RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Melania

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4838



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/21/18 2:37 pm    ::: Melania Reply Reply with quote

Just when you think that it might be possible to think about maybe liking her....

Quote:
"It's a jacket. There was no hidden message. After today's important visit to Texas, I hope the media isn't going to choose to focus on her wardrobe," Grisham said.


Is there NO ONE that is advising these people????

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/2018/06/21/melania-trump-wears-dont-care-coat-visit-migrant-kids-texas/722620002/



_________________
neverthless she persisted
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 19600



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/21/18 5:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I know it's been said many MANY times before, but this time the world really has gone mad. It's fucking bonkers out there.



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 17929



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/21/18 9:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
I know it's been said many MANY times before, but this time the world really has gone mad. It's fucking bonkers out there.


Agree. This administration is taking babies away from their families, and the news focuses on a jacket.

Donald plays them every single time.



_________________
TALENT

What it takes to play a gay pirate, a gay candymaker, and a gay mad hatter, and still land a role as John Dilinger.
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11012
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/21/18 9:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

That poor woman. Those Poor(er) kids....if I were a frightened child, she would not be a comforting figure to me. She looks too much like Cruella DeVille.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 10466
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus. If u were in my safe space, you'd have to be f'd up


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/24/18 7:38 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
I know it's been said many MANY times before, but this time the world really has gone mad. It's fucking bonkers out there.


Agree. This administration is taking babies away from their families, and the news focuses on a jacket.

Donald plays them every single time.


It's been 2 yrs now. I no longer believe the "press" is being played. They're complicit.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 17929



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/24/18 8:07 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
mercfan3 wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
I know it's been said many MANY times before, but this time the world really has gone mad. It's fucking bonkers out there.


Agree. This administration is taking babies away from their families, and the news focuses on a jacket.

Donald plays them every single time.


It's been 2 yrs now. I no longer believe the "press" is being played. They're complicit.


They’re either complicit or stupid.

We need someone like Stewart to call their bullshit out.



_________________
TALENT

What it takes to play a gay pirate, a gay candymaker, and a gay mad hatter, and still land a role as John Dilinger.
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11012
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/24/18 11:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
We need someone like Stewart to call their bullshit out.

A. Men.
I have long said that Jon was like the biblical prophets of old, not in his ability to foresee or warn so much as in his capacity to call out the bullshit of The Establishment. Many try (see: Trevor Noah, etc.), but Jon had an established legitimacy from....what?....was he the first to do it in earnest? To take it from the standup schtick to the newsdesk? And he KNEW. HIS. $HIT.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 17929



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/24/18 3:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
mercfan3 wrote:
We need someone like Stewart to call their bullshit out.

A. Men.
I have long said that Jon was like the biblical prophets of old, not in his ability to foresee or warn so much as in his capacity to call out the bullshit of The Establishment. Many try (see: Trevor Noah, etc.), but Jon had an established legitimacy from....what?....was he the first to do it in earnest? To take it from the standup schtick to the newsdesk? And he KNEW. HIS. $HIT.


Trevor satires the news, Jon satires news organizations. He was openly liberal, but he was also hyper critical of CNN and MSNBC

Similarly for Oliver, Bee, and Colbert. All three excellent at calling out politicians bullshit, none really bother to go after the media.

In fact, he might have been more critical of CNN than anything.



_________________
TALENT

What it takes to play a gay pirate, a gay candymaker, and a gay mad hatter, and still land a role as John Dilinger.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 56615
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/24/18 3:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
Jon had an established legitimacy from....what?


Mostly from the fact that you agreed with him



_________________
When all my dime dancin' is through
I run to you
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11012
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/24/18 3:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
Howee wrote:
mercfan3 wrote:
We need someone like Stewart to call their bullshit out.

A. Men.
I have long said that Jon was like the biblical prophets of old, not in his ability to foresee or warn so much as in his capacity to call out the bullshit of The Establishment. Many try (see: Trevor Noah, etc.), but Jon had an established legitimacy from....what?....was he the first to do it in earnest? To take it from the standup schtick to the newsdesk? And he KNEW. HIS. $HIT.


Trevor satires the news, Jon satires news organizations. He was openly liberal, but he was also hyper critical of CNN and MSNBC

Similarly for Oliver, Bee, and Colbert. All three excellent at calling out politicians bullshit, none really bother to go after the media.

In fact, he might have been more critical of CNN than anything.


Yes, he was. And Fox, of course. They all are, fairly enough. What I actually meant, though, was that--and maybe it's just me--his credibility was more viable cuz he PRESENTED as more of a behind-the-desk journalist than as a stand-up. I know Oliver, Noah, et. al, do that now, too....but I see them more as 'knock-offs' of what Jon established.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11012
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/24/18 4:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
Jon had an established legitimacy from....what?


Mostly from the fact that you agreed with him


From your perspective, perhaps; 'legitimacy' is relative, no? My litmus test might go like this: "Who's research, production and presentation is more legitimate in the documentation of a story on Stormy Daniels: Sean Hannity, Jon Stewart, or Stormy Daniels?" Cool Jon beats out Sean every time. (Maybe even Stormy--can she be objective?!)

But what I meant was a more viable, perceived legitimacy than his proteges (Oliver, Noah, etc.)



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 17929



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/24/18 5:41 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
Jon had an established legitimacy from....what?


Mostly from the fact that you agreed with him


From your perspective, perhaps; 'legitimacy' is relative, no? My litmus test might go like this: "Who's research, production and presentation is more legitimate in the documentation of a story on Stormy Daniels: Sean Hannity, Jon Stewart, or Stormy Daniels?" Cool Jon beats out Sean every time. (Maybe even Stormy--can she be objective?!)

But what I meant was a more viable, perceived legitimacy than his proteges (Oliver, Noah, etc.)


Legitimacy is the same as accuracy.



_________________
TALENT

What it takes to play a gay pirate, a gay candymaker, and a gay mad hatter, and still land a role as John Dilinger.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 56615
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/24/18 9:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
Jon had an established legitimacy from....what?


Mostly from the fact that you agreed with him


From your perspective, perhaps; 'legitimacy' is relative, no? My litmus test might go like this: "Who's research, production and presentation is more legitimate in the documentation of a story on Stormy Daniels: Sean Hannity, Jon Stewart, or Stormy Daniels?" Cool Jon beats out Sean every time. (Maybe even Stormy--can she be objective?!)

But what I meant was a more viable, perceived legitimacy than his proteges (Oliver, Noah, etc.)


I never paid either of them much attention. Stand up comics and house painters aren't the best source of news.



_________________
When all my dime dancin' is through
I run to you
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 17929



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/24/18 9:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
Jon had an established legitimacy from....what?


Mostly from the fact that you agreed with him


From your perspective, perhaps; 'legitimacy' is relative, no? My litmus test might go like this: "Who's research, production and presentation is more legitimate in the documentation of a story on Stormy Daniels: Sean Hannity, Jon Stewart, or Stormy Daniels?" Cool Jon beats out Sean every time. (Maybe even Stormy--can she be objective?!)

But what I meant was a more viable, perceived legitimacy than his proteges (Oliver, Noah, etc.)


I never paid either of them much attention. Stand up comics and house painters aren't the best source of news.


So you know very little about Stewart, and yet you are questioning Howee’s assertion that Stewart had legitimacy?



_________________
TALENT

What it takes to play a gay pirate, a gay candymaker, and a gay mad hatter, and still land a role as John Dilinger.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6380



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/25/18 10:54 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The Daily Show was on when US went into Iraq on a pack of lies and without the support of the United Nations, who declared it illegal. Did the Daily Show have anything bad to say about US actions at that time?


tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6380



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/25/18 11:09 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The reason for separating the children from the parents is because judges have ruled that you can't detain children in family detention centers for more than 20 days. There is too much of a backlog to process their claims in 20 days, so any adults who come with children have been released after being caught, known as "catch and release". They are released into the US and asked to come back for a hearing/trial. But there is no way to enforce their return.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11012
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/25/18 11:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
The Daily Show was on when US went into Iraq on a pack of lies and without the support of the United Nations, who declared it illegal. Did the Daily Show have anything bad to say about US actions at that time?

Did you expect a response based on memory? Cuz I didn't even watch it then. Now, if you have proof of (whatever) to bolster your point, please provide it....starting with your point, please.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6380



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/25/18 11:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
tfan wrote:
The Daily Show was on when US went into Iraq on a pack of lies and without the support of the United Nations, who declared it illegal. Did the Daily Show have anything bad to say about US actions at that time?

Did you expect a response based on memory? Cuz I didn't even watch it then. Now, if you have proof of (whatever) to bolster your point, please provide it....starting with your point, please.


I was obviously not expecting a response based on your memory, as you have admitted you are of retirement age. Bam! Pow!

I remember a tremendous lack of criticism by anyone at the time of the Iraq invasion. The Phil Donahue show had one or more people on who criticized it (I think before - but when it was clear we were going to, like when we kicked out UN Weapons Inspectors). The show was canceled not long after that and Donahue said that it had good ratings for its channel (I believe MSNBC) and timeslot. There was another female author/writer who criticized the invasion and she faced a backlash. But I think she was independent, so was not fired. And, if I am remembering correctly, there were one or two editors/writers around the country who were critical and lost their jobs because of it.

So I don't think John Stewart and The Daily Show were critical of the invasion as it would have gotten a lot of publicity back then. So my point is (assuming no one claims Stewart was critical) that The Daily Show swallowed their whistle at a critical time, in contrast to the praise they are getting for being a watchdog.


J-Spoon



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 4543



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/25/18 11:38 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

google it


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11012
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/25/18 11:39 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

LOL......I'm happy to pit my memory against your imagined hypotheticals here. Wink

tfan wrote:
So I don't think John Stewart and The Daily Show were critical of the invasion as it would have gotten a lot of publicity back then. So my point is (assuming no one claims Stewart was critical) that The Daily Show swallowed their whistle at a critical time, in contrast to the praise they are getting for being a watchdog.


I think neither you NOR I can "claim" anything about Jon's stance on that without some research, so there's no good point to hypothetical conjecture, eh? That's why I asked for proof.

For the sake of the discussion, let's say it WASN'T a topic addressed by him or the show: so what? I base my opinion of his "legitimacy" on what I DID see of his work over the past 12 years, when I did watch him. And he was doggedly determined to call BS--where applicable--on every relevant topic as long as I've known his work.

But I'd be glad to see any findings on that if you care to dig a bit. I'm too old to google. Razz Cool



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6380



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/26/18 1:12 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
LOL......I'm happy to pit my memory against your imagined hypotheticals here. Wink


Why would it be an "imagined hypothetical"? Sounds like a hypothetical to me. I was vehemently against the invasion and was looking hard for people publicly criticizing it. I don't think he did to any extent as it would have got the warmongers upset, as a few people did. Here is a video a few months before the invasion where he makes fun of Iraqi protesters burning an American flag while protesting the coming invasion that is going to destroy their country:

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/zq1m72/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-planned-war-with-iraq

It this "continuing coverage of Slowdown Iraq", again a few months before the invasion he does mention that other countries are not joining the USA's pro-war agenda, but jokingly says that Bush wants to fight Hussein after school and suggests if Hussein doesn't he is a pussy. After showing a clip of Bush claiming there is no "rush to judgment" because "clearly he's not disarming". Stewart fails to point out that UN Inspectors have found nothing at hundreds of sites. Then he shows a clip of Ted Kennedy saying we shouldn't go to war but keep doing inspections, and after mocking Kennedy, he does say "wait, he was making sense". He later calls Kennedy "the voice of reason". But the whole thing is a nothing burger. He jokes of and people are laughing about "Germany not wanting to go to war", missing the fact that Dubya Bush wants to destroy a country for a made up reason that even if true, is not a valid justification for war. It could be claimed by those pro-Stewart that that piece was critical (and I give him credit for calling Kennedy the voice of reason) but it is so lightly done and mixed with jokes that obscure the overall point that I can see why any warmonger would have considered it harmless. And while giving kudos to Kennedy, he fails to go after Bush.

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/t05ced/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-slowdown--iraq---pro-war-agenda

Quote:
For the sake of the discussion, let's say it WASN'T a topic addressed by him or the show: so what? I base my opinion of his "legitimacy" on what I DID see of his work over the past 12 years, when I did watch him. And he was doggedly determined to call BS--where applicable--on every relevant topic as long as I've known his work.


You watched 12 years? That would mean you watched from August 6, 2003 to August 6, 2015, only months removed from his pre-Iraq war coverage. I don't have a problem with you thinking he is legitimate. I have family members who were big Stewart fans. But you can understand why I wouldn't be as enamored if he didn't take a definite stand against the Iraq invasion. That was some serious s***. And to me, that format, does not lend itself to getting across serious messages. It would help if there was a piece at the end of some shows where they gave a no-jokes talk about an issue.


mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 17929



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/26/18 4:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

He was critical of the Iraq war.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-et-st-jon-stewart-definitive-moments-the-daily-show-20150805-html-htmlstory.html

Which is typical of Stewart, who has a tendency to be anti-military involvement. (He has been critical of Israel, and critical of our actions in Syria as well.)



_________________
TALENT

What it takes to play a gay pirate, a gay candymaker, and a gay mad hatter, and still land a role as John Dilinger.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6380



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/18 5:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
He was critical of the Iraq war.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-et-st-jon-stewart-definitive-moments-the-daily-show-20150805-html-htmlstory.html

Which is typical of Stewart, who has a tendency to be anti-military involvement. (He has been critical of Israel, and critical of our actions in Syria as well.)


That article uses the terms "skeptic" and "skeptical". Which is better than going along, but less than I would hope for or want. Although the article says 'Heeding "the new mandate that criticizing the commander in chief is off limits in wartime,"' which I think reflects the feeling at the time - criticizing what Bush was going to do was off limits. Particularly after Congress gave him authorization in 9/2002.

We had a situation where we claimed we had to attack (against the wishes of the United Nations and major allies like Germany and France) because they had WMDs. And yet, we couldn't direct the UN Weapons Inspectors in hundreds of tries to a single place where they had them. Would have been so nice if that had been a daily headline or talking point the way something like Trump/Stormy Daniels will be today.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11012
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/18 10:07 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
Would have been so nice if that had been a daily headline or talking point the way something like Trump/Stormy Daniels will be today.

Hindsight affords us this perspective. I agree completely that the dubious rationale for invasion should have been shouted from the rooftops.

However....think about the time period: we were still raw and reeling from 9/11 and all its ramifications. National security was shaken to its core. Was the media tiptoeing on eggshells? Might it have been too blatant to question the country's military actions? Bush's credibility was still at a fairly high level for most citizens. But still, I certainly remember believing that Iraq's invasion was all wrong so clearly, that perspective was being shared.

Now, fast forward through the following years, when more and more truths about Iraq were revealed. I think Jon did his fair share of exposing. [....and I wish Jon and others had been preaching about negative Obama stories, like his provision of military equipment to brutal Asian leaders for strategic gain] But if we fast forward to now, and something like the Stormy Story, news cycles and public discourse have degenerated considerably. As much as I think Stormy's story should be public, it doesn't deserve the same level of attention as Trump's Rule of Lies in the realm of governing. But of course, all media walk that delicate balance (some better than others) of reporting Important Truths and reporting Salacious Slime That Generates Viewership.

Money/Viewership/Revenues always seems to win out, no? And if our media have become The Whores of Salacious Slime, *we* are complicit, as The 'Johns' who eat it up.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 17929



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/18 1:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I think when we talk about Stewart and legitimacy, Howee and I are more speaking of his tendency to hold media to the fire.

In this clip, (unfortunately only part of the interview), he’s looking for an acknowledgment from an NY Times reporter in her responsibility in the Iraq war.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=924DT22tSWE

But again, he was highly critical of our Iraq involvement. There aren’t too many videos still available, but here is a video of him laying out his views during those years.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RNJPERZK64U



_________________
TALENT

What it takes to play a gay pirate, a gay candymaker, and a gay mad hatter, and still land a role as John Dilinger.
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin