Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Katelew who wrote (78765)	6/21/2018 1:31:20 PM
From: zzpat	Respond to of 364763

Did any of these women prove their case in a court of law or did the run to the media and get headlines? We all know the answer. Media whores are not the same as victims. Note Trump, a media whore. In my world, it's not news if someone says x,y or z. It's news when it's a proven fact. But fox degraded our society so now opinion, even baseless opinion is news. The liberal media (as you call them) covered all these opinion stories. Did fox cover the lies Trump tells on a daily basis? If not, why not?

To: Katelew who wrote (78765)	6/21/2018 1:36:34 PM
From: Sam	Respond to of 364763

All propaganda is the same. Yeah, right. "The thing I can't shake is everyone is lying. The President's lying, heads of agencies are lying ...we were told there is nothing happening here, there is no tents. There are at least 18 tents, at least 400 kids in this wired compound behind me pic.twitter.com/BJuZK2DQ3v — Tomthunkit™ (@TomthunkitsMind) June 21, 2018

To: Katelew who wrote (78765)	6/21/2018 2:05:13 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 364763

The photos depicting life inside the detainment centers have been supplied by the Trump administration. https://t.co/B6TRozEtTx https://t.co/WfdSVcuYtM — Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) June 21, 2018

To: Katelew who wrote (78765)	6/21/2018 5:02:33 PM
From: Lane3	1 Recommendation Recommended By bentway Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 364763

This poll and similar ones also show me that people like these polled are reflecting what they read. It's hard to tell how much the survey responses are a reflection of what people have read vs how much what people read reflects the inherent class difference in perspective between those addressing different audiences. Overwhelming, universal disgust is the immediate and natural reaction to Trump by us cosmopolitan types. The MSM incorporate and exist in the cosmopolitan culture so their product is naturally consistent with that of their audience. I don't think it's apt to characterize MSM readers' reaction as a reflection of what they are reading but more a parallel. (I sure didn't need to the NYT to tell me that Trump is disgusting at his core. My viscera told me that, seconded by my brain.) Better, I think, to say that the two are naturally of one mind. When it's wrong, as in labeling Trump and all Reps as misogynistic... Do you not think Trump a misogynist? I recall my eventual recognition that Bill Clinton qualified. Do you not think Clinton a misogynist? If one watched FOX or paid attention to the women working in the Trump administration, one would see for themselves how terrible false this is. I don't recall hearing of anyone accusing Fox or the Administration of projecting misogyny. (I don't think a cramped view of the appropriate role of women, if that's what you're referring to, is misogyny.) The same with racism. A lot of the problem with assessing racism is that there's no consensus regarding whether racist attitudes without racist acts qualify. People with racist attitudes who would never act on them take offense at being labeled racist. I have had experience with EEO issues. EEO officers and complainants tend not to make the distinction between attitude and act. Yet I've seen situations where officials have evidenced seemingly racist attitudes without any employee being disadvantaged as a result. (That's rather analogous to the distinction between FBI officials showing animus vs acting on it to someone's detriment.) I make the distinction. IMO, no detriment, no foul. But that doesn't nullify or excuse the bigotry. Trump obviously exhibits racist attitudes. And anyone at his rallies who participates in his call and response does, too. We should always remember that these cohort characterizations are generalizations, which are useful for understanding groups at the macro level, but that generalization, by definition, recognizes that the characterization does not apply to every individual in the cohort. P.S. Speaking of misogyny, in case this is new to you as it was to me, I've been reading lately about the latest interest group--incels have a human right to sex. Wonder what the "---ist" label is for those who take issue with that.