- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: CNN throwing temper tantrum bc Trump didn't invite them
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:58 am to CAD703X
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:58 am to CAD703X
I hope he continues to do stuff like this to CNN and NBC and if he wants he can call them out for their coverage of his campaign.
"There was a poison gas terrorist attack in Syria and you were breaking down how I ate my KFC dinner. frick you. *Mic Drop*"
"There was a poison gas terrorist attack in Syria and you were breaking down how I ate my KFC dinner. frick you. *Mic Drop*"
1
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:59 am to goldenbadger08
quote:
"There was a poison gas terrorist attack in Syria and you were breaking down how I ate my KFC dinner. frick you. *Mic Drop*"
He would have my vote in 2020 no matter what he did if he actually said that.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:59 am to TxTiger82
quote:
Oh, so our autocratic President gets to set the rules for press access?
When has that not been the case?
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:59 am to Wolfhound45
quote:
Act like a news organization and you will get treated like one.
There is really no reason to believe this either.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:59 am to TxTiger82
quote:
So Trump will trade access for positive coverage, much like Putin. And you guys think this is a good thing? We are about to have the least transparent President in history and you guys are celebrating it.
I don't need to know if Trump went to dinner with his family
True story
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:00 am to TxTiger82
quote:
We are about to have the least transparent President in history
Give me a fricking break.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:01 am to Wally Sparks
quote:
When has that not been the case?
This is unprecedented. He hasn't even given access to a WH Press Corp yet.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:01 am to Homesick Tiger
quote:
Give me a fricking break.
No break. HOWL.
This post was edited on 11/16/16 at 8:02 am
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:05 am to CAD703X
Translation: CNN was so sure of a Clinton victory that they did not consider the repercussions of their extreme bias in favor of Clinton/Democrats in general. 
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:08 am to GurleyGirl
How Putin dismantled the Russian media bit by bit
It absolutely blows my mind that you guys are applauding these kinds of actions in our own country. We need a free press. It's in the First fricking Amendment for God's sake--you know, the same one that protects your own freedom of speech on this very chat board.
quote:
But RBC is not the first media organisation that has faced serious pressure to conform to Kremlin narratives. Since Putin began his re-election campaign in 2011, 12 prominent newsrooms have battled resignations, restrictions and closures.
It absolutely blows my mind that you guys are applauding these kinds of actions in our own country. We need a free press. It's in the First fricking Amendment for God's sake--you know, the same one that protects your own freedom of speech on this very chat board.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:11 am to TxTiger82
quote:
We need a free press.
You damn right we do. However, you seem to have a hard time distinguishing between a free press and a fair press. There's the rub.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:13 am to TxTiger82
quote:Did you complain on here one single time about Hillary going over a year without a single press conference?
So howl, you assholes. Howl with the fricking wolves.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:13 am to TxTiger82
quote:
It absolutely blows my mind that you guys are applauding these kinds of actions in our own country. We need a free press. It's in the First fricking Amendment for God's sake--you know, the same one that protects your own freedom of speech on this very chat board.
We have a free press. They're free to write whatever they want. Free press does not mean "the president has to invite them to dinner".
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:14 am to Homesick Tiger
quote:
However, you seem to have a hard time distinguishing between a free press and a fair press.
There's was never any guarantee of fairness or objectivity. In fact, the American press was incredibly partisan in the late 1700s and early 1800s. If anything, we have gone back to that kind of system.
The "objective" press literally only existed for a short time period between the 1950s (when TV proliferated) and the 1980s (when cable proliferated).
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:15 am to Cooter Davenport
quote:
We have a free press. They're free to write whatever they want. Free press does not mean "the president has to invite them to dinner".
True, but do you not see the danger in reversing the norm of press access? If not, perhaps you might enjoy Russia.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:19 am to TxTiger82
quote:
There's was never any guarantee of fairness or objectivity.
So you have no problem with giving credence to media personnel that report opinions over facts? I depend on the media to research the facts and reveal that to their audiences. You and I both should never settle for opinion pieces as being the gospel for journalism.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:19 am to CAD703X
Anyone else seeing some parallels between a Tom Clancy book and real life here?
This whole thing sounds like Executive Orders when a president gets seated after a kamakaze strike takes out nearly all of the three branches of government yet "official Washington" still loses its shite over the new president not following its whims.
"Official Washington" in that case is explicitly pointed out to be the press corps, lobbyists, and the groups of mandarins in civil service who get together at Beltway cocktail parties and bitch about the outsider who doesn't understand how things work because they are being told to frick off.
This whole thing sounds like Executive Orders when a president gets seated after a kamakaze strike takes out nearly all of the three branches of government yet "official Washington" still loses its shite over the new president not following its whims.
"Official Washington" in that case is explicitly pointed out to be the press corps, lobbyists, and the groups of mandarins in civil service who get together at Beltway cocktail parties and bitch about the outsider who doesn't understand how things work because they are being told to frick off.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:19 am to TxTiger82
quote:
o you not see the danger in reversing the norm of press access?
No, I don't think it's dangerous for the president to have dinner with his family without inviting the press. That's pure hyperbole. Do you realize how ridiculous and silly that sounds? The only people who are jumping to that extreme are the butthurt press and the butthurt left. Breathe into a paper bag, you are hyperventilating and need to calm down.
This post was edited on 11/16/16 at 8:20 am
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:21 am to Cooter Davenport
quote:
No, I don't think it's dangerous for the president to have dinner with his family without inviting the press.
He hasn't even given access to a press corp yet. This is indicative of a bigger problem. Nobody cares about his steak dinner.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 8:21 am to TxTiger82
The fact that you think one dinner is indicative of "less press access" is astounding. The guy just wanted to go to fricking dinner. If he was doing something in the scope of his office, they would be there.
ETA: "least transparent" is laughable and shows you have no historical knowledge of the Presidency
ETA: "least transparent" is laughable and shows you have no historical knowledge of the Presidency
This post was edited on 11/16/16 at 8:22 am
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News