Political Roundtable Part XXVI

[dobrojim]

So long Sarah

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/sarah-sanders-was-the-disdainful-queen-of-gaslighting/2019/06/14/d6eb36c8-8e8d-11e9-adf3-f70f78c156e8_story.html?utm_term=.dd61406e15f4

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[Pointgod]

Biden is our default nominee unless Warren can prove she can do better, which I think she can. We'll see. Also need to win back the Senate. Man I want to see the expression on McConnell's face when he loses his next election. Unlikely though. Frickin Kentucky. What a vile and despicable person, a true enemy of the people.

McConnell is a coward like Paul Ryan and will probably rather quit than be the minority leader.

[Pointgod]

So long Sarah

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/sarah-sanders-was-the-disdainful-queen-of-gaslighting/2019/06/14/d6eb36c8-8e8d-11e9-adf3-f70f78c156e8_story.html?utm_term=.dd61406e15f4

Good riddance to bad trash. In a just world everyone that held prominent positions in the Trump administration would have their careers ruined for the foreseeable future.

[dobrojim]

Her quintessential moment came in the May 11, 2017, White House press briefing in which she was skeptically questioned by Michael Shear of the New York Times about her statements that she’d heard from “countless” FBI employees about how grateful they were that Trump had fired the agency’s director, James B. Comey.

“Really?” asked Shear.

She replied without a shred of doubt, and as if Shear were the dumbest guy she’d ever seen.

“Between, like, email, text messages, absolutely. Yes,” Sanders said. “We’re not going to get into a numbers game. I mean, I have heard from a large number of individuals that work at the FBI that said that they’re very happy with the president’s decision.”

Eventually, she was forced, under oath, to admit that this was made-up nonsense.

The report by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III: “Sanders told this Office that her reference to hearing from ‘countless members of the FBI’ was a ‘slip of the tongue.’ . . . She also recalled that her statement in a separate press interview that rank-and-file FBI agents had lost confidence in Comey was a comment she made ‘in the heat of the moment’ that was not founded on anything.”

[montestewart]

Her quintessential moment came in the May 11, 2017, White House press briefing in which she was skeptically questioned by Michael Shear of the New York Times about her statements that she’d heard from “countless” FBI employees about how grateful they were that Trump had fired the agency’s director, James B. Comey.

“Really?” asked Shear.

She replied without a shred of doubt, and as if Shear were the dumbest guy she’d ever seen.

“Between, like, email, text messages, absolutely. Yes,” Sanders said. “We’re not going to get into a numbers game. I mean, I have heard from a large number of individuals that work at the FBI that said that they’re very happy with the president’s decision.”

Eventually, she was forced, under oath, to admit that this was made-up nonsense.

The report by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III: “Sanders told this Office that her reference to hearing from ‘countless members of the FBI’ was a ‘slip of the tongue.’ . . . She also recalled that her statement in a separate press interview that rank-and-file FBI agents had lost confidence in Comey was a comment she made ‘in the heat of the moment’ that was not founded on anything.”

If pressed under oath, Sanders would likely have to admit that countless other assertions were also lies (slips of the tongue, heat-of-the-moment errors, whatever). Trump supporter response would be:
1) That is no different than any other press secretary (maybe or maybe not offering any evidence to back that up), and
2) If you put reporters on the stand under oath, they would have to admit to many lies (again, no actual evidence needed).

Reporters occasionally report stories that are not properly vetted/confirmed, rely on faulty or even forged documents, and occasionally flat out fabricate stories. They also often get the stories right, and when many reporters seem to be reporting similar things, it's less likely a conspiracy and more likely the professional press getting to the truth. But "some better, some worse, some great, some horrible," "television news is too captive to ratings," etc. is too nuanced. "They are all liars" is so much easier.

Using Trump's intuitive, unctuous, and relentless BS as the message and the free press of Twitter, etc. as the vehicle, the Executive has evolved the government's end around the 1st Amendment. To his supporters, anything that criticizes him is FAKE NEWS! and anything that supports him (increasingly outside traditional media channels) is the truth. There seems to be virtually no fact checking, skepticism, grey areas, room for doubt, just a black and white world of Anti-Trump lies and an amazing Trump truth.

It's almost like Trump sprung from a sports discussion board.

[daoneandonly]

I'll agree that corruption and abortion are akin to apples and oranges.
But no one is really arguing for either one as a preferred policy position.

That said, you still try to claim that a fetus is morally the same as an actual baby.
They're not. It's arguing in bad faith to make the claim that they are the same.[snip]

But it goes beyond religious beliefs, its basic humanity. if it was religious I'd talk about same sex marriage as well, but I never do

If we're diving into this whole religious and enforcing one's belief, where's the line? I could argue paying for welfare and other social uplifting programs is an enforcement of the help others religious belief, why is that different? Or the healthcare and atrocities of separating kids form their families at the border, why is one separate religious beliefs and feelings and the other not? because of something science/biology says? Well science and biology also says the brain does not fully develop until age 30, so then shall we change the legal voting age to 30? Drinking age? Etc? After all, those are things that should be afforded to adults, not people who still dont have fully developed brains.

You somehow missed or chose to ignore the most salient point -
it's a bad faith argument that a fetus should have the same rights as an actual baby.
They are clearly very different. [edit to add- nice job above Zonk]

The second most salient point is the question of who is best suited to make
a difficult decision, the person most directly involved or the govt ie some outside authority.
You did not address that question either.

Says who? Science? Again, science also indicates a brain is not fully developed until age 30, so can we give folks 30 and up more rights than those 18-29? I.e., voting, drinking, etc.

It's not a bad faith argument, that's all the pro chociers have to cling to because killing a fetus does not sound as reprehensible as killing a baby

[daoneandonly]

You're never going to convince these idiots with their narrow minded beliefs about baby killing, you just have to write them off as misguided morons.

Bottom line.

So people who disagree with you because they have a conscious and heart for the voiceless are idiots and narrow minded, kind of the pot calling the kettle black there

[queridiculo]

You're never going to convince these idiots with their narrow minded beliefs about baby killing, you just have to write them off as misguided morons.

Bottom line.

So people who disagree with you because they have a conscious and heart for the voiceless are idiots and narrow minded, kind of the pot calling the kettle black there

Save your sanctimonious grandstanding for somebody that gives a ****.

[daoneandonly]

You're never going to convince these idiots with their narrow minded beliefs about baby killing, you just have to write them off as misguided morons.

Bottom line.

So people who disagree with you because they have a conscious and heart for the voiceless are idiots and narrow minded, kind of the pot calling the kettle black there

Save your sanctimonious grandstanding for somebody that gives a ****.

There's the liberal class, or lack thereof, that's so evident in this country, yet the media loves to ignore. You're more like Trump than you'd ever like to admit with all the childish name calling and vulgar language

[queridiculo]

So people who disagree with you because they have a conscious and heart for the voiceless are idiots and narrow minded, kind of the pot calling the kettle black there

Save your sanctimonious grandstanding for somebody that gives a ****.

There's the liberal class, or lack thereof, that's so evident in this country, yet the media loves to ignore. You're more like Trump than you'd ever like to admit with all the childish name calling and vulgar language

Placating morons like you and the rest of the deplorables is the real problem.

This idea that there's a reasonable debate to be had with you is so ludicrous and absurd that I can't help but burst out laughing when you come here with your claims of being the messenger of love and compassion.

You talk about protecting the voiceless while kicking down on those that actually have a voice.

You show your compassion by burying people that are desperate so deep that they choke.

You are no do gooder. You're an evil self-righteous prick. You don't deserve to be heard, you don't deserve to be reasoned with.

You're a write off, that's all.

[Zonkerbl]

[daoneandonly]

Save your sanctimonious grandstanding for somebody that gives a ****.

There's the liberal class, or lack thereof, that's so evident in this country, yet the media loves to ignore. You're more like Trump than you'd ever like to admit with all the childish name calling and vulgar language

Placating morons like you and the rest of the deplorables is the real problem.

This idea that there's a reasonable debate to be had with you is so ludicrous and absurd that I can't help but burst out laughing when you come here with your claims of being the messenger of love and compassion.

You talk about protecting the voiceless while kicking down on those that actually have a voice.

You show your compassion by burying people that are desperate so deep that they choke.

You are no do gooder. You're an evil self-righteous prick. You don't deserve to be heard, you don't deserve to be reasoned with.

You're a write off, that's all.

Who am I kicking down exactly? Drug addicts who your side thinks are victims and have no fault or blame for their plight? Yeah they deserve more consideration and thought than innocent babies. Because the only people I've talked down here are people who made a choice to commit a crime and/or use drugs, that word you like so much, choice. Again the hypocrisy of government should stay out of a woman's choice over her body, but fund the institution she can go to for her body needs

You have some anger issues, and it's easy to tell you are using a thesaurus to "grandstand", thing is you couldn't even properly use grandstanding as who exactly am I exactly placating or applause fishing to on this super liberal progressive board.

[queridiculo]

Who am I kicking down exactly? Drug addicts who your side thinks are victims and have no fault or blame for their plight? Yeah they deserve more consideration and thought than innocent babies. Because the only people I've talked down here are people who made a choice to commit a crime and/or use drugs, that word you like so much, choice. Again the hypocrisy of government should stay out of a woman's choice over her body, but fund the institution she can go to for her body needs

You have some anger issues, and it's easy to tell you are using a thesaurus to "grandstand", thing is you couldn't even properly use grandstanding as who exactly am I exactly placating or applause fishing to on this super liberal progressive board.

Bravo, bravo.

Thank you so much for making my point.

[dobrojim]

Implicit support of separating children from parents and putting them in cages has the ring
of 'kicking down' if you ask me.

Your position that a living breathing baby has the same moral status as a fetus of undetermined
gestational age is the equivalent of acting in extremis to save a freezer with 500 fertilized embryos
instead of a single baby in a baby carriage. I honestly don't think you would actually act in that
way, but you're arguing as though you would and that that would be good and proper.
That's an argument in bad faith.

[daoneandonly]

Implicit support of separating children from parents and putting them in cages has the ring
of 'kicking down' if you ask me.

Your position that a living breathing baby has the same moral status as a fetus of undetermined
gestational age is the equivalent of acting in extremis to save a freezer with 500 fertilized embryos
instead of a single baby in a baby carriage. I honestly don't think you would actually act in that
way, but you're arguing as though you would and that that would be good and proper.
That's an argument in bad faith.

Thing is I didn't and still don't support that, never praised the administration for it and thought it was a heartless act, because again, a child is innocent, not just ones that pass through a birth canal.

[daoneandonly]

Who am I kicking down exactly? Drug addicts who your side thinks are victims and have no fault or blame for their plight? Yeah they deserve more consideration and thought than innocent babies. Because the only people I've talked down here are people who made a choice to commit a crime and/or use drugs, that word you like so much, choice. Again the hypocrisy of government should stay out of a woman's choice over her body, but fund the institution she can go to for her body needs

You have some anger issues, and it's easy to tell you are using a thesaurus to "grandstand", thing is you couldn't even properly use grandstanding as who exactly am I exactly placating or applause fishing to on this super liberal progressive board.

Bravo, bravo.

Thank you so much for making my point.

You are welcome, nice to know you think the life of a druggie or criminal far outweighs that of a baby, kudos to you on your empathy. I'm sure having criminals and drug choosers in your inner circle has led you to such a tainted and slanted view. if that's who you claim I'm kicking down, so be it, they made a choice that put them in their predicament.

[queridiculo]

You are welcome, nice to know you think the life of a druggie or criminal far outweighs that of a baby, kudos to you on your empathy. I'm sure having criminals and drug choosers in your inner circle has led you to such a tainted and slanted view. if that's who you claim I'm kicking down, so be it, they made a choice that put them in their predicament.

Halleluja!

Preach brother dimmus bulbus!