The Trump Presidency

[goldfly]

Meanwhile, Theresa May is in Washington today. Why? She wants to move the UK to the 'front of the line' ... I guess they still need us after all.

many reason to be here and be first

but the press conference after was a ****ing joke and embarrassing

[thethe]

many reason to be here and be first

but the press conference after was a ****ing joke and embarrassing

Please explain why.

[Julio3000]

Please explain why.

I thought he was--in contrast with every public statement so far--mostly focused and on-message. On the other hand, I thought his answers on Russia, NATO, and torture were obfuscatory and lacking in clarity.

[jpx7]

Media: "Trump is a racist, Hitlerian bully."
Bannon: "The media is an opposition party."
Media: "That kind of talk is highly inappropriate."

The media should be the opposition party, irrespective of who's in power, because it's their job to be interrogating power and speaking truth to it. Any journalist rankled by that particular message from Trump's administration hasn't understood what their role in society is meant to be.

It's also a nice tacit admission by Bannon that he was never a member of "the media", at least the media qua journalism. He was an unofficial propagandist, now he is an official propagandist; comments like these seem to reflect that he knows this.

[sturg33]

Please explain why.

you new here?

[thethe]

The media should be the opposition party, irrespective of who's in power, because it's their job to be interrogating power and speaking truth to it. Any journalist rankled by that particular message from Trump's administration hasn't understood what their role in society is meant to be.

It's also a nice tacit admission by Bannon that he was never a member of "the media", at least the media qua journalism. He was an unofficial propagandist, now he is an official propagandist; comments like these seem to reflect that he knows this.

But what percentage of the media is opposing trump versus obama? I can't imagine if in a moment of truth anyone can admit it's not heavily slanted.

[jpx7]

Guess what...there a tens of millions of stupid people in this country. They vote for both sides.

Agreed. Seems like a good argument for much more robust state- and federal-level spending on education.

[thethe]

you new here?

Hahahaha....fair point.

[thethe]

Agreed. Seems like a good argument for much more robust state- and federal-level spending on education.

How much have we spent on education the last 20 years? I don't believe money is the solution. I think it may be quite the opposite.

[jpx7]

Meanwhile, Theresa May is in Washington today. Why? She wants to move the UK to the 'front of the line' ... I guess they still need us after all.

Theresa May is such a turd.

[thethe]

I thought he was--in contrast with every public statement so far--mostly focused and on-message. On the other hand, I thought his answers on Russia, NATO, and torture were obfuscatory and lacking in clarity.

It was a short meeting but I think k what should be most comforting to the Trump is unstable and recm less crowd would be that while he disagrees with Mattis on the merit of torture that he will defer to him as he is more qualified.

Basically says to me that as long as Trump is hiring bright people the right policy decisions will be adopted.

[jpx7]

But what percentage of the media is opposing trump versus obama? I can't imagine if in a moment of truth anyone can admit it's not heavily slanted.

You obviously missed my point here. I'm saying the journalistic media should always be adversarial to power; if they were less so under the previous administration, then they failed at their job. But the answer is not to be less adversarial now.

[jpx7]

How much have we spent on education the last 20 years? I don't believe money is the solution. I think it may be quite the opposite.

Spend more and spend better. Teachers, for instance, are one of the most chronically underpaid segments of the workforce. Being a public school teacher should be a much more attractive proposition than it is, given the importance of the role to a healthy society.

[thethe]

You obviously missed my point here. I'm saying the journalistic media should always be adversarial to power; if they were less so under the previous administration, then they failed at their job. But the answer is not to be less adversarial now.

And I disagree they should be adversarial. That is a really strong word. No question they should hold them accountable but adverserial implies lack of objectivity.

[thethe]

Spend more and spend better. Teachers, for instance, are one of the most chronically underpaid segments of the workforce. Being a public school teacher should be a much more attractive proposition than it is, given the importance of the role to a healthy society.

I have always said teachers should make more but this isn't a problem money will solve and if you add more money to the system the bureaucracy will grow and swallow more of the money.

[jpx7]

And I disagree they should be adversarial. That is a really strong word. No question they should hold them accountable but adverserial implies lack of objectivity.

No it doesn't. It simply means that a journalist should approach any institutional subject with deep and abiding skepticism; they should be hostile to the narrative that those in power seek to establish, because power—irrespective of professed ideology—will usually seek to misdirect or conceal. In the context of political journalism, an adversarial relationship to power is, quite precisely, objectivity.

That doesn't mean our politicians are always lying; but if they aren't always questioned, conspicuously and intently, they are more likely to lie, and to lie more often.

[thethe]

No it doesn't. It simply means that a journalist should approach any institutional subject with deep and abiding skepticism; they should be hostile to the narrative that those in power seek to establish, because power—irrespective of professed ideology—will usually seek to misdirect or conceal. In the context of political journalism, an adversarial relationship to power is, quite precisely, objectivity.

That doesn't mean our politicians are always lying; but if they aren't always questioned, conspicuously and intently, they are more likely to lie, and to lie more often.

I'll defer to you on word usage and meaning. I know when I'm out of my league.

[sturg33]

There is some very good news about Trump's presidency.

No, I don't support the wall or really anything the guy is pushing BUT for well over a year I heard Bernie and his supporters singing the praises of tariffs and for even longer than that I've had to put up with moron Paul Krugman talk about how we need tariffs. Then BOOM... Trump walks on the scene and in hours ever liberal in the country is now a free trade libertarian.

Is the tariff on Mexican goods bad? Of course it is. But the education of the progressives on trade is priceless.

[jpx7]

There is some very good news about Trump's presidency.

No, I don't support the wall or really anything the guy is pushing BUT for well over a year I heard Bernie and his supporters singing the praises of tariffs and for even longer than that I've had to put up with moron Paul Krugman talk about how we need tariffs. Then BOOM... Trump walks on the scene and in hours ever liberal in the country is now a free trade libertarian.

Is the tariff on Mexican goods bad? Of course it is. But the education of the progressives on trade is priceless.

I actually don't think many amongst the for-real left have flipped on this issue, for the most part—though there may be some who aren't opponents of tariffs, per se, but just object to their implementation to pay for a border-wall. As I said previously, while these trade issues are by no means simple—and I am personally a bit morally conflicted about effectively taking wages away from third-world workers to improve the quality-of-life of workers here in the United States—I remain in favor of some measure of protectionism being baked into our global economic relations, as I believe free-trade usually ends up benefiting corporations much more than consumers/workers.

What I actually think we're hearing and seeing is establishment liberals emboldened by the feeling that strong anti-Trump sentiment amongst their constituents has given them cover to be a lot more loudly and boldly pro-free-trade. Hell, Obama was a big proponent of the Trans-Pacific, for instance, as was Clinton—until she maybe-sort-of-wasn't (but certainly still was).

[sturg33]

from a staff person at the EPA:
"I work at the EPA, and yeah, it's as bad as you are hearing:
The entire agency is under lockdown -- the website, Facebook, Twitter, you name it, is static and can't be updated. All reports, findings, permits and studies are frozen and not to be released. No presentations or meetings with outside groups are to be scheduled.
Any press contacting us are to be directed to the Press Office, which is also silenced and will give no response.
All grants and contracts are frozen, from the contractors working on Superfund sites, to graduate students working on their thesis.
We are still doing our work, writing reports, doing cancer modeling for pesticides, hoping that this is temporary and we will be able to serve the public soon. But many of us are worried about an ideologically-fueled purging, and if you use any federal data I advise you gather what you can now.
We have been told the website is being reworked to reflect the new administration's policy.
Feel free to copy and paste --

you all pay for the government and you should know what's going on. I am posting this as a fellow citizen and not in any sort of official capacity."

LINK

Please read and stop spreading the paranoia