Fox's Henry, Regan defend Cavuto after Trump attacks: 'Outstanding man, outstanding journalist'

[Axeslinger]

So what happens if they manage to impeach Trump 6 months from now, make it stick and remove him from office? The cultural marxists are already out for blood; what do you think will happen to poor, mild mannered Mike Pence? They’ll Kavanaugh or Roy Moore him in a second! then say hi to Madame Pelosi.

Trump’s gruff toughness and unique skills and hard work are keeping the barbarians from consuming us regular, normal Americans.

Trump’s the right man at the right moment in time. No question about it. In fact, I’d say his personality brought out into the open and shed light onto pervasive bureaucratic corruption like never before. I think we should be thanking him, not disparage him.

@aligncare
The whole premise of your question is nothing but a hysterical “what if”.  But in the interest of discourse, I’ll play.

A second impeachment pre-supposes one of two things:
1) He did/does something that warrants removal from office.  If true, he SHOULD BE.  I don’t believe he will or has.
2) Or a second impeachment effort is, like this last one, ridiculous and made up from nothing.  If true, you exercise your rights as an American and make your individual voice heard, or you start a group that speaks with a larger voice.  You march, you raise hell. And as a last resort, if it’s truly an illegal removal, you shoot the bastards.

Both of these paths are intellectually honest and not dependent on the embodiment of one man. 

[txradioguy]

@aligncare
Your entire post is a testament to your belief that your convictions are malleable because RIGHT NOW you believe the ends justifies the means.  It is nothing but a “Yeah, but...”.

THIS is exactly the problem with the True Believers^TM.  Your salvation as an American (Not speaking religiously here) do not rest in Trump or any one man.  He’s doing good things, to be sure, and I applaud his efforts to seize back some control from the deep state (or at least shine a light on it).  But he is just one man and not beyond reproach and criticism, constructive or otherwise.

@Axeslinger you nailed it!   

[txradioguy]

Just because you are on TV the President of the United States does not give you the right to say whatever you want while your target take it....

@EdinVA here my friend let me fix that to a more accurate statement for you.

[Cyber Liberty]

No. No. NO!!

That is an excuse, not reasoning.

Of course it is!  This is Politics, not English class!  I think I mentioned something about "political technician."  That's the art of the possible, not the science of what's "right."   

[musiclady]

Of course it is!  This is Politics, not English class!  I think I mentioned something about "political technician."  That's the art of the possible, not the science of what's "right."   

I'm not sure what English class has to do with anything being discussed here, but the 'in between' I'm talking about (and you know full well I'm talking about) is not even close to a John Kasich type who compromises principles to be in the middle.

That's an excuse to avoid what I'm talking about.... and what I'm talking about is indeed political.

You can stand firm in beliefs and values, in Constitutional principles, and still behave as an adult. (You KNOW this, @Cyber Liberty ).

You also know, at least down inside, that Trump, with his childish tweets, is not standing up for you, for America, or for the Constitution, but for HIMSELF.

Defending his boorish behavior is an excuse for the fact that you have GIVEN UP in believing that it's possible to have standards that Trump just doesn't live up to.  To defend that position, one has to deny the reality that there are strong people who never, ever cave on principle, but at the same time never, ever behave as rude pre-adolescents.

We don't have to give up on our values to fight the enemy.  In fact, this wholesale caving on values is giving the enemy the upper hand. 

My only hope is that this populist nonsense will fade away and that Conservatism will triumph.  But as long as there are so many people defending the indefensible and pretending it's actually "fighting back" I'm quite certain that Conservatism as a movement will not recover before I've long departed this mortal sphere.....

[goatprairie]

Cavuto is a "Rush" wanna be, not a news guy and should expect blowback from his commentary and should also develop the "thick skin" to absorb some hits...
Just because you are on TV does not give you the right to say whatever you want while your target take it....

Do you ever watch Cavuto? A number of times he'll read comments from viewers who clearly do not like him and call him names.
Cavuto just laughs and says stuff like "really, am I that bad?" provoking laughs from the camera guys.
Trump simply can't take any criticism, even from minor characters like Cavuto, without lashing out.
He is without a doubt the most thin-skinned, easily agitated politician I've ever seen. And he is often foul-mouthed/vulgar unbefitting a POTUS.
I'll restate, I'll vote for him because there is no choice. The Dems are going to nominate a candidate who will be worse than Obama or Hillary Clinton.
But that doesn't mean I have to like him, Trump.
The thing is, maturity-wise, he's never grown up.

[skeeter]

@Axeslinger you nailed it!   

He nailed it alright.

Now all you guys need to do is stop deriding anyone who feels the need to defend the POTUS and imperfect man from incessant criticism or hysterical attacks a "True Believer".

Maybe we don't really care for his focus on ratings. Maybe we suspect there's a method to his madness. Perhaps we just like the direction he's taking the country and want to see it continue.

That kind of name calling is the kind of thing Trump is constantly called out on.

[Cyber Liberty]

@goatprairie  That's why I like Neil more than Donald.  I admire people who can laugh at themselves.

[aligncare]

He nailed it alright.

Now all you guys need to do is stop deriding anyone who feels the need to defend the POTUS and imperfect man from incessant criticism or hysterical attacks a "True Believer".

Maybe we don't really care for his focus on ratings. Maybe we suspect there's a method to his madness. Perhaps we just like the direction he's taking the country and want to see it continue.

That kind of name calling is the kind of thing Trump is constantly called out on.

@skeeter

I came back to this thread with something to say to @Axeslinger, but it appears you said it—maybe even ‘nailed’ it.

Instead of saying here’s what’s wrong with you or your support for the president, a more persuasive argument would be: here’s what’s right about my critique of Trump, focusing on the ball and not the batter.

Fact is, Trump enjoys wide support from millions of republican and conservative voters, and if it happens his agenda or personality has broad appeal and attracts from people who may occupy non traditional republican constituencies, that’s a good thing.

After all, there’s no secret to his agenda. He tells you flat-out what he wants to do and has a track record of doggedly pursuing it. If democrats want to vote for an America first agenda, I’m all for it!

[skeeter]

@skeeter

I came back to this thread with something to say to @Axeslinger, but it appears you said it—maybe even ‘nailed’ it.

Instead of saying here’s what’s wrong with you or your support for the president, a more persuasive argument would be: here’s what’s right about my critique of Trump, focusing on the ball and not the batter.

Fact is, Trump enjoys wide support from millions of republican and conservative voters, and if it happens his agenda or personality has broad appeal and attracts from people who may occupy non traditional republican constituencies, that’s a good thing.

After all, there’s no secret to his agenda. He tells you flat-out what he wants to do and has a track record of doggedly pursuing it. If democrats want to vote for an America first agenda, I’m all for it!

So far thats what I see.

I do not care about any politician. I care about my country.

[Bigun]

So far thats what I see.

I do not care about any politician. I care about my country.

Goes for me as well @skeeter. Well said!

[Axeslinger]

@skeeter

I came back to this thread with something to say to @Axeslinger, but it appears you said it—maybe even ‘nailed’ it.

Instead of saying here’s what’s wrong with you or your support for the president, a more persuasive argument would be: here’s what’s right about my critique of Trump, focusing on the ball and not the batter.

Fact is, Trump enjoys wide support from millions of republican and conservative voters, and if it happens his agenda or personality has broad appeal and attracts from people who may occupy non traditional republican constituencies, that’s a good thing.

After all, there’s no secret to his agenda. He tells you flat-out what he wants to do and has a track record of doggedly pursuing it. If democrats want to vote for an America first agenda, I’m all for it!

@aligncare
See?  And all I’d request is that you actually respond to my post.  You asked me (what I assumed was not a rhetorical) question.   I answered you.   Perhaps, rather than sitting upon sanctimony, you could re-read where the thread was going (for context) and then address what I said....because your comment above does not deal with what we were discussing whatsoever.   It was just more pontificating

[aligncare]

@goatprairie  That's why I like Neil more than Donald.  I admire people who can laugh at themselves.

Got you there. You can’t get away with that. Trump is often self deprecating.

And he’s not thin skinned. He’s just...intense, and on the hunt for coup plotters that infest the treacherous waters of official Washington.

If you’re gonna make an omelette, your gonna have to break some eggs. He’s not thin skinned, he’s fighting back against nearly impossible odds, and so far he has not only survived, but prospered.

[aligncare]

@aligncare
See?  And all I’d request is that you actually respond to my post.  You asked me (what I assumed was not a rhetorical) question.   I answered you.   Perhaps, rather than sitting upon sanctimony, you could re-read where the thread was going (for context) and then address what I said....because your comment above does not deal with what we were discussing whatsoever.   It was just more pontificating

Sanctimony? Good lord! Talk about thin skinned!

[Axeslinger]

He nailed it alright.

Now all you guys need to do is stop deriding anyone who feels the need to defend the POTUS and imperfect man from incessant criticism or hysterical attacks a "True Believer".

Maybe we don't really care for his focus on ratings. Maybe we suspect there's a method to his madness. Perhaps we just like the direction he's taking the country and want to see it continue.

That kind of name calling is the kind of thing Trump is constantly called out on.

@skeeter

Fear not, that label is reserved for a very select few who do not have the intellectual honesty to identify ANYTHING...EVER... that Trump has done wrong.  If they have no intellectual honesty, I will mock them because all they are is fawning sycophants.   Also, please note, I intentionally try not to ID by name who falls into that category...I’d rather let them self identify.  So...unless you’re a fawning sycophant...it’s all good.

[Axeslinger]

Sanctimony? Good lord! Talk about thin skinned!

@aligncare

I notice you’re still not discussing the merits or lack thereof in my post...just sayin’

[Cyber Liberty]

Got you there. You can’t get away with that. Trump is often self deprecating.

And he’s not thin skinned. He’s just...intense, and on the hunt for coup plotters that infest the treacherous waters of official Washington.

If you’re gonna make an omelette, your gonna have to break some eggs. He’s not thin skinned, he’s fighting back against nearly impossible odds, and so far he has not only survived, but prospered.

 

It's all subjective.

[Right_in_Virginia]

There's also something called biting the hand that feeds you.  And it's safe to say that had Fox not given Trump so much air time...and that includes air time to spread unchallenged false rumors about other candidates...he wouldn't have gotten elected.

No, it is not safe to say this unless you're intentionally promoting lies to fulfill your personal agenda or are woefully uninformed.

Back in 2015 and 2016 CNN and MSNBC also carried Trump rallies live.  And both networks were thrilled to interview the then candidate --- especially during the primary season.  And when either network was not covering the candidate live, they were talking about him, his statements, his supporters, his tweets and his victories.

CNN and MSNBC network hosts have said they regret giving candidate Trump so much free advertising.

So get the damn facts straight..

[musiclady]

It's all subjective.

The reality that he is thin skinned and can't tolerate criticism from anyone about anything is most certainly not "subjective."

To deny it is to deny the truth before one's very eyes.

One can say, "Sure, he's thin skinned, but it doesn't bother me," and be telling the truth, but to say he's not is just idiotic.

[Right_in_Virginia]

But I have to strongly disagree that anything he says in his infantile rages is "effective."

See this right here         tells the world you've prejudged everything the President says or will say.

Hate truly is a handicap to comprehension.

[Right_in_Virginia]

@goatprairie  That's why I like Neil more than Donald.  I admire people who can laugh at themselves.

Then you should be over-the-moon with admiration for the President @Cyber Liberty



 

[Axeslinger]

See this right here         tells the world you've prejudged everything the President says or will say.

Hate truly is a handicap to comprehension.

So is adoration.

[skeeter]

@skeeter

Fear not, that label is reserved for a very select few who do not have the intellectual honesty to identify ANYTHING...EVER... that Trump has done wrong.  If they have no intellectual honesty, I will mock them because all they are is fawning sycophants.   Also, please note, I intentionally try not to ID by name who falls into that category...I’d rather let them self identify.  So...unless you’re a fawning sycophant...it’s all good.

OK thats fine. But I wonder if it's just a few 'sycophants' to which you and a few others often refer - why bother mentioning them at all? Or if you do, call em out by name.

[Right_in_Virginia]

The reality that he is thin skinned and can't tolerate criticism from anyone about anything is most certainly not "subjective."

To deny it is to deny the truth before one's very eyes.

One can say, "Sure, he's thin skinned, but it doesn't bother me," and be telling the truth, but to say he's not is just idiotic.

I don't think anyone can call a man who has walked through a buzz saw for three years and emerged stronger for it "thin skinned".   

[Right_in_Virginia]

So is adoration.

I wouldn't know. 

But I am still so curious why you become so unhinged by supporters of the President.  If you believed a fraction of what you say about us, you'd flick us off like a piece of lint and move on.  Yet you're unable to do this.

Your posts are quite a fascinating example of contradiction.