Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Obama's refusal to release the long form birth certificate was weird.
not really considering he had already released his birth certificate in 2008 and HI had switched formats ( the release of the "long-form" only served to escalate birtherism ).
I love it when liberals act like they are for free markets and free trade. You are for other countries imposing crazy high taxes on American exports.
That's globalism and pro protectionist policies for other countries.
Trump's proposed eliminating all tariffs and the other countries don't want to do that. Hard to say he's against free trade if he's trying to reduce tariffs for everybody.
As a former editor of video for local news, I wince at the term "doctored." From what I can tell, there was just a few edits made to make her look like stuttering fool. I know a lot of you have watched live pressers before and live campaign speeches. Sometimes even the best peakers get tripped up on their words. They stumble a little. Sometimes they stutter a lot. It begs the question as a news editor where do you draw the line? For example, say that a politicians has a long quote along the lines of...
Quote:
I.... I, uhm, I, (clear throat, pauses) thank you for inviting me to South Carolina today to...... (pause)...... to talk about the huge issues we are facing today in America..."
Am I making an editorial statement if I don't clean that quote up a little? Or am I making an editorial statement f I do clean it up a little? What if I make it to say
Quote:
Thank you for inviting me to South Carolina today to...... (pause)...... to talk about the huge issues we are facing today in America..."
If I cleaned it up, this is how the quote would come off. I would not make an edit to take out the pause inside the statement, but would leading into the quote. For continuity issues, it comes across better audio-wise to have a lead in to the quote and then for the quote to go right along without the stammering.
The difference between me, for example, and whoever made this edit of Pelosi is that I had to face my superiors on my choices. Depending on the situation, I might would need to talk to them about it before I made the edits. If it concerned me enough, I'd follow up in an e-mail so that I had something to point to as a guide on what I should have done. The people who make these edits, as the woman in the NPR interview above me said, don't have to answer to anyone. Social media doesn't care if it's legit or not as long as you click on it.
And evidently a lot of people have clicked on it.
These are things that were addressed in my schooling for photojournalism, too. Say a liquor store is robbed one night. You are sent to shoot video of it the next day. You see a pastor who is well known in the community walk into the store as you're shooting video. Do you air video of him walking into the store? Do you know why he was there? Was he buying liquor? Does it matter? Would people think less of him if he were? Maybe he was wishing the owner of the store well? Maybe he was witnessing to him? Is it up to us to judge?
The moral of the story that I gleamed from the instructor is to be careful shooting video of a crime scene? People see what they want to see. So I was very careful at these kinds of scenes not to show the faces of who was walking in and out of possible questionable establishments. Some news shooters don't care. Some actively want controversy. I always felt I was there not tell a story, not make the news.
Are you still unaware that "all the news" is the propaganda wing of the DNC?
Lawd, haven't you learned anything over the past 3 years?
Okay, that is a great stance, if you want to stick your head in the sand and ignore facts and reason.
Like Trump said Don't believe what you hear and don't believe what you see.
That is the kind of thing that dictators and cults are made of.
Gas-lighting 101.
If facts say something that you don't want to hear...don't believe them.
Believe "alternative facts".
Believe only the news that fits your agenda...is evidently the mantra of the Trumps
Just throw critical thinking skills and reason right out the window!
(And it was you who stated that you trusted NPR when you used them as a link....but that is okay.)
not really considering he had already released his birth certificate in 2008 and HI had switched formats ( the release of the "long-form" only served to escalate birtherism ).
I don't think birtherism was ever escalated among a significant number of people.
Liberals loved to talk about birtherism rather than the economy and OBama's policies.
It seems to me that it is much more probable that Obama was born in Kenya, given his father was from Kenya, then Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election from Nurse Ratched.
Yet liberals insist birtherism is kooky conspiracy theory while at same time they believe Trump was in cahoots with Russia to steal the election.
Pelosi and all the people complaining about Trump tweeting this video have accused Trump of c olluding with Russia, one of the worst political smears of all time.
But then they get up on the cross if you accurately observe Pelosi has a brain issue.
That Lou Dobbs interview I posted makes a point that Pulosi needs to stop being out front and the voice of the Democrats. She needs to find a Moderate Dem who's intelligent and can communicate effectively.
And not one of the radical Progressives or Trump Haters. She can still rule behind the scene.
She makes to many gaffs and mistakes to be a serious spoke person and leader.
You'll have to forgive me if I don't remember which party you vote for. I'm mostly Democrat though and I don't really care who they elect as Speaker. I don't like McConnell, but that's not on me. Neither one will be the leader of their side of Congress as soon as each party decides they are no longer worth it for them
Okay, that is a great stance, if you want to stick your head in the sand and ignore facts and reason.
Like Trump said Don't believe what you hear and don't believe what you see.
That is the kind of thing that dictators and cults are made of.
Gas-lighting 101.
If facts say something that you don't want to hear...don't believe them.
Believe "alternative facts".
Believe only the news that fits your agenda...is evidently the mantra of the Trumps
Just throw critical thinking skills and reason right out the window!
(And it was you who stated that you trusted NPR when you used them as a link....but that is okay.)
Anytime the DNC media throws a bone to Trump, which they have to do occasionally to keep up the façade of objectivity, you KNOW it's true. They would NEVER issue a story if it put Trump in a positive light unless the story was not 100% verifiably true.
Oh please, your own Dear Leader embraced birtherism including sending an investigating team to Hawaii. He sure did escalate it.
he wasn't even a politician then and Trump's style is obviously not the standard Republican one. lol
Trump's going to talk about anything that is out there when he doesn't like somebody.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
