BillsFanNC Posted 3 hours ago Author Posted 3 hours ago Trump told people to drink bleach. Despite Trump having never used the word 'bleach' at all during the PC in question, he still told people to drink bleach because my legit news sources provided me with the quality information that says he did. - teef
JFKjr Posted 3 hours ago Posted 3 hours ago 9 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Trump told people to drink bleach. Despite Trump having never used the word 'bleach' at all during the PC in question, he still told people to drink bleach because my legit news sources provided me with the quality information that says he did. - teef Love how they all quoted "horse paste" for a legit human medicine (also used by horses, as, erm 'antibiotics' are) that helped win the Nobel Prize for medicine. And has saved countless lives across the globe. Unfortunately it didn't save nearly enough lives during Covid, because, muh, "horse paste."
teef Posted 3 hours ago Posted 3 hours ago 27 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Trump told people to drink bleach. Despite Trump having never used the word 'bleach' at all during the PC in question, he still told people to drink bleach because my legit news sources provided me with the quality information that says he did. - teef 15 minutes ago, JFKjr said: Love how they all quoted "horse paste" for a legit human medicine (also used by horses, as, erm 'antibiotics' are) that helped win the Nobel Prize for medicine. And has saved countless lives across the globe. Unfortunately it didn't save nearly enough lives during Covid, because, muh, "horse paste." what? no one said any of this. jesus. i suppose when you can't handle the news presented to you, this is what's resorted to. nice work fellas.
muppy Posted 2 hours ago Posted 2 hours ago 3 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: You think it was just sloppy on Tapper's part? General incompetence (age-related or other), but unintentional? I don't see the point in deliberately misrepresenting this point, but like you, not certain why 'white man' is included in the story about the capture to begin with. Though, I have this thought that certain media establishments count on their listeners being distracted with life as the 'news' plays in the background, allowing them to push/create a narrative as they see fit. If a family has CNN/Fox/ABC etc on in the background while getting ready for work, making breakfast etc, these details can escape people. hey Leo. Yeah I hope it wasn't intentional. It just makes he appear idiotic to call a dark skinned person white. But yes I say again that his skin color really isn't the issue here. Im white married to a Hispanic. My kids have a skin color in between the both of us. I think they identify as "Hispanic" when queried on forms requiring an answer to ethnicity. I've seen whiter than me Hispanic people though who had European heritage. To me the color of skin should be irrelevant
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago (edited) 59 minutes ago, muppy said: hey Leo. Yeah I hope it wasn't intentional. It just makes he appear idiotic to call a dark skinned person white. But yes I say again that his skin color really isn't the issue here. Im white married to a Hispanic. My kids have a skin color in between the both of us. I think they identify as "Hispanic" when queried on forms requiring an answer to ethnicity. I've seen whiter than me Hispanic people though who had European heritage. To me the color of skin should be irrelevant I've mentioned before--a few decades ago, I received some media training for the company I worked for at the time. It wasn't intended for anything beyond a local market presence, and I looked at it as a resume booster. The thing that was interesting was the....uh...staged aspect of things like TV Q&A appeatances, ambush interviews, and an often burning desire to get someone to say something newsworthy. So, while it would be a stretch to say there wasn't a desire to get truthful answers to honest questions at times, it wasn't at all a problem for the media if some poor soul said something unintentionally inaccurate. Or, if they raised questions outside the scope of the subject that was agreed upon to be discussed. Or, cut and paste. The training also included a review of several high-profile scenarios where the 'free and independent' press sure seemed a lot more like a well-oiled corporate machine looking to push agendas, sell advertising and make some $$$. I can understand people like @Trump_is_Mentally_fit fawning over Leslie Stahl and 60 Minutes, and fully buying into "We asked her a question and took the best answer as we saw it" because they have the slick studio, lighting, camera angles and polished production, but there is really no reason to cut and paste beyond seeking to publish a narrative. Or, during the Trayvon Martin coverage, one of the networks cutting out the 911 operators question about a description of the subject and making it seem like Zimmerman volunteered "he's black" completely on his own. It happens for a reason. In other words, it's a bit like speaking with the police. If you go into it thinking there is nothing to hide, and not agenda beyond a simple Q&A, you can find yourself in a pickle pretty quickly. That you "have nothing to hide" can be completely irrelevant to the other party. It was around this time I first became a media skeptic, and which makes me question intent and agenda when something like this happens. In the intervening decades, if anything, I've grown more skeptical of intent, truthfulness and less likely to think someone just had a bad day. Maybe that happened here...but on the whole I'm quite unconvinced. My children have Hispanic heritage as well, though a couple generations removed. Edited 1 hour ago by leh-nerd skin-erd
muppy Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago 1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Quite a few decades ago, I received some media training for the company I worked for at the time. It wasn't intended for anything beyond a local market and I looked at it as a resume booster. The thing that was interesting was the....uh...staged aspect of things like TV appearances, ambush interviews, and desire to get someone to say something newsworthy. So, while it would be a stretch to say there wasn't a desire to hear a truthful answer, it wasn't at all a problem for the media if some poor soul said something unintentionally inaccurate. Or, if they raised questions outside the scope of the subject that was agreed upon to be discussed. Or, cut and paste. The training also included a review of several high-profile scenarios where the 'free and independent' press sure seemed a lot more like a well-oiled corporate machine looking to push agendas, sell advertising and make some $$$. It was around this time I first became a media skeptic, and which makes me question intent and agenda when something like this happens. In the intervening decades, if anything, I've grown more skeptical of intent, truthfulness and less likely to think someone just had a bad day. Maybe that happened here...but on the whole I'm quite unconvinced. okay That's fair and I respect your opinion. But playing the race card here accomplishes what exactly? Im not being sarcastic what agenda is served by Mr Tapper Idenntifying a black person as white. does his skin color really matter? Why would Tapper make such an intentional mistake? Im asking because I don't understand it really. why is that fact even relevant? Don't Maga OR democrats either for that matter come in all skin colors? and Yes I know a lot of MAGA are labeled as racist. so what point to do you think Tapper was trying to to make. When a point up thread making the media supposedly be unhappy he was black didn't resonate to me either and I eyerolled that as being petty weak sauce
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago 28 minutes ago, muppy said: okay That's fair and I respect your opinion. But playing the race card here accomplishes what exactly? Im not being sarcastic what agenda is served by Mr Tapper Idenntifying a black person as white. does his skin color really matter? Why would Tapper make such an intentional mistake? Im asking because I don't understand it really. why is that fact even relevant? Don't Maga OR democrats either for that matter come in all skin colors? and Yes I know a lot of MAGA are labeled as racist. so what point to do you think Tapper was trying to to make. When a point up thread making the media supposedly be unhappy he was black didn't resonate to me either and I eyerolled that as being petty weak sauce I updated my post but don't really think I addressed this particular incident. At a minimum, I'd think race-baiting sells, sells well and ultimately he's a salesman. Let's be realistic, a boring news anchor or talk show host doesn't sell, but getting some information out there that is controversial moves the needle. So, he declares the 1/6 guy is white because it's consistent with the rest of the 1/6 crowd and understands he can walk it back later when he wants to do that. Appeals to the race-baiters, gets criticized by the right for lying and misrepresenting, which generates clicks and outrage, then walks it back....which satisfies his base (He screwed up, big deal, he made amends) and outrages his critics who find it hard to believe he accidentally completely botched the skin color of the guy who was arrested.
JFKjr Posted 28 minutes ago Posted 28 minutes ago 2 hours ago, teef said: what? no one said any of this. jesus. i suppose when you can't handle the news presented to you, this is what's resorted to. nice work fellas. Short memory. You Are Not A Horse Massive 'Horse Lies' About Nobel Prize-Winning Treatment
teef Posted 27 minutes ago Posted 27 minutes ago Just now, JFKjr said: Short memory. You Are Not A Horse Massive 'Horse Lies' About Nobel Prize-Winning Treatment give me a break. listen...i know this is hard, but you're being duped.
JFKjr Posted 20 minutes ago Posted 20 minutes ago 1 hour ago, muppy said: okay That's fair and I respect your opinion. But playing the race card here accomplishes what exactly? Im not being sarcastic what agenda is served by Mr Tapper Idenntifying a black person as white. does his skin color really matter? Why would Tapper make such an intentional mistake? Im asking because I don't understand it really. why is that fact even relevant? Don't Maga OR democrats either for that matter come in all skin colors? and Yes I know a lot of MAGA are labeled as racist. so what point to do you think Tapper was trying to to make. When a point up thread making the media supposedly be unhappy he was black didn't resonate to me either and I eyerolled that as being petty weak sauce Why are you assuming it was intentional? It makes more sense that someone else made the assumption (quite possible based on the nice neighborhood that was shown the police showing up at) and he ran with it because he prefers that narrative and had no reason to question it. No reason to believe such an obvious mistake was intentional on Tapper's part, more likely confirmation bias.
Recommended Posts