• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What to Think Today, Courtesy The Washington Post

JMaximus

JMaximus

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2017
Messages
2,113
Reaction score
604
Location
Upper Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
WaPo's regular audience has become so dependent on them for forming even rudimentary thoughts that they probably don't even take this as the affront to their basic intellect (what remains of it) that it is...

For those of us with functioning brains more than capable of comprehending the meanings of simple English words, headlines like this only remove the last bit of doubt that WaPo is anything more than politicized propaganda.

Headline:
"How to understand Trump’s condemnation of ‘all types of racism’"
 
JMaximus said:
WaPo's regular audience has become so dependent on them for forming even rudimentary thoughts that they probably don't even take this as the affront to their basic intellect (what remains of it) that it is...

For those of us with functioning brains more than capable of comprehending the meanings of simple English words, headlines like this only remove the last bit of doubt that WaPo is anything more than politicized propaganda.

Headline:
"How to understand Trump’s condemnation of ‘all types of racism’"
Click to expand...

Indeed, WaPo is telling us that racism is a one way street. This is another psychosocial factor that maintains the fundamental immiscibility of the races, which both racists and non-racists desire.
 
Trump says a lot of stupid stuff, but I fail to see what was so controversial in what he said. Racism is bad, no matter where it comes from. Duh.
 
I guess condemning all types of racism is controversial like that other extremely controversial position that all lives matter.
 
This demonstrates the arrogance of the mainstream media. WaPo and others, even local TV stations, portray themselves as telling the citizens how to think about any given subject. They portray themselves as an indispensable guide for the citizen as to how to conduct his daily affairs.

So much bull**** from the propaganda farms.
 
TheGoverness said:
Trump says a lot of stupid stuff, but I fail to see what was so controversial in what he said. Racism is bad, no matter where it comes from. Duh.
Click to expand...

You have to read the article. Here's the psycho-babble that describes the controversy:

On the surface, condemning racism in any form seems noncontroversial. Of course racism should be condemned. What makes Trump’s comments questionable, though, is that it goes out of its way to include a condemnation of “all types” of racism, instead of simply condemning “racism.” By pointedly adding “all types,” he’s implicitly raising the question of which types of racism might be overlooked unless they were included. And a natural answer to that question is perceived racism against white people.
Click to expand...

Only someone motivated by extreme hate can manage to twist a simply statement into something bad.
 
TheGoverness said:
Trump says a lot of stupid stuff, but I fail to see what was so controversial in what he said. Racism is bad, no matter where it comes from. Duh.
Click to expand...

The controversy comes from the one-way nature of racism. When Trump mentions "all forms", he is implying that racism against whites is wrong, and WaPo tells us that this is not the case.
 
JMaximus said:
WaPo's regular audience has become so dependent on them for forming even rudimentary thoughts that they probably don't even take this as the affront to their basic intellect (what remains of it) that it is...

For those of us with functioning brains more than capable of comprehending the meanings of simple English words, headlines like this only remove the last bit of doubt that WaPo is anything more than politicized propaganda.

Headline:
"How to understand Trump’s condemnation of ‘all types of racism’"
Click to expand...

Golly, that's interesting.

What's got you so atwitter about the information at the link?

Please be very specific.
 
Mycroft said:
You have to read the article. Here's the psycho-babble that describes the controversy:



Only someone motivated by extreme hate can manage to twist a simply statement into something bad.
Click to expand...

That really just strikes me as a serious amount reaching. Like, that should be a statement we should all get behind. But whatever, I guess.
 
Thoreau72 said:
This demonstrates the arrogance of the mainstream media. WaPo and others, even local TV stations, portray themselves as telling the citizens how to think about any given subject. They portray themselves as an indispensable guide for the citizen as to how to conduct his daily affairs.

So much bull**** from the propaganda farms.
Click to expand...

It's gotten to the point where none of the mainstream media is anything more than identity politicians.

It's all horse kaka.
 
I believe our bigger issue here, even with media bias on this, is that Trump cannot distance himself enough from prior mistakes on this. It almost does not matter what he does now, there is a vested political interest in ensuring Trump is painted a certain way.
 
TheGoverness said:
That really just strikes me as a serious amount reaching. Like, that should be a statement we should all get behind. But whatever, I guess.
Click to expand...

That's how the Trump hating media works. Spin, speculation, innuendo, hyperbole...and sometimes a fair bit of lying. With those tools, they can turn any simple, reasonable statement into a scandal.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Golly, that's interesting.

What's got you so atwitter about the information at the link?

Please be very specific.
Click to expand...

Nothing. I thought I was pretty specific already. The content of the 'article' is typical WaPo.

The point of the thread was to highlight the blatantness of the headline employed. "How to understand" is the same as "here's what to think".

They're not even trying to hide what they're up to. They've become firmly confident that their regular audience is too brain-dead to spot what is going on and the ones who do notice are just too appreciative of the kind folks at WaPo taking away that inconvenient task of thinking for themselves.

"We're about to tell you what you need to think - read on quickly before you accidentally form your own opinion."
 
JMaximus said:
Nothing. I thought I was pretty specific already. The content of the 'article' is typical WaPo.

The point of the thread was to highlight the blatantness of the headline employed. "How to understand" is the same as "here's what to think".
Click to expand...

Nah, not really. It's just offering one interpretation. You don't have to accept it.
They're not even trying to hide what they're up to. They've become firmly confident that their regular audience is too brain-dead to spot what is going on and the ones who do notice are just too appreciative of the kind folks at WaPo taking away that inconvenient task of thinking for themselves.

"We're about to tell you what you need to think - read on quickly before you accidentally form your own opinion."
Click to expand...

How can they hide what they're not actually doing?
 
Thoreau72 said:
This demonstrates the arrogance of the mainstream media. WaPo and others, even local TV stations, portray themselves as telling the citizens how to think about any given subject. They portray themselves as an indispensable guide for the citizen as to how to conduct his daily affairs.

So much bull**** from the propaganda farms.
Click to expand...

Naturally we would never get anything like this from Fox or any other right wing outlets! At the very least the WaPo doesn't lie to their readers every single day
 
TheGoverness said:
Trump says a lot of stupid stuff, but I fail to see what was so controversial in what he said. Racism is bad, no matter where it comes from. Duh.
Click to expand...

Nope, that statement is offensive just like saying that 'all lives matter' is. Identity politics demands that folks respect their assigned identity and spew only their assigned talking points.
 
OrphanSlug said:
I believe our bigger issue here, even with media bias on this, is that Trump cannot distance himself enough from prior mistakes on this. It almost does not matter what he does now, there is a vested political interest in ensuring Trump is painted a certain way.
Click to expand...

Just as with this current issue, Trump has not made any "prior mistakes". The nonsense twisting and turning we see in this article is the same twisting and turning we've seen in every article about Trump since he came down that escalator. That vested political interest you speak of started day one.

But you are correct. It doesn't matter what he does and Trump knows it. So...he just goes ahead and does what he promised the people when he got elected.
 
Floridafan said:
Naturally we would never get anything like this from Fox or any other right wing outlets! At the very least the WaPo doesn't lie to their readers every single day
Click to expand...

Oh...WaPo certainly isn't the only ones. Fox is part of the mainstream media, after all...and it is certainly part of the multimedia echo chamber.

But you are wrong. The kind of nonsense we see in this WaPo article is nothing more than a lie. This is what the entire mainstream media does: They lie.
 
Mycroft said:
Oh...WaPo certainly isn't the only ones. Fox is part of the mainstream media, after all...and it is certainly part of the multimedia echo chamber.

But you are wrong. The kind of nonsense we see in this WaPo article is nothing more than a lie. This is what the entire mainstream media does: They lie.
Click to expand...

Aren't you the one and same who tells us that Trump never lies?
 
Floridafan said:
Naturally we would never get anything like this from Fox or any other right wing outlets! At the very least the WaPo doesn't lie to their readers every single day
Click to expand...

"We're only a little better than Fox" is a terribly low standard...
 
Mycroft said:
Just as with this current issue, Trump has not made any "prior mistakes". The nonsense twisting and turning we see in this article is the same twisting and turning we've seen in every article about Trump since he came down that escalator. That vested political interest you speak of started day one.

But you are correct. It doesn't matter what he does and Trump knows it. So...he just goes ahead and does what he promised the people when he got elected.
Click to expand...

We would not be having this conversation if you were completely right.

In this forum we (we as in DP) have talked before about Trump's lack of political experience coming with a benefit and a cost, we have also talked about Trump tending to go with a message that the fringe right will run with, and lastly we have talked about that day 1 fight with the media that was never on his side so he gambled with that. You do have points on all that, the issue is those that disagree with you tend to flock to the message given by that media opposition and here we are.

The OP article itself talks about several events early on for Trump that he did not handle in a means that avoided a political landmine, the conversation we are having today is because of those early on decisions Trump made discussing (or waiting to discuss) these things. Now you may not like any of that and file the whole thing away as the media is out to get Trump, but it excuses something he arguably did intentionally. Act without political prowess and go with a bull in a china shop attitude when dealing with these events early on in his Presidency.

Seemingly Trump wants this dispute with the media and will gravitate towards media and commentary that agrees with him. While not the first President to do this, Trump seems to have doubled down on the political advantages and risks of a fight with the media. This thread is evidenced of that even if you agree with Trump 100%, we are having this conversation for a real reason you do not get to dismiss just because.

It is as if Trump supporters want the division to make a point about the media just to be upset that it is there, all while forgiving Trump's clear efforts to combat the media. As if Trump has always been on the defense, but going back to his campaign he clearly was on the attack very early on setting the stage for this conversation we are having now.

Should Trump have done all this? Should the media have done all they did? Unsure, but I do know both sides are looking for advantages from this behavior and it is asinine to assume Trump is just some long term victim here.
 
OrphanSlug said:
We would not be having this conversation if you were completely right.

In this forum we (we as in DP) have talked before about Trump's lack of political experience coming with a benefit and a cost, we have also talked about Trump tending to go with a message that the fringe right will run with, and lastly we have talked about that day 1 fight with the media that was never on his side so he gambled with that. You do have points on all that, the issue is those that disagree with you tend to flock to the message given by that media opposition and here we are.

The OP article itself talks about several events early on for Trump that he did not handle in a means that avoided a political landmine, the conversation we are having today is because of those early on decisions Trump made discussing (or waiting to discuss) these things. Now you may not like any of that and file the whole thing away as the media is out to get Trump, but it excuses something he arguably did intentionally. Act without political prowess and go with a bull in a china shop attitude when dealing with these events early on in his Presidency.

Seemingly Trump wants this dispute with the media and will gravitate towards media and commentary that agrees with him. While not the first President to do this, Trump seems to have doubled down on the political advantages and risks of a fight with the media. This thread is evidenced of that even if you agree with Trump 100%, we are having this conversation for a real reason you do not get to dismiss just because.

It is as if Trump supporters want the division to make a point about the media just to be upset that it is there, all while forgiving Trump's clear efforts to combat the media. As if Trump has always been on the defense, but going back to his campaign he clearly was on the attack very early on setting the stage for this conversation we are having now.

Should Trump have done all this? Should the media have done all they did? Unsure, but I do know both sides are looking for advantages from this behavior and it is asinine to assume Trump is just some long term victim here.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom