Consequences for Veterans and/or retirees in the 2021 DC Riots

[JTS11]

Here's a conservative writer's take

Witless Ape Rides Helicopter | National Review

Goodbye to Donald J. Trump, the man who wanted to be Conrad Hilton but turned out to be Paris Hilton.

www.nationalreview.com

I guess this is the new GOP hotness. Sounding like Code Pink after a military coup in Myanmar.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1356373794638716932

 

[Hair Warrior]

If the person refused to acknowledge it, because bad orange man was involved, then that person may be a "never Trumper "

So, pretty much the GOP's approach to the Obama administration, except with a different color in mind.

Are you implying that the Republican Party disagreed with or opposed Obama because of the color of his skin?

 

[GroundPounder]

So, pretty much the GOP's approach to the Obama administration, except with a different color in mind.

I disagree, to the extent that I do not believe President Obama's biracial status contributed to the motivation of most his detractors. To the people that opposed everything he did or proposed just because he was a democrat or due to his skin colour, my statement is the same.

I also think that the difference with President Obama ( and will be with President Biden ) was/is that the media will not lead the way with attacking almost 100% of his actions , nearly 100% of the time.

 

[Brett327]

I disagree, to the extent that I do not believe President Obama's biracial status contributed to the motivation of most his detractors. To the people that opposed everything he did or proposed just because he was a democrat or due to his skin colour, my statement is the same.

I also think that the difference with President Obama ( and will be with President Biden ) was/is that the media will not lead the way with attacking almost 100% of his actions , nearly 100% of the time.

I think it’s a complicated matter, and given what we’ve seen over the past few years where the GOP has given fairly wide berth to overtly racist right wing groups, it’s a fairly safe presumption that at least some of the opposition to President Obama was racially motivated. Yes, I agree that there was an underlying disagreement on policy and political philosophy, but that alone cannot explain the amount of vitriol and animosity we all witnessed with our own eyes.

 

[Pags]

I disagree, to the extent that I do not believe President Obama's biracial status contributed to the motivation of most his detractors. To the people that opposed everything he did or proposed just because he was a democrat or due to his skin colour, my statement is the same.

I also think that the difference with President Obama ( and will be with President Biden ) was/is that the media will not lead the way with attacking almost 100% of his actions , nearly 100% of the time.

There's a bit of a chicken/egg thing going on with the GOP vs Media that I think the GOP needs to come to terms with.

 

[SlickAg]

There's a bit of a chicken/egg thing going on with the GOP vs Media that I think the GOP needs to come to terms with.

In what way, exactly? I don’t understand how someone can say that Twitter and Facebook BLOCKING people’s ability to read and share a news article, less than one month prior to an election, is okay. And their excuse was well the story was bad because they used nefarious means to acquire the source data100% false. We’ve covered that on there.

And then a very rich Biden supporter pays for a “study” that doesn’t have any numbers of people blocked from Twitter in it because they don’t release the data, but they’ve checked it out and it’s true. Got it.

Tucker Carlson: NYU's farce of a study on Big Tech censorship of conservatives

Billionaires fund their own studies and they get the conclusions they pay for.

www.google.com

Study dismissing conservative concerns about Big Tech bias was funded by far-left Biden mega-donor | Fox News

Billionaire Craig Newmark gave millions to Poynter Institute, which published 'blacklist' of conservative sites in 2019

www.google.com

 

[Pags]

In what way, exactly? I don’t understand how someone can say that Twitter and Facebook BLOCKING people’s ability to read and share a news article, less than one month prior to an election, is okay. And their excuse was well the story was bad because they used nefarious means to acquire the source data100% false. We’ve covered that on there.

And then a very rich Biden supporter pays for a “study” that doesn’t have any numbers of people blocked from Twitter in it because they don’t release the data, but they’ve checked it out and it’s true. Got it.

Tucker Carlson: NYU's farce of a study on Big Tech censorship of conservatives

Billionaires fund their own studies and they get the conclusions they pay for.

www.google.com

Study dismissing conservative concerns about Big Tech bias was funded by far-left Biden mega-donor | Fox News

Billionaire Craig Newmark gave millions to Poynter Institute, which published 'blacklist' of conservative sites in 2019

www.google.com

I don't understand how you, as a conservative, can say that businesses can't run as they see fit.

That said, I meant at a historical level I cant imagine the issue is helped by conservatives bashing the media. Saying lots of nasty things about the media isn't going to get them a fairer shake. And frankly, the media a bunch of businesses so if they're not interested in giving the GOP a good read maybe the GOP should understand that that's what private business does. Especially when the GOP takes all the safeguards off of business controls.

 

[SlickAg]

I don't understand how you, as a conservative, can say that businesses can't run as they see fit.

That said, I meant at a historical level I cant imagine the issue is helped by conservatives bashing the media. Saying lots of nasty things about the media isn't going to get them a fairer shake. And frankly, the media a bunch of businesses so if they're not interested in giving the GOP a good read maybe the GOP should understand that that's what private business does. Especially when the GOP takes all the safeguards off of business controls.

This is where we have very different beliefs.

You are waxing poetic about a free press and implying that we should have journalistic objectivity and integrity.

When you talk about how media is “just a business” then you are advocating for lies, subjectivity, and yellow journalism because the bottom line is “we need to do whatever it takes to sell more papers!”

You can’t have it both ways. Ideally, the press isn’t supposed to lean one way or the other. Clearly, it does. And if you call that a “business decision”, fine. But that’s as crooked as saying that Republicans need to straighten up and fly right and stop calling out the press in order to get more favorable coverage from them.

Edit: All of these videos are a good watch, but here’s a very specific take on the Hunter Biden story.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1356706715249512448

 

[Jim123]

I don't understand how you, as a conservative, can say that businesses can't run as they see fit.

Part of the contentiousness here is some big tech businesses are big enough to be in common carrier territory. When you big enough then the privileges and responsibilities, that come with being a business of that size, change.

(Good point about conservatives and the media historically bashing each other, not really sure who started it or if that even makes a difference at this point.)

 

[taxi1]

I also think that the difference with President Obama ( and will be with President Biden ) was/is that the media will not lead the way with attacking almost 100% of his actions , nearly 100% of the time.

The media? From a recent article...

On Tuesday, Fox announced that it finished its 19th consecutive year as the No. 1 cable news network.

 

[GroundPounder]

The media? From a recent article...

On Tuesday, Fox announced that it finished its 19th consecutive year as the No. 1 cable news network.

Fox has pretty much all of the folks that want to consume their flavour of the news. The left can split up their viewing amongst the other outlets.

 

[taxi1]

Fox has pretty much all of the folks that want to consume their flavour of the news. The left can split up their viewing amongst the other outlets.

The fight now will be between OAN, Fox, NewsMax, etc. Then there's the talk radio. Then there's the online ecosystem.

Years ago, I remember reading in Civil War time that most towns had two newspapers, reflecting two views of the world. Seems we've come full circle.

 

[Pags]

This is where we have very different beliefs.

You are waxing poetic about a free press and implying that we should have journalistic objectivity and integrity.

When you talk about how media is “just a business” then you are advocating for lies, subjectivity, and yellow journalism because the bottom line is “we need to do whatever it takes to sell more papers!”

You can’t have it both ways. Ideally, the press isn’t supposed to lean one way or the other. Clearly, it does. And if you call that a “business decision”, fine. But that’s as crooked as saying that Republicans need to straighten up and fly right and stop calling out the press in order to get more favorable coverage from them.

Edit: All of these videos are a good watch, but here’s a very specific take on the Hunter Biden story.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1356706715249512448

I'm not sure I waxed poetic about a free press. I think having integrity and objectivity is good for journalists and a good ideal but I also think that it's an ideal vice an enforced standard. At the end of the day, i see it as more about establishing and selling trust as part of the media business.

That said a free press is an agreement between the govt and the media businesses. It means a media business can print what it wants. It has nothing to do with them printing what you want. I think people have a fundamental misunderstanding about that and makes them think otherwise.

I also think the GOP can do whatever they want but shouldn't be surprised if their actions and words have consequences. If the GOP were savvy they'd find a way to use the media as something other than an enemy.

 

[Pags]

Part of the contentiousness here is some big tech businesses are big enough to be in common carrier territory. When you big enough then the privileges and responsibilities, that come with being a business of that size, change.

(Good point about conservatives and the media historically bashing each other, not really sure who started it or if that even makes a difference at this point.)

Like I said before, there's a fight coming with Big Tech.

 

[Flash]

Fox has pretty much all of the folks that want to consume their flavour of the news. The left can split up their viewing amongst the other outlets.

Maybe, maybe not. With OAN and Newsmax grabbing some of the more batshit crazy Fox viewers, at least temporarily, and other news outlets gaining around the time the previous President left office they have lost some ground in the latest ratings. Will it hold? Doubtful, but an interesting last few months for the news networks to say the least.

P.S. We speak American here, not English or...gasp, Canadian.