, only facts can be reported. If they want to spend their time preaching “Trump is God” rhetoric, they have to call their channel/ show “Fox OPINION”... If CNN wants to have Anderson Cooper curse out the president and vomit on camera after every remark Trump makes, they are now “CON” (ironic turn of events what adding Opinion to their name turned their abbreviation into LOL)... You get the point. There used to be a thing called journalistic integrity and I am not sure who murdered it or why we sit back and ignore this problem as a society but we need now more than ever to have a news source with true journalistic integrity. As far as I know it does not exist today.
Agreed but they are only providing what people are asking for and that is the problem.
I don't believe that.. I think they are providing their ideology. They are trying to persuade their audience to believe as they believe.
They care about ratings and advertising dollars. If people stopped watching they would change their tune. There is a reason certain anchors are gone from channels once they show any level of actual honest reporting.
Obviously CNN and MSNBC care nothing about ratings. It's all day bash Trump no matter what
Depends on the deal. The new trade deal with Mexico and Canada has some provisions that would increase production in North America in that it slightly increases in the amount of products that have to be produced in one of the three countries as opposed to importing from somewhere else but odds aren’t good anyone is going to open a new plant just for an 11% increase (I think that’s what it was but it’s been a while since I read it). Even if they did they are probably likely to expand operations wherever the current plants are which are primarily south of our border. It does help American workers in that there were mandatory minimum wage requirements for auto workers but I don’t know how many places were paying less than 16/hr anyway. Mexico also gained the option of unionizing their auto plants but I don’t know enough about the Mexican work force to know if that’s really going to make a difference.
There are some real benefits for farmers especially wine makers. Again I’ve never really studied the wine industry enough to know how much market they would gain in Canada from that but if it’s in the bill I’m hoping it’s substantial.
Overall though it keeps most of the same free trade agreements and has no real provisions for increased US production. It’s a lot of hope that companies will do it but with no penalty for paying lower wages at current plants in Mexico it seems highly unlikely. To me I don’t see where it did anything to change the real criticism of NAFTA in that it just encourages moving business out of the US.
The deals with China have just been about waiving tariffs at this point. No real increases have been agreed upon so it’s not going to move then needle on exports even back to pretariff levels. Thus far the agreements have consisted of China agreeing to buy more goods if they can’t get them from existing trade partners. So really all it means is if they need 200 tons of soybeans and they get 100 from us but Mexico can only do 90 then rather than looking for a new deal with Australia for the other 10 they’d come back to us for the difference. That might make some increases but there are also no real penalties if they go ahead and go to Australia anyway.
It’s a lot of good intention but the results are all on hope. I still hold that the biggest impact on trade and the economy would have been to tie the tax breaks to increased US productions. You want to pay less taxes increase jobs and/or production in the US. The giveaways for nothing in return never produces results.
I know Fox likes the most watched moniker but MSNBC and CNN combine for a higher viewership number and they’ve decided to keep fighting each other for the bigger slice of the pie. I would love to see a real independent news network that covered things down the middle and find out how much people are really interested in news versus being told what they want to hear.
I don't know about that. I think it was January this year when I last checked on any given Primetime evening MSNBC had 1.7 million and CNN had 1.18... compared to FNC having 2.9 million. So, it's close but not quite.
I think for April is was about 3.9 for CNN and MSNBC and 3.6 for FOX but the gap is bigger in that 25-54 demographic that everyone goes after. That’s the one where they determine the disposable income lies and therefore adverting money is bigger and that drives everything.
He’s the closest thing to moral you’ve got if indeed your pro life, pro religion pro jobs and anti violence........ what else could you ask for?
that gets Ratings though... Trump himself watches it. Even if people hate CNN they will watch sometimes to see what incendiary things they say. I remember they talked about this regarding shock jocks back in the day. They would get great ratings ESPECIALLY from the demographics most offended by them because “they wanted to see what Howard Stern would say next”...
Moral? You can't be a serious person. He hasn't been moral a day in his life, much less a minute. He epitomizes amorality. If you think otherwise, you know nothing about him or anything he's done in his life. You should read up on who he actually is and not buy into who he keeps telling you he is. The hardest part about exposing a con man is getting past the embarrassment of admitting you were conned.
My point is that FNC beats there ratings if you add the 2 networks together. If they cared about ratings over ideology it seems they would mix in another view point.
Greatest Orator? Are you kidding? He could not answer a question on the spot if his life depended on it....He needed a teleprompter to get his thoughts to flow smoothly...
Michelle was even worse...for her to be Harvard educated...she could not complete sentences without saying, um, u know, in every sentence...check out her interview with Mike Huckabee...
Orator, he was not...Trump beats him hands down...he can think on the spot...
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
It sickens me when I realize Muschamp ran our program so far into the ground it's going to take- Latest: Southern Fried Chicken
-