OT: Breaking News, ABC Cancels Roseanne!

[NYKAL]

maybe I should start a go-fund me page so the racists can contribute to my moving to another (more progressive) country. Honestly, I have really been thinking and looking into leaving Amerikka.

[King of Canada]

maybe I should start a go-fund me page so the racists can contribute to my moving to another (more progressive) country. Honestly, I have really been thinking and looking into leaving Amerikka.

http://cbiftrumpwins.com/

[earthmansurfer]

Almost as despicable as his grossly inappropriate Memorial Day tweet:

Read on Twitter

?s=21

Actually, it is a great point. What are the rules? A bad tweet gets a show cancelled.
But the assasination innuendos+ (e.g. Gifford holding the bloody Trump head. Many examples here.) are business as normal and free speech.

The one conservative show is off the air. Last man standing is coming back, but they will be booted, just give it time.
And I am not a conservative, and no longer a dem.

Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation.

He is comparing the response from Iger regarding Roseanne to the non-response from Iger about "horrible statements" made by ABC. There is a clear difference between Roseanne's racist comments and whatever comments Trump is referring to. One is a disgusting thing to do, the other is being critical of the President of the United States which is something we should all do (questioning our leaders is imperative and necessary). As per usual, Trump didn't actually *say* anything in his tweet, he's vague and unspecific. If an ABC national news anchor said something racist or something equivalent to Roseanne's comment, I am assuming the reaction from ABC would be similar.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with Kathy Griffin's bloody Trump head seeing as her career was destroyed after that incident. Also, half the people didn't vote for Trump, it was more like 20% of the population.

You are more than simplifying here. Rosanne tweets that and within hours the show is cancelled.
The thing with Gifford and the others, took a relatively long time. And, MSM (minus FOX) is reporting negative things about Trump 93% of the time. Yet he has 49% approval. Imagine if they supported the good things he did, sort of like their job.

My point is basic, we have a double standard here. And we have my last point in full effect. No matter your political affiliation, this is extremely dangerous (it just currently feels like it is benefitting you). Again - "Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation."

[Dave DaButcher]

Actually, it is a great point. What are the rules? A bad tweet gets a show cancelled.
But the assasination innuendos+ (e.g. Gifford holding the bloody Trump head. Many examples here.) are business as normal and free speech.

The one conservative show is off the air. Last man standing is coming back, but they will be booted, just give it time.
And I am not a conservative, and no longer a dem.

Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation.

He is comparing the response from Iger regarding Roseanne to the non-response from Iger about "horrible statements" made by ABC. There is a clear difference between Roseanne's racist comments and whatever comments Trump is referring to. One is a disgusting thing to do, the other is being critical of the President of the United States which is something we should all do (questioning our leaders is imperative and necessary). As per usual, Trump didn't actually *say* anything in his tweet, he's vague and unspecific. If an ABC national news anchor said something racist or something equivalent to Roseanne's comment, I am assuming the reaction from ABC would be similar.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with Kathy Griffin's bloody Trump head seeing as her career was destroyed after that incident. Also, half the people didn't vote for Trump, it was more like 20% of the population.

You are more than simplifying here. Rosanne tweets that and within hours the show is cancelled.
The thing with Gifford and the others, took a relatively long time. And, MSM (minus FOX) is reporting negative things about Trump 93% of the time. Yet he has 49% approval. Imagine if they supported the good things he did, sort of like their job.

My point is basic, we have a double standard here. And we have my last point in full effect. No matter your political affiliation, this is extremely dangerous (it just currently feels like it is benefitting you). Again - "Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation."

I'll let others address your other assertions, but I think we should at least all use the same facts. With that in mind, where the heck did you get the notion that Trump has a 49% approval rating?

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?ex_cid=rrpromo

[thebuzzardman]

Actually, it is a great point. What are the rules? A bad tweet gets a show cancelled.
But the assasination innuendos+ (e.g. Gifford holding the bloody Trump head. Many examples here.) are business as normal and free speech.

The one conservative show is off the air. Last man standing is coming back, but they will be booted, just give it time.
And I am not a conservative, and no longer a dem.

Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation.

He is comparing the response from Iger regarding Roseanne to the non-response from Iger about "horrible statements" made by ABC. There is a clear difference between Roseanne's racist comments and whatever comments Trump is referring to. One is a disgusting thing to do, the other is being critical of the President of the United States which is something we should all do (questioning our leaders is imperative and necessary). As per usual, Trump didn't actually *say* anything in his tweet, he's vague and unspecific. If an ABC national news anchor said something racist or something equivalent to Roseanne's comment, I am assuming the reaction from ABC would be similar.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with Kathy Griffin's bloody Trump head seeing as her career was destroyed after that incident. Also, half the people didn't vote for Trump, it was more like 20% of the population.

You are more than simplifying here. Rosanne tweets that and within hours the show is cancelled.
The thing with Gifford and the others, took a relatively long time. And, MSM (minus FOX) is reporting negative things about Trump 93% of the time. Yet he has 49% approval. Imagine if they supported the good things he did, sort of like their job.

My point is basic, we have a double standard here. And we have my last point in full effect. No matter your political affiliation, this is extremely dangerous (it just currently feels like it is benefitting you). Again - "Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation."

Sort of like how most conservatives were against Obama and the democrats? How Fox's coverage of things has it's own slant? It's interesting how this is held up as bias on one side, but when the other side does it, they are just trying to "balance things out".

Is it wrong when it happens, or not? Last I checked, if half the country voted for a guy, his supporters should stop feeling so victimized. I guess that's not a convenient narrative.

[earthmansurfer]

Almost as despicable as his grossly inappropriate Memorial Day tweet:

Read on Twitter

?s=21

Actually, it is a great point. What are the rules? A bad tweet gets a show cancelled.
But the assasination innuendos+ (e.g. Gifford holding the bloody Trump head. Many examples here.) are business as normal and free speech.

The one conservative show is off the air. Last man standing is coming back, but they will be booted, just give it time.
And I am not a conservative, and no longer a dem.

Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation.

Silicon Valley liberal? I guess. Ignoring the nutty libertarian venture capitalists and people like Theil. I don't think it's quite so black and white.

Silicon Valley is perhaps the most liberal part of CA. The two largest liberal strongholds (basically where Hillary got all her votes) were CA and NY. Even during the Facebook "hearings", Zuckerberg said that SV is extremely liberal. Been there a few times and I can agree. Heck, I thought being liberal was a good thing. But the liberal of 20 years ago and what has masqueraded as liberalism the last 10 or so, is really vastly different.

And yes, it isn't so black and white, but my points stand re Hollywood, SV and MSM. No matter your political belief. It is dangerous. They will use you to support their agenda and then, might not be so pretty.

[thebuzzardman]

Actually, it is a great point. What are the rules? A bad tweet gets a show cancelled.
But the assasination innuendos+ (e.g. Gifford holding the bloody Trump head. Many examples here.) are business as normal and free speech.

The one conservative show is off the air. Last man standing is coming back, but they will be booted, just give it time.
And I am not a conservative, and no longer a dem.

Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation.

Silicon Valley liberal? I guess. Ignoring the nutty libertarian venture capitalists and people like Theil. I don't think it's quite so black and white.

Silicon Valley is perhaps the most liberal part of CA. The two largest liberal strongholds (basically where Hillary got all her votes) were CA and NY. Even during the Facebook "hearings", Zuckerberg said that SV is extremely liberal. Been there a few times and I can agree. Heck, I thought being liberal was a good thing. But the liberal of 20 years ago and what has masqueraded as liberalism the last 10 or so, is really vastly different.

And yes, it isn't so black and white, but my points stand re Hollywood, SV and MSM. No matter your political belief. It is dangerous. They will use you to support their agenda and then, might not be so pretty.

But when when the religious right and other right wing morality police join forces with anti tax anti regulation big business interests for THEIR agenda, that's ok? Pretty sure those people don't believe what a lot of people believe nor is that agenda in line with a large number of Americans, yet that agenda is pushed, and hard, with lots of money behind it. That must be a bad thing too, right?

[shtolky]

Actually, it is a great point. What are the rules? A bad tweet gets a show cancelled.
But the assasination innuendos+ (e.g. Gifford holding the bloody Trump head. Many examples here.) are business as normal and free speech.

The one conservative show is off the air. Last man standing is coming back, but they will be booted, just give it time.
And I am not a conservative, and no longer a dem.

Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation.

He is comparing the response from Iger regarding Roseanne to the non-response from Iger about "horrible statements" made by ABC. There is a clear difference between Roseanne's racist comments and whatever comments Trump is referring to. One is a disgusting thing to do, the other is being critical of the President of the United States which is something we should all do (questioning our leaders is imperative and necessary). As per usual, Trump didn't actually *say* anything in his tweet, he's vague and unspecific. If an ABC national news anchor said something racist or something equivalent to Roseanne's comment, I am assuming the reaction from ABC would be similar.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with Kathy Griffin's bloody Trump head seeing as her career was destroyed after that incident. Also, half the people didn't vote for Trump, it was more like 20% of the population.

You are more than simplifying here. Rosanne tweets that and within hours the show is cancelled.
The thing with Gifford and the others, took a relatively long time. And, MSM (minus FOX) is reporting negative things about Trump 93% of the time. Yet he has 49% approval. Imagine if they supported the good things he did, sort of like their job.

My point is basic, we have a double standard here. And we have my last point in full effect. No matter your political affiliation, this is extremely dangerous (it just currently feels like it is benefitting you). Again - "Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation."

It's Griffin, not Gifford, and her career was destroyed by what she did. Period. There is a good chance she'd have also been fired from whatever show she was working on if she was on a show. I also personally see a HUGE difference between the "artistic" statement from Griffin (even though it was kind of stupid) versus the disgusting racist statements by Roseanne.

Also, you CANNOT equate the media reporting negatively on Trump versus racist statements made by Roseanne. I don't want to get too political, but any reasonable person would see that there is a lot, and I mean a lot of things people can criticize Trump for. Being critical of the President is FAR different than making a disgusting, racist comment akin to the one Roseanne made. I am not sure how you can compare the two.

It seems like you are a Trump supporter, or at the very least think he's doing a decent job. That is 100% fine to have that opinion, even if I think you're completely wrong. That's ok. But I don't think it's that difficult to understand why liberals would find what Trump is doing and saying as really toxic. Again, we can disagree on that, but I don't see a double standard. If liberals were making racist remarks about Trump out of left field like Roseanne made about Jarrett, then there is a double standard if those Trump remarks don't result in consequences. But you cannot compare people being critical of a President who makes fun of disabled people, makes blatantly racist comments about blacks and latinos, seems to have zero regard for immigrants, lies literally all the time, and generally shows a lack of respect for pretty much anyone and anything unless it benefits him.

Also, I assume you got that 49% approval number from Rasmussen which is widely considered the most biased, least accurate poll out there. Lastly, only 20% of the U.S voted for Trump. That leaves a lot of people who didn't vote for Trump. Again, we can agree to disagree poltically, and that's fine, but it's sort of disingenuous to say that the MSM is being a big old meany head to Trump when half the people voted for him. That's just false. How many people voted for Trump should have nothing to do with the criticism he receives from the media and others.

[thebuzzardman]

It must be interesting to live in a country where there is a vast left wing conspiracy taking place amongst entertainers, half the country, and long term employees of the federal government, all designed to subjugate the other half of the population in a politically correct gulag full of unisex bathrooms and atheism. How do some people get out bed in the morning or remain patriotic? I mean, whatever for, if so much of the country is full of such vile scum?

"I'm proud to be an American. Except for all these dicks. Proud to be an American, even if it makes me sick"

Sing it Lee.

[earthmansurfer]

Silicon Valley liberal? I guess. Ignoring the nutty libertarian venture capitalists and people like Theil. I don't think it's quite so black and white.

Silicon Valley is perhaps the most liberal part of CA. The two largest liberal strongholds (basically where Hillary got all her votes) were CA and NY. Even during the Facebook "hearings", Zuckerberg said that SV is extremely liberal. Been there a few times and I can agree. Heck, I thought being liberal was a good thing. But the liberal of 20 years ago and what has masqueraded as liberalism the last 10 or so, is really vastly different.

And yes, it isn't so black and white, but my points stand re Hollywood, SV and MSM. No matter your political belief. It is dangerous. They will use you to support their agenda and then, might not be so pretty.

But when when the religious right and other right wing morality police join forces with anti tax anti regulation big business interests for THEIR agenda, that's ok? Pretty sure those people don't believe what a lot of people believe nor is that agenda in line with a large number of Americans, yet that agenda is pushed, and hard, with lots of money behind it. That must be a bad thing too, right?

What benefits us? Us regular people? So far, Trump has. The tax cuts not only are giving everyone money back, but the government is collecting more revenue. And that was the idea. A bit like Reagans tax cuts, they worked too. But once he was out, they were gone. The last thing TPTB want is a policy that benefits us.

We have more regulations than we can handle. It is ridiculous. It slows business down and just makes the govt inefficient. I wouldn't equate less regulations with being outright designed to hurt the environment or just help big business (if that was what you were getting at.) Look at the banking regulations. Trump is overturning those regs that benefitted the big banks (Dodd Frank or stg like that) and put the smaller banks / credit unions (who really do good work) out of business.

BTW - I wouldn't equate Trumps base (at least not a lot of it) to any form of extreme religious views. Saying Religious Right is a bit of poisoning the well. I mean I doubt all right leaning people are religious (in that way.) The media has certainly tried to make being a Christian a crime, but outside of some zealots, I am ok with most non extreme religions (as long as they treat people fairly and don't repress groups and such.)

I prefer not to really identify with any groups (right, left.) I want what is best for everyone and that is a hard thing to achieve when we have essentially, 2 politcal parties. Crazy, eh?

[Clyde_Style]

Actually, it is a great point. What are the rules? A bad tweet gets a show cancelled.
But the assasination innuendos+ (e.g. Gifford holding the bloody Trump head. Many examples here.) are business as normal and free speech.

The one conservative show is off the air. Last man standing is coming back, but they will be booted, just give it time.
And I am not a conservative, and no longer a dem.

Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation.

Dear President Trump,

ABC News has taken your tweet into consideration and we wish to apologize for accurately reporting on the following:

Watch on YouTube

We concede there is no excuse for us doing our job of informing the public of your conduct. There is no excuse for our disgusting commitment to accurate news reportage.

Sincerely,
Bob Iger
ABC News

That is FAKE news. It is quite clear that Tump did that "routine" before. He was not making fun of a disabled person. Let that fake news story go. People start believing it.

I guess you just accept my last point, re MSM, HollyWood, SV, etc. Dangerous situation. Just because it fits your political belief you should look a bit closer at it.

Let's go after the real criminals. Wonder what this set up general meant? Oh, his account was hacked, lol.

You actually replied Fake News.

And you say you want to root out corruption while you deflect away from the most corrupt administration in the history of our nation. Got it

What I've noticed about you is when people rightfully flame you for your insanity you like to play it off that you are a benign individual being bullied by aggressive posters.

There is nothing benign about you. You have evil staring you in the face and you have zero issues with glibly dismissing the FACTS while promoting fantasies you would never have the imagination to design for yourself. You're a parrot of the most vulgar rubbish ever seen.

The actuality is you are a sick person who peddles really vile and toxic trash and I'm done with you.

You are not benign. Your thought process is malignant and harmful. You are a glaring example of the worst kind of civilian in America today.

Yet you live in Germany apparently.

Ignored.

[thebuzzardman]

Silicon Valley is perhaps the most liberal part of CA. The two largest liberal strongholds (basically where Hillary got all her votes) were CA and NY. Even during the Facebook "hearings", Zuckerberg said that SV is extremely liberal. Been there a few times and I can agree. Heck, I thought being liberal was a good thing. But the liberal of 20 years ago and what has masqueraded as liberalism the last 10 or so, is really vastly different.

And yes, it isn't so black and white, but my points stand re Hollywood, SV and MSM. No matter your political belief. It is dangerous. They will use you to support their agenda and then, might not be so pretty.

But when when the religious right and other right wing morality police join forces with anti tax anti regulation big business interests for THEIR agenda, that's ok? Pretty sure those people don't believe what a lot of people believe nor is that agenda in line with a large number of Americans, yet that agenda is pushed, and hard, with lots of money behind it. That must be a bad thing too, right?

What benefits us? Us regular people? So far, Trump has. The tax cuts not only are giving everyone money back, but the government is collecting more revenue. And that was the idea. A bit like Reagans tax cuts, they worked too. But once he was out, they were gone. The last thing TPTB want is a policy that benefits us.

We have more regulations than we can handle. It is ridiculous. It slows business down and just makes the govt inefficient. I wouldn't equate less regulations with being outright designed to hurt the environment or just help big business (if that was what you were getting at.) Look at the banking regulations. Trump is overturning those regs that benefitted the big banks (Dodd Frank or stg like that) and put the smaller banks / credit unions (who really do good work) out of business.

BTW - I wouldn't equate Trumps base (at least not a lot of it) to any form of extreme religious views. Saying Religious Right is a bit of poisoning the well. I mean I doubt all right leaning people are religious (in that way.) The media has certainly tried to make being a Christian a crime, but outside of some zealots, I am ok with most non extreme religions (as long as they treat people fairly and don't repress groups and such.)

I prefer not to really identify with any groups (right, left.) I want what is best for everyone and that is a hard thing to achieve when we have essentially, 2 politcal parties. Crazy, eh?

You mean like equating anyone who thinks there might be some value in the government acting for good with the most extreme social stances or that the farthest left opinions of the left wing are representative of everyone who isn't a conservative? You mean like that?

You think removing banking regulations is a good idea? Were you asleep from 1992-2007?

Go cuddle up in bed with your Friedrich Hayek and Ayn Rand books.

[earthmansurfer]

He is comparing the response from Iger regarding Roseanne to the non-response from Iger about "horrible statements" made by ABC. There is a clear difference between Roseanne's racist comments and whatever comments Trump is referring to. One is a disgusting thing to do, the other is being critical of the President of the United States which is something we should all do (questioning our leaders is imperative and necessary). As per usual, Trump didn't actually *say* anything in his tweet, he's vague and unspecific. If an ABC national news anchor said something racist or something equivalent to Roseanne's comment, I am assuming the reaction from ABC would be similar.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with Kathy Griffin's bloody Trump head seeing as her career was destroyed after that incident. Also, half the people didn't vote for Trump, it was more like 20% of the population.

You are more than simplifying here. Rosanne tweets that and within hours the show is cancelled.
The thing with Gifford and the others, took a relatively long time. And, MSM (minus FOX) is reporting negative things about Trump 93% of the time. Yet he has 49% approval. Imagine if they supported the good things he did, sort of like their job.

My point is basic, we have a double standard here. And we have my last point in full effect. No matter your political affiliation, this is extremely dangerous (it just currently feels like it is benefitting you). Again - "Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation."

It's Griffin, not Gifford, and her career was destroyed by what she did. Period. There is a good chance she'd have also been fired from whatever show she was working on if she was on a show. I also personally see a HUGE difference between the "artistic" statement from Griffin (even though it was kind of stupid) versus the disgusting racist statements by Roseanne.

Also, you CANNOT equate the media reporting negatively on Trump versus racist statements made by Roseanne. I don't want to get too political, but any reasonable person would see that there is a lot, and I mean a lot of things people can criticize Trump for. Being critical of the President is FAR different than making a disgusting, racist comment akin to the one Roseanne made. I am not sure how you can compare the two.

It seems like you are a Trump supporter, or at the very least think he's doing a decent job. That is 100% fine to have that opinion, even if I think you're completely wrong. That's ok. But I don't think it's that difficult to understand why liberals would find what Trump is doing and saying as really toxic. Again, we can disagree on that, but I don't see a double standard. If liberals were making racist remarks about Trump out of left field like Roseanne made about Jarrett, then there is a double standard if those Trump remarks don't result in consequences. But you cannot compare people being critical of a President who makes fun of disabled people, makes blatantly racist comments about blacks and latinos, seems to have zero regard for immigrants, lies literally all the time, and generally shows a lack of respect for pretty much anyone and anything unless it benefits him.

Also, I assume you got that 49% approval number from Rasmussen which is widely considered the most biased, least accurate poll out there. Lastly, only 20% of the U.S voted for Trump. That leaves a lot of people who didn't vote for Trump. Again, we can agree to disagree poltically, and that's fine, but it's sort of disingenuous to say that the MSM is being a big old meany head to Trump when half the people voted for him. That's just false. How many people voted for Trump should have nothing to do with the criticism he receives from the media and others.

You know who I mean, but thanks for the correction. She was one example. There are many. Wonder how much work Robert De Nero lost for his violent words against Trump.

Why can't you equate the media, who influences millions and millions of people, with Roseanne? The "crimes" just don't fit the punishment. What Roseanne did was wrong, she apologized. But cancelling a show for what she said? Ok, then we need like treatment. The media has outright lied, daily, often with no retractions (or after the damage is done.) What penalty do they pay? Ok, their ratings are going to sh*t, but that is rather from the people.

It is disgusting how they lie to fit their agenda. From trying to change electoral college votes, to backing a fake Russian Dossier, to now calling a spy a "confidential informant". It won't end. And against the elected leader of a country? Really, 93% negative reporting? They didn't even talk hardly at all about what Trump did with Korea - the S. Korean president said Trump should get the Nobel Peace prize for his work there. They skip over the very low unemployment figures (or attribute it to all the PT jobs created by Obama). They skip over record GDP, skip over billions coming back into this country. Most of the media is treasonous in one form or another.

I will leave it there and just add, I can't wait till the IG report comes out and criminal prosecutions to begin. What has been going on against our President, like him or hate him, has been disgusting. The previous administration weaponising the FBI and DOJ to go against Trump. (And she still lost.)

[nedleeds]

maybe I should start a go-fund me page so the racists can contribute to my moving to another (more progressive) country. Honestly, I have really been thinking and looking into leaving Amerikka.

No you haven't. The oppression and racism here is nothing compared to the ethno/religious strife happening around the world.

[Clyde_Style]

maybe I should start a go-fund me page so the racists can contribute to my moving to another (more progressive) country. Honestly, I have really been thinking and looking into leaving Amerikka.

No you haven't. The oppression and racism here is nothing compared to the ethno/religious strife happening around the world.

It is a global issue and on the rise in many parts of the world. There are really no countries that I can think of that are immune to this.

Scandinavia has hardcore racism at its fringes, but the mainstream sentiments are still highly in favor of tolerance and inclusion. For countries with small populations relative to the rest of Europe, they have made a disproportionately large effort to take in refugees from Africa and the Middle East. There quite a few dark skinned faces on the streets and on the train in Sweden.

They may have to limit immigration by necessity, but relative to a country like the U.S. their efforts to help others and give refugees educational and work opportunities has been extraordinary. Not every immigrant integrates well and they can end up in their own housing ghettos and feel cut off from their host culture, but I know from my knowledge of Sweden that can be the fault of the immigrant as much as the country they live in. There are white supremacists there too, but they do not run the country and that's a big difference.

[Dave DaButcher]

You are more than simplifying here. Rosanne tweets that and within hours the show is cancelled.
The thing with Gifford and the others, took a relatively long time. And, MSM (minus FOX) is reporting negative things about Trump 93% of the time. Yet he has 49% approval. Imagine if they supported the good things he did, sort of like their job.

My point is basic, we have a double standard here. And we have my last point in full effect. No matter your political affiliation, this is extremely dangerous (it just currently feels like it is benefitting you). Again - "Just seems like Hollywood (liberal) and Silicon valley (liberal), most of MSM (minus 50% of FOX) are totally against what half the people voted for and are trying to be the govt. Dangerous situation."

It's Griffin, not Gifford, and her career was destroyed by what she did. Period. There is a good chance she'd have also been fired from whatever show she was working on if she was on a show. I also personally see a HUGE difference between the "artistic" statement from Griffin (even though it was kind of stupid) versus the disgusting racist statements by Roseanne.

Also, you CANNOT equate the media reporting negatively on Trump versus racist statements made by Roseanne. I don't want to get too political, but any reasonable person would see that there is a lot, and I mean a lot of things people can criticize Trump for. Being critical of the President is FAR different than making a disgusting, racist comment akin to the one Roseanne made. I am not sure how you can compare the two.

It seems like you are a Trump supporter, or at the very least think he's doing a decent job. That is 100% fine to have that opinion, even if I think you're completely wrong. That's ok. But I don't think it's that difficult to understand why liberals would find what Trump is doing and saying as really toxic. Again, we can disagree on that, but I don't see a double standard. If liberals were making racist remarks about Trump out of left field like Roseanne made about Jarrett, then there is a double standard if those Trump remarks don't result in consequences. But you cannot compare people being critical of a President who makes fun of disabled people, makes blatantly racist comments about blacks and latinos, seems to have zero regard for immigrants, lies literally all the time, and generally shows a lack of respect for pretty much anyone and anything unless it benefits him.

Also, I assume you got that 49% approval number from Rasmussen which is widely considered the most biased, least accurate poll out there. Lastly, only 20% of the U.S voted for Trump. That leaves a lot of people who didn't vote for Trump. Again, we can agree to disagree poltically, and that's fine, but it's sort of disingenuous to say that the MSM is being a big old meany head to Trump when half the people voted for him. That's just false. How many people voted for Trump should have nothing to do with the criticism he receives from the media and others.

You know who I mean, but thanks for the correction. She was one example. There are many. Wonder how much work Robert De Nero lost for his violent words against Trump.

Why can't you equate the media, who influences millions and millions of people, with Roseanne? The "crimes" just don't fit the punishment. What Roseanne did was wrong, she apologized. But cancelling a show for what she said? Ok, then we need like treatment. The media has outright lied, daily, often with no retractions (or after the damage is done.) What penalty do they pay? Ok, their ratings are going to sh*t, but that is rather from the people.

It is disgusting how they lie to fit their agenda. From trying to change electoral college votes, to backing a fake Russian Dossier, to now calling a spy a "confidential informant". It won't end. And against the elected leader of a country? Really, 93% negative reporting? They didn't even talk hardly at all about what Trump did with Korea - the S. Korean president said Trump should get the Nobel Peace prize for his work there. They skip over the very low unemployment figures (or attribute it to all the PT jobs created by Obama). They skip over record GDP, skip over billions coming back into this country. Most of the media is treasonous in one form or another.

I will leave it there and just add, I can't wait till the IG report comes out and criminal prosecutions to begin. What has been going on against our President, like him or hate him, has been disgusting. The previous administration weaponising the FBI and DOJ to go against Trump. (And she still lost.)

Yikes. I had no idea that Alex Jones was a Knicks fan.

[Oscirus]

Silicon Valley is perhaps the most liberal part of CA. The two largest liberal strongholds (basically where Hillary got all her votes) were CA and NY. Even during the Facebook "hearings", Zuckerberg said that SV is extremely liberal. Been there a few times and I can agree. Heck, I thought being liberal was a good thing. But the liberal of 20 years ago and what has masqueraded as liberalism the last 10 or so, is really vastly different.

And yes, it isn't so black and white, but my points stand re Hollywood, SV and MSM. No matter your political belief. It is dangerous. They will use you to support their agenda and then, might not be so pretty.

But when when the religious right and other right wing morality police join forces with anti tax anti regulation big business interests for THEIR agenda, that's ok? Pretty sure those people don't believe what a lot of people believe nor is that agenda in line with a large number of Americans, yet that agenda is pushed, and hard, with lots of money behind it. That must be a bad thing too, right?

What benefits us? Us regular people? So far, Trump has. The tax cuts not only are giving everyone money back, but the government is collecting more revenue. And that was the idea. A bit like Reagans tax cuts, they worked too. But once he was out, they were gone. The last thing TPTB want is a policy that benefits us.

We have more regulations than we can handle. It is ridiculous. It slows business down and just makes the govt inefficient. I wouldn't equate less regulations with being outright designed to hurt the environment or just help big business (if that was what you were getting at.) Look at the banking regulations. Trump is overturning those regs that benefitted the big banks (Dodd Frank or stg like that) and put the smaller banks / credit unions (who really do good work) out of business.

BTW - I wouldn't equate Trumps base (at least not a lot of it) to any form of extreme religious views. Saying Religious Right is a bit of poisoning the well. I mean I doubt all right leaning people are religious (in that way.) The media has certainly tried to make being a Christian a crime, but outside of some zealots, I am ok with most non extreme religions (as long as they treat people fairly and don't repress groups and such.)

I prefer not to really identify with any groups (right, left.) I want what is best for everyone and that is a hard thing to achieve when we have essentially, 2 politcal parties. Crazy, eh?

Trickle down economics didn't work during the reagan era wont work now. Only thing these tax cuts do is widen the gap between the classes.
As for deregulation, if only there wasn't prove that such things cause unsavory business practices. If only that Glass-Seagall act wasn't repealed... Pity.

These regular people better hope that Trumps a one term president so they can blame the **** coming our way on the next president, otherwise, they just won't know what to do with themselves.