1984hasarrived Said:
In this thread I am going to post the words of the guy in the White House and hope that someone here
a) can explain what he means
b) justify and defend his words
or
c) just laugh at his stupidity.
So let's kick off then...
First off, I'm not defending Donald Trump, I'm defending rationality and the belief that some people
have different views on the world that may not allign with others.
I don't like deceivers, not because they lie... that is up to them and not because it's against a law,
it's because it wastes my time.
I don't like those that imply a characteristic is connected to conduct, it's not. There are influencial
people in the world who wouldn't last five minutes in a war zone, but one will tend to find that such
powerful people are the ones who delegate others to do it.
That may seem unfair, but the real world is like that.
Secondly, anything put into print or in an edited piece of video footage is there to draw in ratings.
I worked in the busines for almost thirty years and I can tell you, the media doesn't give a rat's-ass
about the meaning behind a comment or it's value. As long as it's got a cleavage, an idiot and
someone to explain to the person staring at the boob-tube that the rules are what they telll them,
then the media are fine with it.
When was the last time you saw a reporter talk to a member of the pubic without adding their
own opinion on what was said at the end of the article...? It's about established control and that
doesn't mean 'New World Order'.
It means an easy shift for the Journalist that doesn't involve them getting shot or their feet wet.
Politicians know the game and know that to run out the clock of the interview by speaking in a
manner that explains at length what the people they represent want and use words that avoid
any blow-back from a media-deemed controversial comment.
It's not that they truly mean it, it's just that they know their interview in reality is a piece that fits
into a designed programme. and any personal opinion could be used as a filler at a later date
and force them to be accountable.
Not because of some high-moral standing of the newspaper or television company, but because
it can be exploited in the name of entertainment... and entertainment brings ratings.
With that said and you say, let's kick off then.
.....................................................
"You have to treat 'em like shit. Referring to women (New York magazine, Nov. 9, 1992)
In this piece, Trump is talking man-shit. He's leaning on an old saying 'treat 'em men, keep 'em keen'
It's the way men talk when they're trying to impress other men. It might seem callous and not very
presidential, but he wasn't president then and people can say things we might not agree with.
'Chicks love me and my big schlong' -Boy In A Dress.
The comment doesn't really make me feel good and it's hoped to impress men around me because
men are insecure around other men and protect themselves with bravado and bullshit.
It wouldn't work on females because it would be seen that a big-headed fool -who's thinks he's God's
-gift to women is not decent material for woman seeking a trusting relationship with a male partner
who would want someone like that?!
That's why the majority of men behave in a different manner when in the respective companies.
It's just life.
.....................................................
Let's have a more recent one
(From article)
John Dickerson:
"George W. Bush said the reason the Oval Office is round is there are no corners you can hide in."
President Donald Trump:
"Well there's truth to that. There is truth to that. There are certainly no corners. And you look,
there's a certain openness. But there's nobody out there. You know, there's an openness, but
I've never seen anyone actually out there, as you can imagine."
John Dickerson:
"But he... what he meant was it's all comes...
President Donald Trump:
"Sure. Sure.
John Dickerson:
"...Back to you"
He doesn't get it does he??
This scares me that George Bush (not an intellectual heavyweight, let's admit) can use a metaphor and
Trump does not understand it. That is scary as hell.
.....................................................
[Please Note, I haven't seen the documentary, this only my opinion]
Nope... the United States current leader doesn't understand the metaphor... That must be it.
I would suggest the fact that if the majority of the same country's citizens accepted the rules of an
election, never complained about them enough to get them altered and then watched as others
around them voted for Donald Trump, there's a symbolism there that casts a dim light on not only
the assumed manner that 'somebody' voted him in, but the blindness of the opposing party had
on what he represented to the public who voted for him.
But that's for another day.
Without using any biased, I would offer the idea -based on the words used, that the interview between
Mr. Dickerson (CBS...?! come on man!) and President Trump was a 'moving' situation.
'Out there' implies the area outside the Oval Office, Dickerson's remark about Bush Jnr's comment may
have been brushed aside because of what Trump was wanting talk about.
Maybe Trump felt that Dickerson was veering towards asking him questions that would have made
him squirm..?
Maybe Trump was just not interested in sagacious metaphors or maybe he's just too thick to appreciate
that he was supposed to talk like he was addressing five year-olds who don't know their Government kills
for influence.
Whatever the reason, I wouldn't take it personally as one tends to find that figure-heads are not the ones
doing the real thinking. It's the policies that count.
And without sounding vindictive or cruel, I wouldn't be scared, there's plenty of people in the background
dealing with the real serious issues.
.....................................................
"I don’t stand by anything. You can take it the way you want." (his wild and baseless
statement that Obama wiretapped Trump tower.)
Can you imagine him saying this in a meeting with world leaders? Sadly I can.
.....................................................
It's a classic, nuh...? An edited piece that was said to a media the person saying it, does't trust.
Imagine my horror.
What was written in regards of the televised interview was this:
'...In an interview that aired Monday, Dickerson pressed the president to explain his March tweets claiming
Obama wiretapped him during the 2016 election.
"You're the president of the United States," Dickerson said. "You said he was 'sick and bad' because he
had tapped you."
"You can take it any way you want," Trump replied.
"I'm asking you," Dickerson said, "because you don't want it to be fake news. I want to hear it from
President Trump."
The president insisted that he had his opinions and that Dickerson could draw his conclusions about what
Trump meant.
"But I want to know your opinions," Dickerson said. "You're the president of the United States."
"OK, it's enough. Thank you. Thank you very much," Trump said, walking away from Dickerson....'
SOURCE:
Well it sounds like he was unwilling to talk about it...? Why? Mr. Dickerson pressed him using a good
stance that if he's Mr. Dickerson's President, he'd like to know his President's opinion on the wire-tapping
matter. Trump refused and shut-down that part of the conversation.
Maybe he lied. Maybe Trump imagined that the wire-tapping by the previous President had happened and
for no other reason than to impress people on Twitter, he lied.
(Forgive me for being flippant below!)
I can now see your concern, the idea that Obama sneaked into Trump Towers, placed the bugging devices
near the phones or possibly he never entered the building, but sat outside in a van and listened using the
latest technology to what the man who enjoyed being urinated on, was really up to.
Unless... unless there's an agency that does that? Unless there are men and women who perform such covert
operations for reasons that may have nothing to do with Trump? Maybe President Trump should reveal the
names of all the employees of the CIA, the FBI and the NSA?
The reason we can shoot-the shit on the internet, decide who gets to sit behind the Resolute desk and
teach diverse subjects in our educational facilities is because we don't really know what is wild and baseless,
we don't really know what goes on in the secretive areas of running a democratic country.
But it could be argued that the bucks stops somewhere and Obama was in charge a that time.
But yes, that silly-haired man with the little hands should all release all the information of what really goes
on in the world for the sake of proving himself correct on Twitter.
Or maybe he's just full of shit and the voters bought it.
Still, if people get back to work in his term and he takes credit for it (although I doubt he can be at every job
interview taking place)... then some good has come from having him in the round Oval Office.
Policies, policies in an ever-changing world.
No, I don't think he would say that in a meeting with world leaders, but I can suggest that if he did, the said
leaders won't swagger and relate it to the media. Politics doesn't work that way and true honesty belongs in
the movies.
.....................................................
There will be more to come, as he says random shit daily, so it is not too hard to find
ridiculous statements he has made. What is hard is having someone justify and explain
them.
He does say strange things, 1984 and I can understand your concern, truly I do.
I can't justify or explain them because I don't know the man, but I can offer my thoughts -if that helps.
In this thread I am going to post the words of the guy in the White House and hope that someone here
a) can explain what he means
b) justify and defend his words
or
c) just laugh at his stupidity.
So let's kick off then...
First off, I'm not defending Donald Trump, I'm defending rationality and the belief that some people
have different views on the world that may not allign with others.
I don't like deceivers, not because they lie... that is up to them and not because it's against a law,
it's because it wastes my time.
I don't like those that imply a characteristic is connected to conduct, it's not. There are influencial
people in the world who wouldn't last five minutes in a war zone, but one will tend to find that such
powerful people are the ones who delegate others to do it.
That may seem unfair, but the real world is like that.
Secondly, anything put into print or in an edited piece of video footage is there to draw in ratings.
I worked in the busines for almost thirty years and I can tell you, the media doesn't give a rat's-ass
about the meaning behind a comment or it's value. As long as it's got a cleavage, an idiot and
someone to explain to the person staring at the boob-tube that the rules are what they telll them,
then the media are fine with it.
When was the last time you saw a reporter talk to a member of the pubic without adding their
own opinion on what was said at the end of the article...? It's about established control and that
doesn't mean 'New World Order'.
It means an easy shift for the Journalist that doesn't involve them getting shot or their feet wet.
Politicians know the game and know that to run out the clock of the interview by speaking in a
manner that explains at length what the people they represent want and use words that avoid
any blow-back from a media-deemed controversial comment.
It's not that they truly mean it, it's just that they know their interview in reality is a piece that fits
into a designed programme. and any personal opinion could be used as a filler at a later date
and force them to be accountable.
Not because of some high-moral standing of the newspaper or television company, but because
it can be exploited in the name of entertainment... and entertainment brings ratings.
With that said and you say, let's kick off then.
.....................................................
"You have to treat 'em like shit. Referring to women (New York magazine, Nov. 9, 1992)
In this piece, Trump is talking man-shit. He's leaning on an old saying 'treat 'em men, keep 'em keen'
It's the way men talk when they're trying to impress other men. It might seem callous and not very
presidential, but he wasn't president then and people can say things we might not agree with.
'Chicks love me and my big schlong' -Boy In A Dress.
The comment doesn't really make me feel good and it's hoped to impress men around me because
men are insecure around other men and protect themselves with bravado and bullshit.
It wouldn't work on females because it would be seen that a big-headed fool -who's thinks he's God's
-gift to women is not decent material for woman seeking a trusting relationship with a male partner
who would want someone like that?!
That's why the majority of men behave in a different manner when in the respective companies.
It's just life.
.....................................................
Let's have a more recent one
(From article)
John Dickerson:
"George W. Bush said the reason the Oval Office is round is there are no corners you can hide in."
President Donald Trump:
"Well there's truth to that. There is truth to that. There are certainly no corners. And you look,
there's a certain openness. But there's nobody out there. You know, there's an openness, but
I've never seen anyone actually out there, as you can imagine."
John Dickerson:
"But he... what he meant was it's all comes...
President Donald Trump:
"Sure. Sure.
John Dickerson:
"...Back to you"
He doesn't get it does he??
This scares me that George Bush (not an intellectual heavyweight, let's admit) can use a metaphor and
Trump does not understand it. That is scary as hell.
.....................................................
[Please Note, I haven't seen the documentary, this only my opinion]
Nope... the United States current leader doesn't understand the metaphor... That must be it.
I would suggest the fact that if the majority of the same country's citizens accepted the rules of an
election, never complained about them enough to get them altered and then watched as others
around them voted for Donald Trump, there's a symbolism there that casts a dim light on not only
the assumed manner that 'somebody' voted him in, but the blindness of the opposing party had
on what he represented to the public who voted for him.
But that's for another day.
Without using any biased, I would offer the idea -based on the words used, that the interview between
Mr. Dickerson (CBS...?! come on man!) and President Trump was a 'moving' situation.
'Out there' implies the area outside the Oval Office, Dickerson's remark about Bush Jnr's comment may
have been brushed aside because of what Trump was wanting talk about.
Maybe Trump felt that Dickerson was veering towards asking him questions that would have made
him squirm..?
Maybe Trump was just not interested in sagacious metaphors or maybe he's just too thick to appreciate
that he was supposed to talk like he was addressing five year-olds who don't know their Government kills
for influence.
Whatever the reason, I wouldn't take it personally as one tends to find that figure-heads are not the ones
doing the real thinking. It's the policies that count.
And without sounding vindictive or cruel, I wouldn't be scared, there's plenty of people in the background
dealing with the real serious issues.
.....................................................
"I don’t stand by anything. You can take it the way you want." (his wild and baseless
statement that Obama wiretapped Trump tower.)
Can you imagine him saying this in a meeting with world leaders? Sadly I can.
.....................................................
It's a classic, nuh...? An edited piece that was said to a media the person saying it, does't trust.
Imagine my horror.
What was written in regards of the televised interview was this:
'...In an interview that aired Monday, Dickerson pressed the president to explain his March tweets claiming
Obama wiretapped him during the 2016 election.
"You're the president of the United States," Dickerson said. "You said he was 'sick and bad' because he
had tapped you."
"You can take it any way you want," Trump replied.
"I'm asking you," Dickerson said, "because you don't want it to be fake news. I want to hear it from
President Trump."
The president insisted that he had his opinions and that Dickerson could draw his conclusions about what
Trump meant.
"But I want to know your opinions," Dickerson said. "You're the president of the United States."
"OK, it's enough. Thank you. Thank you very much," Trump said, walking away from Dickerson....'
SOURCE:
Well it sounds like he was unwilling to talk about it...? Why? Mr. Dickerson pressed him using a good
stance that if he's Mr. Dickerson's President, he'd like to know his President's opinion on the wire-tapping
matter. Trump refused and shut-down that part of the conversation.
Maybe he lied. Maybe Trump imagined that the wire-tapping by the previous President had happened and
for no other reason than to impress people on Twitter, he lied.
(Forgive me for being flippant below!)
I can now see your concern, the idea that Obama sneaked into Trump Towers, placed the bugging devices
near the phones or possibly he never entered the building, but sat outside in a van and listened using the
latest technology to what the man who enjoyed being urinated on, was really up to.
Unless... unless there's an agency that does that? Unless there are men and women who perform such covert
operations for reasons that may have nothing to do with Trump? Maybe President Trump should reveal the
names of all the employees of the CIA, the FBI and the NSA?
The reason we can shoot-the shit on the internet, decide who gets to sit behind the Resolute desk and
teach diverse subjects in our educational facilities is because we don't really know what is wild and baseless,
we don't really know what goes on in the secretive areas of running a democratic country.
But it could be argued that the bucks stops somewhere and Obama was in charge a that time.
But yes, that silly-haired man with the little hands should all release all the information of what really goes
on in the world for the sake of proving himself correct on Twitter.
Or maybe he's just full of shit and the voters bought it.
Still, if people get back to work in his term and he takes credit for it (although I doubt he can be at every job
interview taking place)... then some good has come from having him in the round Oval Office.
Policies, policies in an ever-changing world.
No, I don't think he would say that in a meeting with world leaders, but I can suggest that if he did, the said
leaders won't swagger and relate it to the media. Politics doesn't work that way and true honesty belongs in
the movies.
.....................................................
There will be more to come, as he says random shit daily, so it is not too hard to find
ridiculous statements he has made. What is hard is having someone justify and explain
them.
He does say strange things, 1984 and I can understand your concern, truly I do.
I can't justify or explain them because I don't know the man, but I can offer my thoughts -if that helps.
Edith Head Gives Good Wardrobe.