Amazing 'how hostile the press is to everything the president does'

When I think of the former President, I think of a lot of times I disagreed with him, but also of a few times when I agreed. If it’s 100% disagreement, one has to suspect that what’s afoot is not just disagreement, but opposition for the sake of opposition. I could never go there with Obama or even Clinton simply because I value my country enough to cheer when something happens that’s right, and to desire that what’s right will occur.

It appears that this strong opposition is in the bureaucracy as well, evidenced especially by the apparent revelation that General Flynn called the Russian ambassador. As Flynn was not in his position at the time, this information could have only been uncovered by a wiretap or the NSA, and the justification for such a tap has not been released. Ordinarily such surveillance can get a person fired or put in jail if it’s not warranted, so we’re talking some very serious opposition on the part of someone in the bureaucracy or in the previous administration.

(and interestingly, it was a Congressman, and not a reporter, who put two and two together here….this is another big place where journalists have simply dropped the ball)

I bet he wasn’t saying that about Obama. The truth is that our system of government depends on criticism of policies and decisions by those in high office. When the GOP offers an extremely low quality candidate, so that we have an election between him and a crook… Why should any of this be surprising? What did Chaput (et al.) expect?

I find it interesting that the very same people who lambasted Obama on a daily basis are now preaching sermons that we need to respect Trump.

Even more interesting is how Trump seems to be annoyed that he is not respected by a huge swath of America. I have noticed he sends his lying drones (Spicer and Conway) out to whine that he is not respected enough, and inexplicably, that now he is President, he should be treated differently by the press than when he was running.

No question, in my mind, that Trump needs close scrutiny and a healthy dose of criticism. Still, it’s maddening to see the mainstream press, who couldn’t seem to find anything to criticize about Obama, now being unable to find anything but criticism for Trump. I think Trump is right to call them on it, but I sure wish he would find a softer manner.

I’m glad we have a real Ruler who is coming back, who doesn’t need National Security Advisors, Press Secretaries, an Executive Cabinet or a Twitter account. He isn’t dishonest or morally suspect. He will command obedience and crush all enemies. He will rule in righteousness. It’s times like these when you are glad to have heavenly citizenship.

[GregH]

I find it interesting that the very same people who lambasted Obama on a daily basis are now preaching sermons that we need to respect Trump.

Even more interesting is how Trump seems to be annoyed that he is not respected by a huge swath of America. I have noticed he sends his lying drones (Spicer and Conway) out to whine that he is not respected enough, and inexplicably, that now he is President, he should be treated differently by the press than when he was running.

Greg, maybe you’ve got some examples of people who have done what you claim in your first sentence there? Evidence of daily, or near daily statements in opposition of Obama, followed by whole sermons saying we need to respect Trump? I would dare suggest that a pastor who attempted the first half of this would have alienated non-Republicans from his church to the point where it would be needless for him to say “we need to support Trump” at all, let alone occupy a whole sermon with it. You might get a series of public statements castigating Obama followed by a public statement supporting Trump, but not a sermon. And “daily” is pushing credibility as well.

I think you need to admit that statement was hyperbole—yes, we’re a fractured society, but no need to exaggerate it for rhetoric’s sake.

And funny, I’ve been saying about the same thing you said in that second paragraph for the past eight years, just with the names “Obama”, “Pfeiffer”, and “Palmieri” substituted for “Trump”, “Spicer”, and “Conway.” Along those lines, we need to be careful of the “FactCheck” articles claiming such and such is a lie, as all too often, what goes on is that the “FactCheck” people change the terms of the question, redefine it, or use a single point of reference to “refute” the claim when any good journalist (or reasonably aware non-journalist) knows that there are multiple points of reference that speak to the claim.

Not that I would claim that Trump has always been honest—he has, like his predecessors, said some doozies—but if you don’t catch on that the fact-checkers are pulling some strings in a pretty clear pattern, you’re just not thinking.

It’s just so amusing to me the mainstream media’s new commitment to the pursuit of absolute truth and hard facts. Just this morning on CNN New Day, Chris Cuomo interrupted Republican Rep. Jim Collins (who absolutely was dancing around Cuomo’s question), and said, “Please, Rep. Collins, on this Valentine’s Day, for the love of TRUTH…”, trying to press him into responding.

I would like to ask Cuomo, “Do you believe in absolute truth? What is truth, to you? How do you define it? How do you determine it? Why does it seem that so many in the media were not nearly so interested in pursuing truth for truth’s sake under the previous administration?”

And yes, we Christians should be as committed to the pursuit of truth under the Trump administration as we were under the Obama administration. Pres. Trump is not one to let truth and the facts get in the way of his opinions and decisions.

[GregH]

I find it interesting that the very same people who lambasted Obama on a daily basis are now preaching sermons that we need to respect Trump.

Even more interesting is how Trump seems to be annoyed that he is not respected by a huge swath of America. I have noticed he sends his lying drones (Spicer and Conway) out to whine that he is not respected enough, and inexplicably, that now he is President, he should be treated differently by the press than when he was running.

I agree. He needs to stop focusing on the media. I am not sure what his obsession is with the ratings. The only thing I can gather is that the White House has become much more like “The Apprentice” than an actual working government. Therefore he is focused on the ratings. The political system is a bit of a disaster now, and I find the whole situation quite humorous. I am 100% fine with it continuing as it is. The more they are consumed by a bunch of nonsense, the more they are staying out of my business. Now if they could just give me back some of my tax money, I would really be happy.

[Bert Perry]

GregH wrote:

I find it interesting that the very same people who lambasted Obama on a daily basis are now preaching sermons that we need to respect Trump.

Even more interesting is how Trump seems to be annoyed that he is not respected by a huge swath of America. I have noticed he sends his lying drones (Spicer and Conway) out to whine that he is not respected enough, and inexplicably, that now he is President, he should be treated differently by the press than when he was running.

Greg, maybe you’ve got some examples of people who have done what you claim in your first sentence there? Evidence of daily, or near daily statements in opposition of Obama, followed by whole sermons saying we need to respect Trump? I would dare suggest that a pastor who attempted the first half of this would have alienated non-Republicans from his church to the point where it would be needless for him to say “we need to support Trump” at all, let alone occupy a whole sermon with it. You might get a series of public statements castigating Obama followed by a public statement supporting Trump, but not a sermon. And “daily” is pushing credibility as well.

I think you need to admit that statement was hyperbole—yes, we’re a fractured society, but no need to exaggerate it for rhetoric’s sake.

And funny, I’ve been saying about the same thing you said in that second paragraph for the past eight years, just with the names “Obama”, “Pfeiffer”, and “Palmieri” substituted for “Trump”, “Spicer”, and “Conway.” Along those lines, we need to be careful of the “FactCheck” articles claiming such and such is a lie, as all too often, what goes on is that the “FactCheck” people change the terms of the question, redefine it, or use a single point of reference to “refute” the claim when any good journalist (or reasonably aware non-journalist) knows that there are multiple points of reference that speak to the claim.

Not that I would claim that Trump has always been honest—he has, like his predecessors, said some doozies—but if you don’t catch on that the fact-checkers are pulling some strings in a pretty clear pattern, you’re just not thinking.

Yes, I meant daily. I mean the people like Sean Hannity and his ilk. I mean some of the people in my FB feed. I mean lots of people both public and private. I don’t recant what I said. And when I said sermons, I don’t mean from a pulpit. And no I am not going to debate the definition of sermon and whether I misused it. I think reasonable people knew what I meant.

In my opinion, Trump is the first president that will look into a camera and tell a bold faced lie, knowing that he can be proved wrong easily but with the strategy that he will just castigate those who dare to call him out (labeling anything negative as fake news, etc). The example of the murder rate being at a 47 year high is an example. He has said this multiple times. It is laughably wrong and there is not a chance that he has not had his people warn him that he is wrong. Yet he keeps doing it. He is essentially trying to create his own convenient version of truth through the media by control and smear tactics. It is scary.

I am sure that Obama, the Bushes, and every president has lied. But Trump really does take it to a whole new level. He lies with no fear of being called out on it. There is no regard for truth because he knows he can take to Twitter and recast truth to match his needs.

[GregH]

In my opinion, Trump is the first president that will look into a camera and tell a bold faced lie, knowing that he can be proved wrong easily but with the strategy that he will just castigate those who dare to call him out (labeling anything negative as fake news, etc). The example of the murder rate being at a 47 year high is an example. He has said this multiple times. It is laughably wrong and there is not a chance that he has not had his people warn him that he is wrong. Yet he keeps doing it. He is essentially trying to create his own convenient version of truth through the media by control and smear tactics. It is scary.

I am sure that Obama, the Bushes, and every president has lied. But Trump really does take it to a whole new level. He lies with no fear of being called out on it. There is no regard for truth because he knows he can take to Twitter and recast truth to match his needs.

I want you to listen to me…..I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.

If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.

Honestly, Greg, there is political bias, and there is simple detachment from reality, and you’re getting to be clearly on the wrong side of that divide. And ya wanna be scared, watch this one.

Bert, don’t worry about where I am politically. Probably it is a waste of time but I will tell you the difference between Trump lies and the lie you bring up from Clinton. (The Obama statement I would not consider a lie but the Clinton statement is.)

Clinton told that lie expecting not to be found out. He lied to hide the truth. And he would not have lied if he had known that the truth would come out as it did.

Trump tells lies knowing that he will be found out and not caring because he believes he can basically castigate his enemies and recast truth to meet his needs. He believes that if for example, he gives his absurd murder rate statistic enough, enough people will believe it so it doesn’t even matter what the real truth is. Same thing about his claim that 3 million people voted illegally in the last election and his inane claims about his inauguration crowd. Truth to Trump is what he believes and what he can get others to believe.

In other words, those that hate post modernism have elected themselves the ultimate postmodernist. Congratulations…

….where you are politically, because that is self-evident from your comments. However, when you make the ludicrous claim that Obama’s “if you like your plan/doctor, you can keep it/him” was not a lie, you’re starting to show something I am concerned about, which is detachment from reality.

It is a lie because when Obama said it, he knew that the Affordable Care Act and the regulations he planned to implement it would make a large number of insurance plans illegal, which in turn would force many people to choose new doctors. Anyone who has ever had to choose between healthcare plans—as Obama did as a community organizer in Chicago—knows full well that a key factor in choosing a plan is to choose the one, if possible, that covers your doctor.

In the same way, when Obama was claiming he was going to run the “most transparent administration in history”, he knew full well that he was preparing to appoint people who would be stonewalling FOIA requests. Sorry, brother, but that’s a lie.

In contrast, when Trump said that the murder rate was the highest in 47 years, he does have the plausible deniability that he didn’t know the actual statistics. Hence Politifact says that he was “wrong” but not “lying”.

And the “three million illegal voters”? Well, on one side, Trump doesn’t have the evidence to prove it, and on the other side, we really haven’t done the audit of voting records to disprove it. It’s at least more plausible than Clinton on Lewinsky, or Obama vis-a-vis being able to keep your plan or doctor.

Not that Trump hasn’t lied on occasion, but if you’re going to argue that his lying is of an entirely different genre than that of Clinton or Obama, you’ve really got to improve your evidence.

[Bert Perry]

….where you are politically, because that is self-evident from your comments. However, when you make the ludicrous claim that Obama’s “if you like your plan/doctor, you can keep it/him” was not a lie, you’re starting to show something I am concerned about, which is detachment from reality.

It is a lie because when Obama said it, he knew that the Affordable Care Act and the regulations he planned to implement it would make a large number of insurance plans illegal, which in turn would force many people to choose new doctors. Anyone who has ever had to choose between healthcare plans—as Obama did as a community organizer in Chicago—knows full well that a key factor in choosing a plan is to choose the one, if possible, that covers your doctor.

In the same way, when Obama was claiming he was going to run the “most transparent administration in history”, he knew full well that he was preparing to appoint people who would be stonewalling FOIA requests. Sorry, brother, but that’s a lie.

In contrast, when Trump said that the murder rate was the highest in 47 years, he does have the plausible deniability that he didn’t know the actual statistics. Hence Politifact says that he was “wrong” but not “lying”.

And the “three million illegal voters”? Well, on one side, Trump doesn’t have the evidence to prove it, and on the other side, we really haven’t done the audit of voting records to disprove it. It’s at least more plausible than Clinton on Lewinsky, or Obama vis-a-vis being able to keep your plan or doctor.

Not that Trump hasn’t lied on occasion, but if you’re going to argue that his lying is of an entirely different genre than that of Clinton or Obama, you’ve really got to improve your evidence.

I would not label your thoughts a lie. I would label a lot of them ridiculous though :)

The only thing we agree on Bert is that we think the other is detached from reality. So be it.

….would be when Obama infamously called the Fort Hood shooting “workplace violence” instead of the Islamic terrorist attack that it was, ignoring the many signs of his radicalization going back at least to 2007. In fact, it’s worse, again because regarding the “47%” comment, Trump had plausible deniability. Obama had been receiving daily briefings on what people knew about the perpetrator and does not have that plausible deniability, but persisted in calling it “workplace violence” for years.

So is Trump really the “worst liar ever”, or is the press showing that they’ve got some rather selective memory?

Don’t get me wrong; I am very concerned at many of the quite frankly reckless things our President has said. The one about Mexico “not sending their best and brightest” especially—it’s not as if illegal immigration is coordinated from Mexico City, after all. They’re “sending” nobody, whatever the other characteristics of those who come. I’ve been concerned about his penchant for “attack dog” tactics as well. But that said, even that isn’t that much different from Obama saying, in effect, that conservatives can sit in the back of the bus back in 2009, or scratching his face with his middle finger on numerous occasions.