POTUS 2016, part 3

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
Locked

Who would you like to see winning the presidency of the U.S.?

Hillary Clinton - (Dem.)
38
47%
Donald Trump - Mike Pence (Rep.)
21
26%
Gary Johnson - Bill Weld (Libertarian)
8
10%
Jill Stein (Green)
14
17%
 
Total votes: 81

pulga
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by pulga » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:44 am

Slavoj Žižek take on the current political turmoil in the U.S. and in the U.K..


User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6625
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by Cittasanto » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:59 am

Mkoll wrote:And so the lies begin. The blatancy of this one is remarkable, even by political standards.
Sean Spicer, White House Press Secretary wrote:"This was the largest audience ever to witness an inauguration, period. Both in person and around the globe," Spicer said in a brief statement. "These attempts to lessen the enthusiasm about the inauguration are shameful and wrong."
Use a building, such as the dark building on the right that conspicuously juts in toward the center of the shots, as a landmark to get a sense of how much smaller Trump's crowd was.

2009 Obama Inauguration

Image

Timelapse of Trump's 2017 Inauguration

I have seen posts on facebook (from members of DW) asking people to buy the tickets to stop his supporters going. now it may not be the case that people did this, however, when this is one of the ways people were suggesting openly to suppress attendence.

Kind Regards
Cittasanto
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

Phena
Posts: 470
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 6:40 am

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by Phena » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:16 am

Now we have "alternative facts" as a cover-up phrase coming from the Trump camp, instead of calling Spicer's claims what they are: lies and falsehoods. This would be laughable if it wasn't serious.


Day two of the Trump administration and we clearly have them lying, all the while leveling this claim at the media. This will be the future modus operandi - attack the media if they don't report what Trump wants and accuse them of doing exactly what he is doing, the old "look over there" trick.

Phena
Posts: 470
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 6:40 am

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by Phena » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:32 am

It's time for some humour (this is all just so weird and surreal) on the Press Secretary's lies - I mean, "alternative facts" ... ahem.

User avatar
BlackBird
Posts: 1928
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by BlackBird » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:58 am

Phena wrote: Day two of the Trump administration and we clearly have them lying, all the while leveling this claim at the media. This will be the future modus operandi - attack the media if they don't report what Trump wants and accuse them of doing exactly what he is doing, the old "look over there" trick.
The old "look over there" trick indeed, but it extends further - The whole thing is trump 101 - They know the media very well and they know what they need to say because if they can keep your eyes focused on some inane inconsequential mock debate about crowd sizes and how we go about measuring them, maybe 1 or 2 articles will be about this fluff rather than probing into what is actually going on behind closed doors.

It's all about controlling the narrative, and they'd much rather it was this. Like her or hate her - KellyAnne Conway is a seasoned political operative.
"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6438
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by Mkoll » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:30 am

Cittasanto wrote:I have seen posts on facebook (from members of DW) asking people to buy the tickets to stop his supporters going. now it may not be the case that people did this, however, when this is one of the ways people were suggesting openly to suppress attendence.
How does that make sense when one didn't need a ticket to watch the inauguration?
Unofficial Guide to Presidential Inaugurations wrote:Do I need tickets to watch the swearing-in ceremony?

No. While tickets are needed to enter certain areas, there will be non-ticketed viewing areas available as well.
Besides, the crowd size itself is not the important issue here. The issue is as-blatant-as-you-can-get lying to our faces. To quote myself:
Mkoll wrote:Right. The issue is not where the inauguration was held---that is irrelevant to what Spicer said. The issue is that Trump is directing his staff to give blatant lies to the American people on Day 2 of his term. This one is so obvious that a small child could tell you that it's BS. This is a bad sign for things to come, though unsurprising.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6438
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by Mkoll » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:38 am

BlackBird wrote:
Phena wrote: Day two of the Trump administration and we clearly have them lying, all the while leveling this claim at the media. This will be the future modus operandi - attack the media if they don't report what Trump wants and accuse them of doing exactly what he is doing, the old "look over there" trick.
The old "look over there" trick indeed, but it extends further - The whole thing is trump 101 - They know the media very well and they know what they need to say because if they can keep your eyes focused on some inane inconsequential mock debate about crowd sizes and how we go about measuring them, maybe 1 or 2 articles will be about this fluff rather than probing into what is actually going on behind closed doors.
Indeed. And it shows that he looks to be running his government the same way he did his campaign with regard to the media.
BlackBird wrote:It's all about controlling the narrative, and they'd much rather it was this. Like her or hate her - KellyAnne Conway is a seasoned political operative.
She is brilliant in an Orwellian way. Her skills of "calmly spouting BS, obfuscation, and misdirection with a friendly smile" are top notch. Trump's campaign wasn't looking too good until she came along. Without her managing his campaign, Clinton would have had a better chance of winning. Ironically, she's the first woman to successfully run a presidential campaign.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

chownah
Posts: 7494
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by chownah » Mon Jan 23, 2017 9:44 am

Is interviewing conway about lies presented at a news conference really what the news should be doing? Why ask her why did the administration tell someone to report lies? What do you think she is going to say? Do you think that this question caught her off guard? :jumping: Do you think that she hadn't already rehearsed how she would respond and knew how to turn the conversation to her own bias? Of course she knew the question would come and she knows how to talk fast and change the subject....that' her job....she lives and breathes this even more than the people who interview her.

Here is the way it works. Trump's propogandists determine what things can be said and done to get their experienced and battle hardened talking heads (conway et al) onto national media interviews. Not only do they get to talk loud and long about their own biased view but if any of the interviewers overstate something it can be pounced on and presented to the loyal as one more instance of the crooked and biased media once again showing that you need to get your news from trump approved sources and preferably from trump himself. He has been doing this all along and it worked and he keeps doing it and people keep falling into the same trap.

Maybe they should stop interviewing conway. Why did they interview her for this issue? Seems to me there is no real reason to interview her since it is pretty much a forgone conclusion that she will not reasonably discuss the issue and will just use it to preach her own propoganda.

Every lie and every outrageous statement is an opportunity for them to preach their propoganda....with the media paying for it. That's why they do it. It doesn't matter how petty the issue...in fact the more petty the issue the better because the more petty the issue the worse the media looks in the eyes of many trump supporters.
chownah

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6625
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by Cittasanto » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:11 pm

Mkoll wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:I have seen posts on facebook (from members of DW) asking people to buy the tickets to stop his supporters going. now it may not be the case that people did this, however, when this is one of the ways people were suggesting openly to suppress attendence.
How does that make sense when one didn't need a ticket to watch the inauguration?
I am only relaying a public post on FB.

I will point out generally, not to you exclusively, that attendance and ability to watch the inauguration are not mutually exclusive. and the media have made focusing on everything trump says its agenda, rather than what is being done, so whupee

Kind Regards
Cittasanto
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
BlackBird
Posts: 1928
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by BlackBird » Mon Jan 23, 2017 7:21 pm

chownah wrote:Is interviewing conway about lies presented at a news conference really what the news should be doing? Why ask her why did the administration tell someone to report lies? What do you think she is going to say? Do you think that this question caught her off guard? :jumping: Do you think that she hadn't already rehearsed how she would respond and knew how to turn the conversation to her own bias? Of course she knew the question would come and she knows how to talk fast and change the subject....that' her job....she lives and breathes this even more than the people who interview her.

Here is the way it works. Trump's propogandists determine what things can be said and done to get their experienced and battle hardened talking heads (conway et al) onto national media interviews. Not only do they get to talk loud and long about their own biased view but if any of the interviewers overstate something it can be pounced on and presented to the loyal as one more instance of the crooked and biased media once again showing that you need to get your news from trump approved sources and preferably from trump himself. He has been doing this all along and it worked and he keeps doing it and people keep falling into the same trap.

Maybe they should stop interviewing conway. Why did they interview her for this issue? Seems to me there is no real reason to interview her since it is pretty much a forgone conclusion that she will not reasonably discuss the issue and will just use it to preach her own propoganda.

Every lie and every outrageous statement is an opportunity for them to preach their propoganda....with the media paying for it. That's why they do it. It doesn't matter how petty the issue...in fact the more petty the issue the better because the more petty the issue the worse the media looks in the eyes of many trump supporters.
chownah
Well you have to remember the MSM has been doing it this way for a very long time, it's like a big old ship, the captain might turn the wheel, but the ship takes time to turn and that's assuming that the captain even wants to turn the wheel here, of that I'm not so sure. The media has a job and that is to bring eyes to their product, not necessarily to bring the truth. This crowd size drama - smoke screen or not - is a popular talking point. Trump and his aids are the news media's hen that lays the golden eggs, because whether or not what KAC says is factual or not, having her on the show is bound to generate headlines.

The MSM doesn't work for the people, it has it's own agenda, and that agenda is to be able to sit at the Trump table and eat the food that the hosts have given them. It is a symbiotic relationship.
"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

User avatar
BlackBird
Posts: 1928
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by BlackBird » Mon Jan 23, 2017 7:35 pm

In other news: Trump has signed an executive order formally removing the USA from the TPPA. This is a very good thing, because that deal was simply a corporate cash grab and takeover of National sovereignty.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-t ... SKBN1572AF
"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 4402
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by SDC » Mon Jan 23, 2017 7:40 pm

BlackBird wrote:Well you have to remember the MSM has been doing it this way for a very long time...
Indeed. A couple of examples of it being acknowledged here in America (even though we're just dumb all the time):

Frank Zappa in the middle 60's: Trouble Every Day
A great film from the 70's: Network

Not sure what made people think it has ever had honesty at its core. Did we really need to coin the term "fake news" in the last 6 months in order to see that this is an inherent problem with outlets whose survival depend on ratings? How silly.

Phena
Posts: 470
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 6:40 am

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by Phena » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:49 pm

BlackBird wrote:In other news: Trump has signed an executive order formally removing the USA from the TPPA. This is a very good thing, because that deal was simply a corporate cash grab and takeover of National sovereignty.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-t ... SKBN1572AF
Agree. This was all about multi-national corporations further entrenching their already excessive control.

One thing I agree with Trump on, but no doubt for completely different reasons.

User avatar
cjmacie
Posts: 688
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:49 am

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by cjmacie » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:01 am

BlackBird wrote:... Well you have to remember the MSM has been doing it this way for a very long time,...
"MSM"? methylsulfonylmethane?
Not familiar with this acronym (other than in pharmacology) and can't find it searching around here... :shrug:

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6438
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by Mkoll » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:03 am

cjmacie wrote:
BlackBird wrote:... Well you have to remember the MSM has been doing it this way for a very long time,...
"MSM"? methylsulfonylmethane?
Not familiar with this acronym (other than in pharmacology) and can't find it searching around here... :shrug:
Main Stream Media.

A useful resource: http://www.urbandictionary.com/
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests