It seems he was just sharing some insight into your questions about USAID.
The New Lounge
- Thread starter hpnole
- Start date
@GhostOf301 If you are inclined to reply, and I hope you are, please don't waste your time and my time posting source material like the junk @smashmouth5 is posting. Good grief! You know I'm skeptical. I hope you know that I wouldn't ask if I wasn't going to at least listen. You also surely know that if you're posting from a site that is blatantly partisan, it's not going to convince me.
I just said I have no deep knowledge of what USAID is or does. I also posted tentative kudos about the tariff bluffs.
If you're saying one of my golden calves is preferring that people post credible info rather than sensational partisan crap that benefits from further division, I'm unapologetically guilty of that.
Well, I already replied. You probably won't like it. And how on earth do you think there is a slight possibility that there would be a bipartisan source for something like this when the left is in complete denial and will fight anything and everything that comes out against their interests? It's impossible not to be partisan. That's what makes it so easy for people to write it off.
It also scared the right people, which is why the Mexican and Canadian govt have folded like cheap tents. The U. S. is the most powerful country on Earth. And now we’re acting like it. No more apology tours, no bumbling around international summits like a blind, three legged cat.
Glad to see you’ve come around to calling him “our President” when your side has been calling him Hitler all this time.
Re: tariffs, they raise prices on imported goods, which shifts demand to domestic, which is the whole point. Funny how the Legacy media is all of a sudden fear mongering over potential rising prices after being silent for four year. Disgusting but not surprising
The moment Lindsey Graham speaks out against shutting down USAID, will be the moment all doubt is removed.
Rand Paul is the only one of those I would pause to consider.
If I posted things Gov Walz or Sen Sanders or Warren Buffett said, would you accept that as legit evidence? I would think not. That means you're essentially taking this on faith, not logic.
I have consistently called him "our President" and "President Trump" since the very beginning of his first term. I saw the disgusting, racist "not our President" bile spewed by the right throughout President Obama's 2 terms and have not been a hypocrite about it by returning the favor -- as many on the left have -- with President Trump in office. So no, I didn't "come around" to a thing. You're too much of an intellectual coward to have noticed it before.
The stock market has fluctuated quite a bit around the latest tariff news. I think we pay entirely too much attention to the stock market, but I still know that stability is preferable.
If tariffs are as simple and awesome as you imply, why isn't every President and every powerful country using them all the time?
If you're the most powerful country on Earth, you shouldn't have to crow about it. There's a reason you're more likely to get bitten by a chihuahua than by a mastiff.
The people who you have your trust in are outraged over USAID being exposed. I would expect your skepticism. I didn't present what I posted as direct evidence. I referred to it as a rabbit hole that you could choose to believe or not. And gave you my reason for choosing to believe it. So I don't know what point you are making with your second paragraph.
You're using my lines here, though the goal with media is nonpartisan, not bipartisan.
I agree that it is impossible to be completely neutral, but that doesn't excuse ethical journalists from trying, and integrity can more than make up for some bias. If you can read all the headlines at a site and determine with certainty what their bias is, it should be a red flag. If you can't confirm it through sites with less inflammatory language, that should also be a red flag.
Correction: The people I trust are outraged over USAID being attacked for political reasons. Whether USAID is being attacked or exposed has yet to be determined for me because the people I trust aren't trusted blindly. You can't even have this conversation without twisting language to your opinion. It's like you think the other side are comic book villains admitting out loud that they are evil.
I told you in the last sentence of that post what the point was: you are acting on faith, not logic.
The stock market always “fluctuates”. The uncertainty caused by Trump’s rhetoric is outweighed by the fear it put into our neighbors.
Didn’t imply that tariffs are always awesome, but that they are helpful as a negotiating tool and to protect domestic manufacturing.
Crowing about your nation’s strength and using it as leverage in negotiating are two vastly different things.
Senator reveals how 'crazy' USAID threatened her
Sen. Joni Ernst is accusing USAID of intimidating and threatening her team in a brazen effort to obstruct congressional oversight.
All the shocking ways USAID spent your money
The United States Agency for International Development has spent millions in U.S. taxpayer dollars on some shocking expenditures.
Senator reveals how 'crazy' USAID threatened her
Sen. Joni Ernst is accusing USAID of intimidating and threatening her team in a brazen effort to obstruct congressional oversight.www.dailymail.co.uk
"Established in 1896 by Harold and Alfred Harmsworth and Kennedy Jones, The Daily Mail is a tabloid newspaper in the UK."All the shocking ways USAID spent your money
The United States Agency for International Development has spent millions in U.S. taxpayer dollars on some shocking expenditures.
"Woman, 63, 'becomes PREGNANT in the mouth' with baby squid after eating calamari"
It also has been named The National Newspaper of the year NINE times since 2000 by the Press Awards. Notice you left that part out
I didn't use Wikipedia, but speaking of Wikipedia: "In 2017, Wikipedia banned the Daily Mail as an ‘unreliable’ source. When it comes to sourcing information, they use minimal hyperlinked sourcing and sourcing to themselves. Further, a Reuters Institute survey found that 26% of respondents trust their news coverage and 47% do not, ranking them #11 in trust of the major UK news providers."
This is the Left’s problem. They have no problem dismissing some outlets like The Daily Mail, New York Post, as right wing and unreliable , but somehow view the New York Times and CNN as main stream and trustworthy.
Not surprising when the Left controlled the airwaves and social media until recently that their view would seem centrist since it was the view expressed 90% of the time on tv and print.
Thank, Datt for unwittingly reminding everyone of the implicit liberal media bias
The left is like the guy that sh%# down their leg, yet walks around accusing others of farting.
The country spoke loudly in November. They either don't care, are too stupid, or both.
Department of Education is on the chopping block. Get ready for a lot of reeeeeee'ing. EO coming banning biological males from competing in women's sports. So much winning.
Not just violent but most violent How does one differentiate between the levels of violence?
On the bright side, it appears that Maxine Waters has an heir apparent
I've acknowledged that bias um... wittingly. Where we differ is the extent to which it is relevant. I don 't cite CNN or the NYT here because y'all unilaterally dismiss everything they have to say in favor of media whose only reason for existence is to counter the left. Why shouldn't I dismiss your legitimately unreliable sources -- with receipts -- in response to y'all dismissing everything mainstream at a glance? Shoot, if anything, I hold myself to a higher standard than y'all do because I vet what I post beforehand and explain why your sources are complete crap thoroughly.
Without knowing the slightest thing about the British Press Awards, you saw it on the Daily Mail's wiki page and cited it immediately. Now when I point out that Wikipedia has banned the Daily Mail, suddenly it's msm and you can't trust anything it says.
Among the right's many, many problems is a pitiable lack of self-awareness. You equivocate. You're hypocrites without awareness of your hypocrisy. You don't understand irony or satire because you don't recognize yourself as the target. And here you're trying to criticize me for playing the game better than you by your own rules.
Last edited:
Why not compare Queen's "Bicycle Race" to anything from Beyonce's "Lemonade"?
Oh, that's right. You're going for zingers for people w/ short attention spans, not any actual point.
It requires Congress to dissolve federal depts. President Trump claimed he was going to get rid of the Dept of Ed in 2016. Despite having GOP control of both Houses of Congress, it never even got out of committee. President Trump knows putting on a show about this wins him points with MAGA and the Heritage Foundation. Congressional Republicans know this is a losing proposition for them. Nothing to see here. Or rather, only something to see. Nothing substantive underneath.
What's "reeeee'ing"? Is it an onomatopoeic representation of liberals freaking out? Well, I can confirm it's definitely happening, but you won't get it from me. This is a nothingburger.
You cited Reuters. What’s the difference??I've acknowledged that bias um... wittingly. Where we differ is the extent to which it is relevant. I don 't cite CNN or the NYT here because y'all unilaterally dismiss everything they have to say in favor of media whose only reason for existence is to counter the left. Why shouldn't I dismiss your legitimately unreliable sources -- with receipts -- in response to y'all dismissing everything mainstream at a glance? Shoot, if anything, I hold myself to a higher standard than y'all do because I vet what I post beforehand and explain why your sources are complete crap thoroughly.
Without knowing the slightest thing about the British Press Awards, you saw it on the Daily Mail's wiki page and cited it immediately. Now when I point out that Wikipedia has banned the Daily Mail, suddenly it's msm and you can't trust anything it says.
Among the right's many, many problems is a pitiable lack of self-awareness. You equivocate. You're hypocrites without awareness of your hypocrisy. You don't understand irony or satire because you don't recognize yourself as the target. And here you're trying to criticize me for playing the game better than you by your own rules.
Over use of the word receipts ? Check.
Name calling? Check.
Self righteous pats on the back? Check.
Many of the hallmarks of a Datt post.
I remember the first joke I learned off a Laffy Taffy wrapper.
The country spoke loudly in November, yes. Trump won. Just like when President Obama was first elected, people didn't stop organizing and opposing him just because he won. It's not a lack of caring; it's a lack of agreeing.
There's probably some stupid in there, too, but I don't think you're smart enough to connect those dots. I'm sure you'll get some yucks and atta boys from the other people here who hold all of the exact same opinions as you, though, so you won't have to strain your brain with supporting your takes with anything.
She is credited with being a co-writer on many of her songs. Her Renaissance album had 72 different songwriters. Co-writer means someone else did the heavy lifting in exchange for a big check and the glam with working with Beyoncé.
She’s the most overrated artist since Michael Jackson. Most of his songs post Thriller were comically bad
Reuters ranks high for factual reporting and is among the least biased media groups around. That's the difference.
If you're not providing receipts and I am, expect to see it all the time. You might as well predict that peeing on an electric fence will hurt, then do it and think you won something because you were right.
Oh, name-calling? Let me add that you're a snowflake. And in the same span that you loled at mac's claims about the left defecating down their leg and being too stupid? I'll double-down on hypocrite.
We all have certain strengths. I'm aware of mine and I stay in my lane. That's why I haven't offered an opinion on whether USAID should be dissolved or not.
When you drop out in 4th grade, I guess it would be too much to expect that you differentiate between 5th grade insults and post-doc insults.
