192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:08 am
@thack45,
I like what you wrote very much thack. How long this aggressive chaos is sustainable is really the question.

And yes re Fleisher's "generosity". Ari is not one of my favorite people.
blatham
 
  4  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:10 am
@georgeob1,
Quote:
However, I thought twice and poured a second cup of coffee.

Toss in a quaalude george for the product's zen goodness.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:21 am
Great piece from Vox on Colbert's show these days
Quote:
...When it became clear that Trump was about to win, Colbert was almost at a loss for words. "I can't put a happy face on that,” he said, shell-shocked, “and that's my job."

Colbert’s blatant astonishment marked the beginning of a steady adjustment for The Late Show. Between the election and Trump’s inauguration, he largely stuck to the same kinds of obvious punchlines that drove his pre-election coverage — gotta get those tiny hand quips in while the getting’s good, I guess — but nonetheless infused his political commentary with a new undercurrent of disbelief. And when Inauguration Day came in January, Colbert kicked off his first show of the Trump administration with a monologue titled “This Is Really Happening,” as if to convince the audience — and himself — that they weren’t dreaming.

Once Trump officially took office, the panic that took hold of Colbert on election night evolved into anger, and then flourished. His jokes settled into a new and far more piercing rhythm. He began to spend night after night hammering the new administration with stark jokes explicitly designed to eviscerate, even as he delivered them with a twinkling grin. And now, two months in, he’s not pulling any punches or relying on low-hanging fruit; instead, he’s more than willing to call out Trump and his advisers as “sexist,” “white supremacists,” or acting like “dictators.”

(Lest you think this new direction might have startled or angered his audience, the opposite appears to be true: Colbert has been steadily beating longtime late-night ratings king Jimmy Fallon — who prefers inviting celebrities to play icebreaker games like every week is his first of college — for five straight weeks.)

As Donald Trump transitioned into President Trump, Colbert transitioned from stunned spectator into furious citizen. All of a sudden, after doing little to set himself apart from the increasingly crowded glut of late-night shows for more than a year, he seemed to decide there’s no reason to suppress what he truly thinks — as evidenced by the palpable anger he expresses with every passing day of Trumpian chaos.
Vox
To paraphrase Voltaire, this is very definitely the time to be making new enemies.
0 Replies
 
thack45
 
  4  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:22 am
@layman,
To an extent, you're right, I'm sure. But for many, the Great Trumpkin had shat away any semblance of credibility through his immutable ketchup slathered steak hole long before the election ever took place. Then there's Bannon's affiliation with Breitbart. And finally, you say things like "America first, baby!", which given some context, breaks down to, "Layman first, baby!"

That said, I'd read things written about him, but I'm not interested in things by him
izzythepush
 
  2  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:24 am
@blatham,
It is, there's a thread devoted to it, but nobody gives a **** because it's all a load of old bollocks. That's why he keeps having to bring it up here.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:28 am
I don't see any pattern here. Anyone see a pattern here?
Quote:
The New York Times has confirmed that Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano sourced his false allegation that former President Barack Obama asked British intelligence to spy on President Donald Trump to a discredited former CIA analyst. This analyst, Larry C. Johnson, floated the conspiracy theory on the Russian state-sponsored news network RT on March 6, the week after Trump’s original accusation that Obama was responsible for an illegal wiretap.
Media Matters
georgeob1
 
  0  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:30 am
@camlok,
piss off. You don't understand even a small fraction of the **** you post here.
georgeob1
 
  0  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:33 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

I don't see any pattern here. Anyone see a pattern here?


You see only the things that fit the preconceptions found in the sources you so slavishly follow.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:36 am
@georgeob1,
It dawns on me now, george, that I've never told you to "piss off". You know why? Quaaludes in my coffee. But stay away from the vanilla flavored version because that flavor in coffee works directly against that testosteroney thing you and I have going.
layman
 
  -1  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:41 am
@thack45,
Quote:
I'd read things written about him, but I'm not interested in things by him.


Why is that? Why is it that cheese-eaters always want to hear opinions, but not facts, about the topics they criticize?

They don't want to hear what Bannon says, just what others say ABOUT him. And, of course, they're very selective about who they will listen to in that regard, also.
thack45
 
  4  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:41 am
@blatham,
Thanks. Given my particularly dark feelings for the US lately, I'm simply in 4 tha trollin tha trollz, but I figure I ought to make an actual contribution every once in a month or five
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  6  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:44 am
@georgeob1,
Quote:
Hard not to notice the alt right authoritarian overtones here.

So when camlok continually raises a subject that no one else wants to discuss, repeatedly filling pages with attempts to get comments or attract attention, and there's already an active thread to discuss that very topic , suggesting that the discussion be moved is authoritarian??? Do I have that right?
Quote:
(...)the Bannon-like psychodrama of the evolution of this dark underside of Blatham's psyche(...)


And, good god, please — enough of the armchair psychoanalysis and the authoritarian(!) attempts to restrict the re-posting of articles from well-known media sources and journals of opinion. I like to see how the press covers the events of the day — I only wish conservatives made more effort to submit erudite pieces from a conservative point of view instead of just posting tiresome memes, forwarding fake news, and bitching about links.

Of course I may be in error in supposing that erudite sources of the conservative point of view actually exist.
thack45
 
  3  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:45 am
@layman,
I assumed these opinions of him that you've posted were at the very least favorable
layman
 
  -1  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:46 am
@hightor,
I gotcho "erudite source" right here, eh?
layman
 
  -1  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:47 am
@thack45,
thack45 wrote:

I assumed these opinions of him that you've posted were at the very least favorable


Well, you assume wrong. I have simply posted his own words. Any "opinions" involved are his, and he doesn't opine about himself.
thack45
 
  3  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:53 am
@layman,
Dude. You just said you had posted things about him. But I give. Being a noob on all things Bannon, please give me and others like me a proper starting point. Eh.
layman
 
  -1  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:54 am
@layman,
It's the same with Trump. No cheese-eater will listen to a word he says. They just want to hear, second-hand, what the media says he said, which then becomes "fact" in their mind.

The media will tell you that he mocked a disabled reporter, "attacked" a gold star family, and any number of other outright falsehoods, and the cheese-eaters dutifully repeat them as fact, all the while being totally unwilling to see what was said/done for themselves.
layman
 
  0  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 11:58 am
@thack45,
thack45 wrote:

Dude. You just said you had posted things about him.

You didn't read my post very carefully, eh?
layman
 
  -1  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 12:02 pm
@layman,
Here ya go---here's a repost of one of the videos. I'm sure no one will listen to it, but that won't stop them from telling you exactly what Bannon thinks:

georgeob1
 
  0  
Sun 19 Mar, 2017 12:04 pm
@blatham,
I prefer the coffee black. That and wine, and the occasional whiskey, are the only recreational drugs in which I indulge. (though as a young man I smoked cigarettes for a few years until I noticed their effects on my altitude tolerance and physical endurance. ) Though I didn't at the time know an explanation of the, now verified, serotonin rush, I was an early addict of what was once called "runner's high". I recognized quickly that, though it didn't solve any of my problems, for about eight hours after a good workout, I didn't give a damn.

There's nothing hormonal going on. Instead I very strongly disagree with the basic ideas you push so incessantly here, and believe that I have ample knowledge and direct experience ( more than you) on which to base very different views - all previously expressed here.

In addition, while I understand the effects of the spotlight in exposing the frailties and failings of anyone, or any organization or nation, in a leading or dominant role in any endeavor ( while the spectators and critics themselves remain blissfully anonymous and unexamined), I am also offended by intrusive commentaries here by folks from other countries ( in the words of Merle Haggard's song, it excites the fighting side of me), who, like you, generally evade any discussion of similar issues in their own.

Finally I find some admirable and engaging talents in you, and regret your wasting them on this stuff.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.48 seconds on 10/02/2024 at 06:18:30