Trump threatens to target licenses of 'NBC and the Networks' after nuclear arsenal report

[Emjay]

Wow.  Just wow.  Who, may I ask, would you appoint to be the "Truth Czar?"  Who decides what the truth is?

Did I suggest a truth czar?  I did not.  I suggested a few regulations to hold the media's feet to the fire.

They should not be able to lie and slant the truth. 

So, you don't know what the truth is?  The truth is what is true.  There now.

[aligncare]

Wow.  Just wow.  Who, may I ask, would you appoint to be the "Truth Czar?"  Who decides what the truth is?

A better word to use is “facts.”

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I know no such thing.  But, I do know you guys are scaring the crap out of me.  And, I highly doubt I will comply with your demand to not argue with you about this.  You will have many voices not willing to STFU at your command.

Clearly pro-Trumpers love liberty as much as Democrats do... which isn't a whole lot.

[Cyber Liberty]

A better word to use is “facts.”

OK, I have no trouble amending that.  "Who would you appoint as "Fact Czar?"  Who decides?  What branch of the Government?

[aligncare]

True “facts” are determined in court every day.

[roamer_1]

Stop arguing with me.  I'm right and you know it.

No, you're not. Here's a good touchstone:

We're truing to make the federal government LESS powerful... To shrink it down to it's proper Constitutional boundaries. This is not doing that.

The arbiter of truth, right now, is the civil court. I like it like that.

[aligncare]

The lying has to stop.

[roamer_1]

The lying has to stop.

Not by way of federal coercion.
You are becoming what you are supposed to fight against.

[Cyber Liberty]

True “facts” are determined in court every day.

Poor example.  The courts are becoming less reliable every day, as they stray from the Constitution and a nation of laws, to becoming a nation of men.

[Cyber Liberty]

Not by way of federal coercion.
You are becoming what you are supposed to fight against.

They don't want "freedom of the press," they want to be the ones pulling the levers of the press.  Some freedom.

[Smokin Joe]

As long as people continue to be 'pragmatic' and vote party, we will continue to get politicians. The ENTIRE reason the congress is paralyzed right now is because of pragmatism being the word, rather than Conservatism. Vote for men who will undoubtedly stand for Conservative principles, and you will begin to tip the balance the other way.

We NEED tried and true, true-blue, rock-ribbed, Conservative statesmen, and literally nothing else will do.

Until the American people understand that, nothing will change.
this current government is a symptom (including Tump).

[aligncare]

The Media Research Center had a bumper sticker a number of years back, “Don’t believe the lying media.”

Well, it took Donald Trump to bring it to the nation’s attention. And God bless him for doing so.

We are finally having that national conversation.

[DiogenesLamp]

Why should the only recourse be, for a willfully damaging news story based upon lies and innuendos from anonymous sources, to force them to rebut it on their own networks?

How does one reach the audience of the affected with sinister lies, meant to keep their viewers from knowing the TRUTH?

Do you force them to cover previously ignored stories?  NO!

You charge them with willful intent to deceive the People of the USA and then you prove it in a public trial.

I could live with that if the issue was only about damaging stories.   What about even more damaging non-stories?   (Stories they refused to run and because they refused to run them,  it caused damage.)


The media does more damage by refusing to cover a story than they do by pushing fake stories.    How likely would the public have been to reelect Obama if they only knew of the information we were seeing on the conservative websites?     


Obama more or less singlehandedly created ISIS,  and he is more responsible than anyone else for it's atrocities.    Who in the network media pointed out Obama's involvement in creating ISIS?   

Nobody did.   How much blood shed and treasure did this cost?   It was immense. 

President Trump is merely snapping his fingers to bring everyone's attention to the matter.

This is plain to see for some of us,  but many of us want to focus on a tree instead of the larger forest. 

[roamer_1]

The Media Research Center had a bumper sticker a number of years back, “Don’t believe the lying media.”

Well, it took Donald Trump to bring it to the nation’s attention. And God bless him for doing so.

We are finally having that national conversation.

Where have you been? We've been 'having this conversation' at the top of our lungs, for 30 years or better.

The difference being in your case (all y'all), you advocate the liberal idea that the ends justify the means. and that is never true.

[Smokin Joe]

The lying has to stop.

So don't buy it. Don't watch it.

Same rule as I use with programs containing gratuitous faggotry: JUST DON'T WATCH. Break that rule just once, I am done with the show. I don't watch cable news. I buy only a rare newspaper. I subscribe to very few magazines (mostly technical journals).

Sure, they  will put it out there, but I'm not buying it. There are already laws against slander and libel. Use them. Censorship is for Communists.

[DiogenesLamp]

AP spiked stories about Russian genocide in the 1930's in Siberia and the NYT downplayed the NAZI Holocaust for all of WWII.

This is nothing new.  Just like media having a Liberal bent is as predictable as the sun coming up.

That it has persisted does not make it acceptable.   It is in fact unacceptable in a society like ours.   

You are asserting  argumentum ad antiquitatem.   

If this was Obama threatening Fox your attitude would be completely different...in fact it probably was every time he badmouthed FNC.

Obama wouldn't necessarily threaten publicly.   He would do it the "Chicago Way" which means he would send them a message that said "Nice little network you've got here.  It would be a shame if anything happened to it."   

You're all about revenge. 

The First Amendment protects NBC even when they are acting the way the are.  It doesn't just protect speech you agree with...but that with which you disagree with as well.

It is not protecting our speech at all.  The purpose of "speech"  is to influence listeners.   They have millions every night,  and are therefore very influential.    We are kept away from the listeners by the actions of the Federal Government who gave them exclusive access and monopoly to the broadcasting channels.   

The government is therefore suppressing our freedom of speech by depriving us of the crowds to which the networks broadcast. 

[roamer_1]

Same rule as I use with programs containing gratuitous faggotry

Sooo... Your post infers a 'non-gratuitous faggotry'... Do tell...
 :eatdrink:

 

No really... good post.
 

[DiogenesLamp]

Whether I like or trust a news source or not, I still don’t want big government revoking or otherwise “challenging” licenses to news sources that they deem are unfair, lying, or simply not to their liking.

Here we go again.  People still thinking this is about "licenses." 




It is about "licenses"  in the same manner forcing people to bake a homosexual cake is about "cake." 


News flash!   It isn't about cake!

[DiogenesLamp]

That's the bottom line.

Revenge, getting even, censorship, and "fairness" are not conservative principles.

Dying isn't a conservative principle either,   but if we don't do something about the propaganda and censorship,  we will be eventually left with no other choice but to die. 


When Abraham Lincoln was confronted with a set of seemingly incompatible principles,  this is what he did. 

I did understand however, that my oath to preserve the constitution to the best of my ability, imposed upon me the duty of preserving, by every indispensable means, that government -- that nation -- of which that constitution was the organic law. Was it possible to lose the nation, and yet preserve the constitution? By general law life and limb must be protected; yet often a limb must be amputated to save a life; but a life is never wisely given to save a limb. I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might become lawful, by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the constitution, through the preservation of the nation. Right or wrong, I assumed this ground, and now avow it. I could not feel that, to the best of my ability, I had even tried to preserve the constitution, if, to save slavery, or any minor matter, I should permit the wreck of government, country, and Constitution all together.

[Smokin Joe]

Sooo... Your post infers a 'non-gratuitous faggotry'... Do tell...
 :eatdrink:

 

No really... good post.
 

LOL! Gratuitous faggotry is faggotry that was installed to try to normalize the presence of homosexuality without contributing to or being essential in any way to the plot. That gets shut down immediately, and the show is not watched again, in the case of a series. (Fear the Walking Dead was one. The guys could have just been bros.)
 
Non-gratuitous faggotry is essential to the plot--in which case I'm not going to watch, anyway.

[Emjay]

No, you're not. Here's a good touchstone:

We're truing to make the federal government LESS powerful... To shrink it down to it's proper Constitutional boundaries. This is not doing that.

The arbiter of truth, right now, is the civil court. I like it like that.

I'm on board with that.

But I love the fact that Trump started his.  He's dumb, but then again, he's not so dumb.

He brought huge attention to media bias. 

Just look at how many people are all het up.

[TomSea]

Dying isn't a conservative principle either,   but if we don't do something about the propaganda and censorship,  we will be eventually left with no other choice but to die. 


When Abraham Lincoln was confronted with a set of seemingly incompatible principles,  this is what he did.

Rush is always calling MSNBC and CNN mouth-pieces for the Democrat party.

I thought all Trump said about NBC was about being "challenged", I'll re-read his words, however, we know that just plugging for one party is political speech and I thought that some guidelines do have to be followed if one is doing that.

You talked about Cruz hate over at TOS but I think you are responding to some typical negativity here that qualifies as that against Trump that's pretty common here.

[roamer_1]

I'm on board with that.

But I love the fact that Trump started his.  He's dumb, but then again, he's not so dumb.

He brought huge attention to media bias. 

Just look at how many people are all het up.

Meh.
It is ever so.
Flailing around about it is much ado about nothing.

[Emjay]

Meh.
It is ever so.
Flailing around about it is much ado about nothing.

Meh, too.  All these pages and no resolution.

Still, I think it is a topic worthy of discussion.

[Smokin Joe]

Dying isn't a conservative principle either,   but if we don't do something about the propaganda and censorship,  we will be eventually left with no other choice but to die. 


When Abraham Lincoln was confronted with a set of seemingly incompatible principles,  this is what he did.

I'm well aware of what Lincoln did.

The despot's heel is on thy shore
Maryland, My Maryland...