Donald Trump

Bentleyspop

tbergs said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Good fucking lord. Maybe he could go back and figure out who killed Biggie and Tupac?

http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/30/media/president-trump-roseanne-barr-bob-iger/index.html

Everyone knows that Bill and Hillary orchestrated the hits on Biggie and Tupac while they were grooming Obama. Midwest needed to take out the East and West coast to gain some street cred.

I blame The ODB

PJ_Soul

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

Wait, what? The death toll in Puerto Rico is 70 times higher than "thought" (reported)??? I haven't seen any news about that at all, let alone 3 times less than news about Roseanne.

this goes to my point a few days ago about "Celebrity trumps society"

Sure... but your point was lost back then because you were talking about Weinstein/an extremely relevant and important story, celebrity or not. Not because the idea that North Americans are too into the entertainment industry isn't true.

I was talking about celebrity in general in the weinstein thread. the point stands. 

I never said it didn't. I think my argument was that it's the fault of the masses far more than it is the fault of the news media.

which I also agreed with previously. 

I know.
But back to the Roseanne story..... Our little side convo here got me thinking about just how important or not important this story might be..... I think everyone is fascinated with it because it's so damned "gossipy" or "juicy", and also because people love to see wackos like Roseanne fall from grace (especially when it's the second go 'round). That's the superficial crap you're talking about I think.
But then there is the issue of ABC's response, and how that ties into the behaviour of and response by the POTUS and his supporters .... I think that side of the story deserves some serious attention.
Not as much attention as Trump's completely indifference to Puerto Rico's situation though, obviously. That is appalling.

HughFreakingDillon

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

Wait, what? The death toll in Puerto Rico is 70 times higher than "thought" (reported)??? I haven't seen any news about that at all, let alone 3 times less than news about Roseanne.

this goes to my point a few days ago about "Celebrity trumps society"

Sure... but your point was lost back then because you were talking about Weinstein/an extremely relevant and important story, celebrity or not. Not because the idea that North Americans are too into the entertainment industry isn't true.

I was talking about celebrity in general in the weinstein thread. the point stands. 

I never said it didn't. I think my argument was that it's the fault of the masses far more than it is the fault of the news media.

which I also agreed with previously. 

I know.
But back to the Roseanne story..... Our little side convo here got me thinking about just how important or not important this story might be..... I think everyone is fascinated with it because it's so damned "gossipy" or "juicy", and also because people love to see wackos like Roseanne fall from grace (especially when it's the second go 'round). That's the superficial crap you're talking about I think.
But then there is the issue of ABC's response, and how that ties into the behaviour of and response by the POTUS and his supporters .... I think that side of the story deserves some serious attention.
Not as much attention as Trump's completely indifference to Puerto Rico's situation though, obviously. That is appalling.

I agree. but unfortunately, I think this further emboldens Trump in his own mind as being untouchable. just the fact that he used a friend of his being held to account for being racist to demand further retribution from a foe is staggeringly out of touch. 

I have no issue with these stories when they have a larger societal consequence, like weinstein, like this, but this roseanne story specifically, in my opinion, is NOT bigger than the Puerto Rico story. 

PJ_Soul

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

Wait, what? The death toll in Puerto Rico is 70 times higher than "thought" (reported)??? I haven't seen any news about that at all, let alone 3 times less than news about Roseanne.

this goes to my point a few days ago about "Celebrity trumps society"

Sure... but your point was lost back then because you were talking about Weinstein/an extremely relevant and important story, celebrity or not. Not because the idea that North Americans are too into the entertainment industry isn't true.

I was talking about celebrity in general in the weinstein thread. the point stands. 

I never said it didn't. I think my argument was that it's the fault of the masses far more than it is the fault of the news media.

which I also agreed with previously. 

I know.
But back to the Roseanne story..... Our little side convo here got me thinking about just how important or not important this story might be..... I think everyone is fascinated with it because it's so damned "gossipy" or "juicy", and also because people love to see wackos like Roseanne fall from grace (especially when it's the second go 'round). That's the superficial crap you're talking about I think.
But then there is the issue of ABC's response, and how that ties into the behaviour of and response by the POTUS and his supporters .... I think that side of the story deserves some serious attention.
Not as much attention as Trump's completely indifference to Puerto Rico's situation though, obviously. That is appalling.

I agree. but unfortunately, I think this further emboldens Trump in his own mind as being untouchable. just the fact that he used a friend of his being held to account for being racist to demand further retribution from a foe is staggeringly out of touch. 

I have no issue with these stories when they have a larger societal consequence, like weinstein, like this, but this roseanne story specifically, in my opinion, is NOT bigger than the Puerto Rico story. 

Well it should be, at least... Makes me wonder though... Like we talked about before, the media focuses on what the audience wants... Does the media have a good reason to assume the masses really don't or wouldn't care about the Puerto Rico story? They probably know the audience a lot better than we do.

HughFreakingDillon

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

Wait, what? The death toll in Puerto Rico is 70 times higher than "thought" (reported)??? I haven't seen any news about that at all, let alone 3 times less than news about Roseanne.

this goes to my point a few days ago about "Celebrity trumps society"

Sure... but your point was lost back then because you were talking about Weinstein/an extremely relevant and important story, celebrity or not. Not because the idea that North Americans are too into the entertainment industry isn't true.

I was talking about celebrity in general in the weinstein thread. the point stands. 

I never said it didn't. I think my argument was that it's the fault of the masses far more than it is the fault of the news media.

which I also agreed with previously. 

I know.
But back to the Roseanne story..... Our little side convo here got me thinking about just how important or not important this story might be..... I think everyone is fascinated with it because it's so damned "gossipy" or "juicy", and also because people love to see wackos like Roseanne fall from grace (especially when it's the second go 'round). That's the superficial crap you're talking about I think.
But then there is the issue of ABC's response, and how that ties into the behaviour of and response by the POTUS and his supporters .... I think that side of the story deserves some serious attention.
Not as much attention as Trump's completely indifference to Puerto Rico's situation though, obviously. That is appalling.

I agree. but unfortunately, I think this further emboldens Trump in his own mind as being untouchable. just the fact that he used a friend of his being held to account for being racist to demand further retribution from a foe is staggeringly out of touch. 

I have no issue with these stories when they have a larger societal consequence, like weinstein, like this, but this roseanne story specifically, in my opinion, is NOT bigger than the Puerto Rico story. 

Well it should be, at least... Makes me wonder though... Like we talked about before, the media focuses on what the audience wants... Does the media have a good reason to assume the masses really don't or wouldn't care about the Puerto Rico story? They probably know the audience a lot better than we do.

of course they have good reason, because our society is addicted to celebrity. they fucking elected one. 

however, I think that the press has an obligation to not just sell themselves, but to tell the important stories. it's twofold. unfortunately, there is so much tabloid news everywhere, the previously respected news agencies that would have placed the roseanne story as a footnote, have no choice but to compete for clicks and views. and the idiotic public dictates what news we all get. 

Halifax2TheMax

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

Wait, what? The death toll in Puerto Rico is 70 times higher than "thought" (reported)??? I haven't seen any news about that at all, let alone 3 times less than news about Roseanne.

this goes to my point a few days ago about "Celebrity trumps society"

Sure... but your point was lost back then because you were talking about Weinstein/an extremely relevant and important story, celebrity or not. Not because the idea that North Americans are too into the entertainment industry isn't true.

I was talking about celebrity in general in the weinstein thread. the point stands. 

I never said it didn't. I think my argument was that it's the fault of the masses far more than it is the fault of the news media.

which I also agreed with previously. 

I know.
But back to the Roseanne story..... Our little side convo here got me thinking about just how important or not important this story might be..... I think everyone is fascinated with it because it's so damned "gossipy" or "juicy", and also because people love to see wackos like Roseanne fall from grace (especially when it's the second go 'round). That's the superficial crap you're talking about I think.
But then there is the issue of ABC's response, and how that ties into the behaviour of and response by the POTUS and his supporters .... I think that side of the story deserves some serious attention.
Not as much attention as Trump's completely indifference to Puerto Rico's situation though, obviously. That is appalling.

I agree. but unfortunately, I think this further emboldens Trump in his own mind as being untouchable. just the fact that he used a friend of his being held to account for being racist to demand further retribution from a foe is staggeringly out of touch. 

I have no issue with these stories when they have a larger societal consequence, like weinstein, like this, but this roseanne story specifically, in my opinion, is NOT bigger than the Puerto Rico story. 

Well it should be, at least... Makes me wonder though... Like we talked about before, the media focuses on what the audience wants... Does the media have a good reason to assume the masses really don't or wouldn't care about the Puerto Rico story? They probably know the audience a lot better than we do.

of course they have good reason, because our society is addicted to celebrity. they fucking elected one. 

however, I think that the press has an obligation to not just sell themselves, but to tell the important stories. it's twofold. unfortunately, there is so much tabloid news everywhere, the previously respected news agencies that would have placed the roseanne story as a footnote, have no choice but to compete for clicks and views. and the idiotic public dictates what news we all get. 

The idiotic public does not dictate what news we all get, you’re responsible for the “news” you consume. If you’re reliant on one or two sources of news, faux news, CNN, or less, shame on you. You want to know more about Puerto Rico? Give up your Facebook news feed and seek out information.

Halifax2TheMax

And this is what passes for a strategy session to tackle pressing issues of the day.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/30/politics/kim-kardashian-jared-kushner-white-house/index.html

HughFreakingDillon

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

Wait, what? The death toll in Puerto Rico is 70 times higher than "thought" (reported)??? I haven't seen any news about that at all, let alone 3 times less than news about Roseanne.

this goes to my point a few days ago about "Celebrity trumps society"

Sure... but your point was lost back then because you were talking about Weinstein/an extremely relevant and important story, celebrity or not. Not because the idea that North Americans are too into the entertainment industry isn't true.

I was talking about celebrity in general in the weinstein thread. the point stands. 

I never said it didn't. I think my argument was that it's the fault of the masses far more than it is the fault of the news media.

which I also agreed with previously. 

I know.
But back to the Roseanne story..... Our little side convo here got me thinking about just how important or not important this story might be..... I think everyone is fascinated with it because it's so damned "gossipy" or "juicy", and also because people love to see wackos like Roseanne fall from grace (especially when it's the second go 'round). That's the superficial crap you're talking about I think.
But then there is the issue of ABC's response, and how that ties into the behaviour of and response by the POTUS and his supporters .... I think that side of the story deserves some serious attention.
Not as much attention as Trump's completely indifference to Puerto Rico's situation though, obviously. That is appalling.

I agree. but unfortunately, I think this further emboldens Trump in his own mind as being untouchable. just the fact that he used a friend of his being held to account for being racist to demand further retribution from a foe is staggeringly out of touch. 

I have no issue with these stories when they have a larger societal consequence, like weinstein, like this, but this roseanne story specifically, in my opinion, is NOT bigger than the Puerto Rico story. 

Well it should be, at least... Makes me wonder though... Like we talked about before, the media focuses on what the audience wants... Does the media have a good reason to assume the masses really don't or wouldn't care about the Puerto Rico story? They probably know the audience a lot better than we do.

of course they have good reason, because our society is addicted to celebrity. they fucking elected one. 

however, I think that the press has an obligation to not just sell themselves, but to tell the important stories. it's twofold. unfortunately, there is so much tabloid news everywhere, the previously respected news agencies that would have placed the roseanne story as a footnote, have no choice but to compete for clicks and views. and the idiotic public dictates what news we all get. 

The idiotic public does not dictate what news we all get, you’re responsible for the “news” you consume. If you’re reliant on one or two sources of news, faux news, CNN, or less, shame on you. You want to know more about Puerto Rico? Give up your Facebook news feed and seek out information.

oh jesus christ. I'm not blaming the media for the news I get. I'm blaming them for what they report on. I don't rely on my facebook feed for news FFS. But the dumbing down of news for your average consumer is undeniable. 

as a general rule, I don't read the news. I do visit CNN occasionally, but I'm smart enough to know what's partisan and what isn't. not all of us have the time to seek out reputable underground news sources all fucking day long. 

I have 80's movies to argue about with PJ Soul. 

Halifax2TheMax

My point stands. Just because Rosanne seems to be all over the news does not mean other more important stories or news aren’t being reported on. By reputable news agencies, not “underground” news sources, no less. Your statement is a cop out. 

HughFreakingDillon

Halifax2TheMax said:

My point stands. Just because Rosanne seems to be all over the news does not mean other more important stories or news aren’t being reported on. By reputable news agencies, not “underground” news sources, no less. Your statement is a cop out. 

no, your point doesn't stand, because it's not what I'm talking about. of course they are being reported on. but one gets the massive headline, the other gets a small snippet down the page. 

you don't seem to be understanding what I'm saying here. I look at all the stories, because I know that often the fluff gets the top headline. 

Halifax2TheMax

HughFreakingDillon said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

My point stands. Just because Rosanne seems to be all over the news does not mean other more important stories or news aren’t being reported on. By reputable news agencies, not “underground” news sources, no less. Your statement is a cop out. 

no, your point doesn't stand, because it's not what I'm talking about. of course they are being reported on. but one gets the massive headline, the other gets a small snippet down the page. 

you don't seem to be understanding what I'm saying here. I look at all the stories, because I know that often the fluff gets the top headline. 

You said, “and the idiotic public dictates what news we all get.” And I call that BS.

HughFreakingDillon

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

My point stands. Just because Rosanne seems to be all over the news does not mean other more important stories or news aren’t being reported on. By reputable news agencies, not “underground” news sources, no less. Your statement is a cop out. 

no, your point doesn't stand, because it's not what I'm talking about. of course they are being reported on. but one gets the massive headline, the other gets a small snippet down the page. 

you don't seem to be understanding what I'm saying here. I look at all the stories, because I know that often the fluff gets the top headline. 

You said, “and the idiotic public dictates what news we all get.” And I call that BS.

and I expanded on that in my subsequent post. 

Halifax2TheMax

HughFreakingDillon said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

My point stands. Just because Rosanne seems to be all over the news does not mean other more important stories or news aren’t being reported on. By reputable news agencies, not “underground” news sources, no less. Your statement is a cop out. 

no, your point doesn't stand, because it's not what I'm talking about. of course they are being reported on. but one gets the massive headline, the other gets a small snippet down the page. 

you don't seem to be understanding what I'm saying here. I look at all the stories, because I know that often the fluff gets the top headline. 

You said, “and the idiotic public dictates what news we all get.” And I call that BS.

and I expanded on that in my subsequent post. 

Duly noted but should have expanded that thought in your first post. Otherwise it stands as complete BS.

Halifax2TheMax

Ouch.

Donald Trump is scared of the Mueller investigation. As a D.C. outsider, he's right to be afraid. - NBC News https://apple.news/AXy0Cgm3RT_C7cAG2ZT0vxQ

RoleModelsinBlood31

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Seriously, who the fuck says "happy Memorial Day"???? I've actually had conversations about how inappropriate it would be to say "happy Remembrance Day" (Canada's Memorial Day), like as a joke - a tasteless joke .... I've actually had a laugh with others over how weird that is to say. But the fucking POTUS just blasts it out there on Twitter without even thinking about it. SMH!!!
And the "... and women in 18 years".... WHAT THE FUCK?!

I had over 50 people tell me happy Memorial Day yesterday.

The same guy you're sticking up for here wrote a tacky 'To all my friends what an amazing time' at the holocaust memorial... and a 'get well soon' to a McCain's cancer diagnosis.

He's a f**king clueless dolt- just like his brain dead supporters.  

No, I’m not arguing with anyone that he says stupid shit.  We all know that twitter should be on the NO list for him.  I was saying that it’s ridiculous to get up in arms because someone said “happy Memorial Day.”  That’s taking it to a silly level.  I listened to a baseball podcast yesterday and within the first minute the guy says “happy Memorial Day everyone!”  It’s just a greeting- don’t let your hate for the president make you react poorly to commonalities.

HughFreakingDillon

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

My point stands. Just because Rosanne seems to be all over the news does not mean other more important stories or news aren’t being reported on. By reputable news agencies, not “underground” news sources, no less. Your statement is a cop out. 

no, your point doesn't stand, because it's not what I'm talking about. of course they are being reported on. but one gets the massive headline, the other gets a small snippet down the page. 

you don't seem to be understanding what I'm saying here. I look at all the stories, because I know that often the fluff gets the top headline. 

You said, “and the idiotic public dictates what news we all get.” And I call that BS.

and I expanded on that in my subsequent post. 

Duly noted but should have expanded that thought in your first post. Otherwise it stands as complete BS.

uh, that's called a DISCUSSION. when something is obviously taken incorrectly, regardless of fault, people expand on it to give/gain better understanding of said thought.  

part of it is clarification before accusation, which is something you seem to need to work on. Jared, dear boy. 

Thirty Bills Unpaid

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Seriously, who the fuck says "happy Memorial Day"???? I've actually had conversations about how inappropriate it would be to say "happy Remembrance Day" (Canada's Memorial Day), like as a joke - a tasteless joke .... I've actually had a laugh with others over how weird that is to say. But the fucking POTUS just blasts it out there on Twitter without even thinking about it. SMH!!!
And the "... and women in 18 years".... WHAT THE FUCK?!

I had over 50 people tell me happy Memorial Day yesterday.

The same guy you're sticking up for here wrote a tacky 'To all my friends what an amazing time' at the holocaust memorial... and a 'get well soon' to a McCain's cancer diagnosis.

He's a f**king clueless dolt- just like his brain dead supporters.  

No, I’m not arguing with anyone that he says stupid shit.  We all know that twitter should be on the NO list for him.  I was saying that it’s ridiculous to get up in arms because someone said “happy Memorial Day.”  That’s taking it to a silly level.  I listened to a baseball podcast yesterday and within the first minute the guy says “happy Memorial Day everyone!”  It’s just a greeting- don’t let your hate for the president make you react poorly to commonalities.

But that's just it: the 'commonality' is McDonald saying stupid, off hand things in situations that demand heightened levels of respect.

He's completely absorbed with himself to the point he can't even feign respect.

HughFreakingDillon

I don't ever hear Christians smiling and saying "Happy Good Friday everyone!". that would be weird. 

I'm not offended by Happy Memorial Day, I think it's just.....odd. 

tbergs

HughFreakingDillon said:

I don't ever hear Christians smiling and saying "Happy Good Friday everyone!". that would be weird. 

I'm not offended by Happy Memorial Day, I think it's just.....odd. 

I'm really excited for happy D-day.

tbergs

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Seriously, who the fuck says "happy Memorial Day"???? I've actually had conversations about how inappropriate it would be to say "happy Remembrance Day" (Canada's Memorial Day), like as a joke - a tasteless joke .... I've actually had a laugh with others over how weird that is to say. But the fucking POTUS just blasts it out there on Twitter without even thinking about it. SMH!!!
And the "... and women in 18 years".... WHAT THE FUCK?!

I had over 50 people tell me happy Memorial Day yesterday.

The same guy you're sticking up for here wrote a tacky 'To all my friends what an amazing time' at the holocaust memorial... and a 'get well soon' to a McCain's cancer diagnosis.

He's a f**king clueless dolt- just like his brain dead supporters.  

No, I’m not arguing with anyone that he says stupid shit.  We all know that twitter should be on the NO list for him.  I was saying that it’s ridiculous to get up in arms because someone said “happy Memorial Day.”  That’s taking it to a silly level.  I listened to a baseball podcast yesterday and within the first minute the guy says “happy Memorial Day everyone!”  It’s just a greeting- don’t let your hate for the president make you react poorly to commonalities.

I don't care who says it, it's inappropriate and out of context. People who fail to engage their thinking skills are mindlessly saying something that they shouldn't. Do you go to a funeral and say happy funeral day? Happy Memorial Day is not a commonality any more than Happy MLK Day.