fix'd



because the ny times is objectively a "bad actor" within the press - unlike outlets like fox news or breitbart... you shills are hilarious...

Alright, then we mostly agree.

He's not just doing that though. He basically generalizes MSM as the source of evil (one of the many). I'm waiting for a great speech or even great quotes on the role of the press. It's not gonna happen though, not with Trump.

Do you not know what TDS is?

Intellectually refuting you and others does not make me a trump cultist.
The unjustified namecalling instead of an argument is immature and telling of the type of person we are dealing with here.



You are arguing something that isn't the point and making up some hamfisted strawman about breitbart.
If you look closely nowhere did I say that foxnews or breitbart are great and never have bad actors/fake news/bias.

Would you care to justify your "false equivalency" kneejerk assertion? or is taking shots at breitbart/fox/trump and feeling good about it the needed distraction you were going for?

The point is that criticizing and having disagreements with people from media outlets is not at all conflicting with the freedom of the press and its not calling for violence.
This does not rely on a specific news outlet being objectively bad actors or not, a side descriptor. Clearly there is heavy bias, a lot of falsehoods/hyperbole and contentious individuals at some of these news outlets.

When they go into hysteria mode feeding horribly biased information and narratives to people like you i'm glad someone is calling them out.
Speech you dont like doesnt somehow go against the first amendment.

I think trump might actually win this one

Take your pills for bipolarity

i point out your false equivalency and you reply with "TDS" - so that's what you call "intellectually refuting" and me starting the "unjustified namecalling"... funny how that works out in your head...




no, but i never said you did. what you did is characterise trump's "fake news" rhetoric as merely "criticizing horrible press" - blatantly ignoring the fact that he ignores objectively horrible press and focuses solely on press that's critical of him.
again, funny how something that obvious escapes you trying to justify his ridiculous attacks...

The only pill I take is the Lord's love washed down with a tall glass of redemption

You didnt point out a false equivalency. Saying "false equivalency 101" when you see something you dont like is not the same as pointing an actual one out.
The parallels are obvious and illustrate my point nicely.


Thats what it is. Trying to whine and split hairs about the way I put it and the words I used is impotent and uninteresting.
Jefferson used and others used extreme language to harshly criticize the press too. Yet, its still not calling for violence of infringing on freedom of the press, obviously.


Shocker he criticizes media that goes out of their way to criticize him (often unjustly). How is that a relevant point i'm supposedly "blatantly ignoring"?

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Aug 30 2017 11:00am

Sounds tempting.

I've only just noticed it was more aimed at the topic title than the arguments made. whoops

Trump is going beyond criticizing, he's refraining from any form of responsibility asked by free press. The clear waters did already become a swamp.

This post was edited by Knaapie on Aug 30 2017 11:16am