Shutdown Over Border Security?

[Mountain Man]

Pelosi is claiming that she and her colleagues were planning to fly commercial for their overseas trip until Trump jeopardized their safety by publicly announcing their travel itinerary in his letter. That of course explains why Pelosi and her gang piled onto an Air Force bus headed to Andrews Air Force base where (they thought) an Air Force plane was waiting for them.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...ir-force-base/

[One Bad Pig]

Pelosi is claiming that she and her colleagues were planning to fly commercial for their overseas trip until Trump jeopardized their safety by publicly announcing their travel itinerary in his letter. That of course explains why Pelosi and her gang piled onto an Air Force bus headed to Andrews Air Force base where (they thought) an Air Force plane was waiting for them.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...ir-force-base/

Close. Her chief if staff is claiming that they were making alternate plans to travel commercial after the military flight was revoked by Trump, but that the Trump administration had leaked the commercial plans after they were made, making it unsafe. I find that unconvincing, since if they were leaked we'd know what they are.

[Sparko]

48932558_2478359695539845_3968256035805724672_n.jpg

[rogue06]

What the border patrol wants is strategic extra fencing in some areas (not a Trumpian wall) to compliment the fencing already there...

[rogue06]

It wasn't just CNN.

NBC's Chief White House correspondent Hallie Jackson and Ali Velshi, a senior economic and business correspondent for NBC News were railing and ranting about Trump's "sophomoric ... power play." On MSNBC Live host Katy Tur and her panelists were blasting Trump as a "man baby." New York Times columnist Bret Stephens was denouncing Trump for being "incredibly foolish" and "childish."

Note that there was no such criticism of Pelosi but rather praise.

Again - MSNBC is ranked just slightly to the left of CNN - and both as far left as Fox is right. So...again... what did you expect?

And the New York Times who I also mentioned but you left out as well as NBC's Chief White House correspondent? Is there a reason you omitted them?

But let's continue shall we?

When Pelosi expressed her goal of cancelling the State of the Union over at CBS This MorningToday show one of the network's White House correspondent Peter Alexander gushed over how Pelosi was "flexing her muscles" but the same program described Trump as being full of "pettiness."

[rogue06]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]34509[/ATTACH]

00000000000000ab000-004.jpg

00000000000000a.jpg

smiley rimshot.gif

[carpedm9587]

And the New York Times who I also mentioned but you left out as well as NBC's Chief White House correspondent? Is there a reason you omitted them?

I kind of thought it was pretty obvious that a "columnist" is not the same as a news reporter.

But let's continue shall we?

I have to admit that the "grin" emoji has always struck me as evil looking. It should be :evilgrin:

When Pelosi expressed her goal of cancelling the State of the Union over at CBS This Morning the move was praised as clever "political maneuvering" and a "power move." Trump's response was termed "petty political" bickering.

Rogue - as best I can tell, "CBS This Morning" is the CBS equivalent of "Fox and Friends." Although these programs often use the backdrops of a news room - they are about as much "news" as "Oprah" or "Helen" or (for us older dudes), "Mike Douglas."

Today show one of the network's White House correspondent Peter Alexander gushed over how Pelosi was "flexing her muscles" but the same program described Trump as being full of "pettiness."

The same thing is true of the "Today" show. These aren't news programs. They're talk programs with commentary that talk about pretty much anything, including the latest news stories. They are essentially "verbal columnists."

And there is a left lean to most such programming - except on Fox of course. There the lean is strongly right.

[rogue06]

I kind of thought it was pretty obvious that a "columnist" is not the same as a news reporter.



Rogue - as best I can tell, "CBS This Morning" is the CBS equivalent of "Fox and Friends." Although these programs often use the backdrops of a news room - they are about as much "news" as "Oprah" or "Helen" or (for us older dudes), "Mike Douglas."



The same thing is true of the "Today" show. These aren't news programs. They're talk programs with commentary that talk about pretty much anything, including the latest news stories. They are essentially "verbal columnists."

And there is a left lean to most such programming - except on Fox of course. There the lean is strongly right.

That's a lot of fitful flailing and floundering there carpe. You seem to be deliberately overlooking that several of these comments are coming from Chief White House correspondents and the like.

[Tassman]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...p-nbpc/580237/

This is what Pelosi is advocating. Pelosi said Democrats would give money for "border security" but not a Trumpian wall.

[carpedm9587]

That's a lot of fitful flailing and floundering there carpe.

You and Seer and Sparko are definitely fans of pointless well poisoning.

You seem to be deliberately overlooking that several of these comments are coming from Chief White House correspondents and the like.

That I missed completely. So which White House correspondents and what statements where?

For the rest, I stand by the observation that the Today show, Good Morning America, Fox and Friends, Hannity, Maddow, and all of the programs of their ilk are not "news." They are the visual equivalent of columnists. Because of how they are structured - they confuse a lot of people - no question about it.

And media outlets are skewed. There are essentially no outlets I know of that aren't left or right leaning - with more left than right. In this day and age - the reader/viewer needs to be alert - or they're going to get conned.

Why do more lean left than right? Gee - I dunno. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that news is now a for-profit business, there are more liberals and progressives than conservatives, so outlets go where the money is? Maybe it has something to do with more moderates/liberals going into journalism than conservatives? Fox and Hannity (and Limbaugh, and Coulter, and others) noted that way back and set out to serve an under-served market - which explains their strong right-wing lean.

Maybe what we need today is to find a way to get money OUT of news so they are not beholden to advertisers who are in turn looking for eyeballs?

Or I suppose we could go with "it's a vast left-wing conspiracy."

[One Bad Pig]

You and Seer and Sparko are definitely fans of pointless well poisoning.

I suspect you were aiming for some other logical fallacy, whatever it may be. They're not the ones denigrating all sorts of programs as "not real news".

That I missed completely. So which White House correspondents and what statements where?

For the rest, I stand by the observation that the Today show, Good Morning America, Fox and Friends, Hannity, Maddow, and all of the programs of their ilk are not "news." They are the visual equivalent of columnists. Because of how they are structured - they confuse a lot of people - no question about it.

And media outlets are skewed. There are essentially no outlets I know of that aren't left or right leaning - with more left than right. In this day and age - the reader/viewer needs to be alert - or they're going to get conned.

Why do more lean left than right? Gee - I dunno. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that news is now a for-profit business, there are more liberals and progressives than conservatives, so outlets go where the money is? Maybe it has something to do with more moderates/liberals going into journalism than conservatives? Fox and Hannity (and Limbaugh, and Coulter, and others) noted that way back and set out to serve an under-served market - which explains their strong right-wing lean.

Maybe what we need today is to find a way to get money OUT of news so they are not beholden to advertisers who are in turn looking for eyeballs?

Or I suppose we could go with "it's a vast left-wing conspiracy."

Looks like rogue skewered you pretty well, since you're still doing that flailing and floundering thing.

[carpedm9587]

I suspect you were aiming for some other logical fallacy, whatever it may be.

No - that's the right one.

Poisoning the well is a type of informal logical fallacy where irrelevant adverse information about a target is preemptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing something that the target person is about to say."

Comments like "that's ridiculous/silly/nonsense/handwaving" don't actually contribute to an argument - they simply are designed to predispose anyone who is following the argument to be predisposed to dismiss any comments made (before and after) as ridiculous/silly/nonsense/handwaving, etc. I can see no other purpose to their continual inclusion by the usual cast of characters. They don't actually contribute to a defense/response or to a logical discussion.

They're not the ones denigrating all sorts of programs as "not real news".

Denigrating? OBP it is not "denigrating" to point out that an article is an opinion piece - or a column. These reflect the opinion of the author, and not necessarily (or even usually) present hard news. That is what has happened to many "news" programs these days. The line between "commentary" and "news" has been badly muddied because news is now a profit center and requires eyeballs - and commentary gets eyeballs. So I distinguish between news programs (e.g., the Fox and NPR hourly news podcast feeds), and commentary programs like Potomac Watch, the Today Show, Good Morning America, Fox and Friends, and the like. I recognize most Americans do not (as far as I can tell). Then you have programs like Anderson Cooper, where news is reported with a healthy does of opinion tossed in. The age of Cronkite is pretty much over.

However, in general, recognizing or identifying a thing is not the same as denigrating a thing.

Looks like rogue skewered you pretty well, since you're still doing that flailing and floundering thing.

And more well poisoning....

[rogue06]

And the New York Times who I also mentioned but you left out as well as NBC's Chief White House correspondent? Is there a reason you omitted them?

But let's continue shall we?

When Pelosi expressed her goal of cancelling the State of the Union over at CBS This MorningToday show one of the network's White House correspondent Peter Alexander gushed over how Pelosi was "flexing her muscles" but the same program described Trump as being full of "pettiness."

00000000000000ab000-006.jpg

[carpedm9587]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]34547[/ATTACH]

And the point is...?

[One Bad Pig]

No - that's the right one.

Poisoning the well is a type of informal logical fallacy where irrelevant adverse information about a target is preemptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing something that the target person is about to say."

Comments like "that's ridiculous/silly/nonsense/handwaving" don't actually contribute to an argument - they simply are designed to predispose anyone who is following the argument to be predisposed to dismiss any comments made (before and after) as ridiculous/silly/nonsense/handwaving, etc. I can see no other purpose to their continual inclusion by the usual cast of characters. They don't actually contribute to a defense/response or to a logical discussion.



Denigrating? OBP it is not "denigrating" to point out that an article is an opinion piece - or a column. These reflect the opinion of the author, and not necessarily (or even usually) present hard news. That is what has happened to many "news" programs these days. The line between "commentary" and "news" has been badly muddied because news is now a profit center and requires eyeballs - and commentary gets eyeballs. So I distinguish between news programs (e.g., the Fox and NPR hourly news podcast feeds), and commentary programs like Potomac Watch, the Today Show, Good Morning America, Fox and Friends, and the like. I recognize most Americans do not (as far as I can tell). Then you have programs like Anderson Cooper, where news is reported with a healthy does of opinion tossed in. The age of Cronkite is pretty much over.

However, in general, recognizing or identifying a thing is not the same as denigrating a thing.



And more well poisoning....

Oh, you're doing your typical redefining things to mean what you want them to mean. Carry on.