Widgets Magazine
Page 8 of 63 FirstFirst ... 34567891011121358 ... LastLast
Results 176 to 200 of 1552
  1. #176

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTravellers View Post
    Yes, you could, but you would be seen as a complete buffoon and laughing stock for drawing those conclusions from whatever articles and journals you cited (because there are no articles or journals that support that conclusion). You don't quite understand the meaning of credible, I think. The Slate article/author is *completely* credible, you just don't agree with it.
    The irony here is really meta.

  2. Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by Sancho View Post
    The irony here is really meta.
    Oh, go ahead, start yelling "FAKE NEWS, FAKE NEWS", that's about all ya got left.

  3. #178

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTravellers View Post
    Oh, go ahead, start yelling "FAKE NEWS, FAKE NEWS", that's about all ya got left.
    Maybe you could find a salon.com piece that states slate.com is credible... as your proof.

  4. #179

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by Sancho View Post
    First explain what credibility means to someone who quotes people with things they didnt say?
    Yup, my mistake. I didn't quote your exact words. Here, I'll do it again, even though it does not change the message:

    Rebuttal? I am simply supplying another companion source for his news. I just doubled the strength of his opinion with a comparable publication.
    Simply? No, not simply supplying another companion source. That's dishonest. That's not "simply" what you are doing.

    So, I'll ask again - do tell, what is a "credible" news source of yours?

  5. #180

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by Cid View Post
    Yup, my mistake. I didn't quote your exact words. Here, I'll do it again, even though it does not change the message:


    Simply? No, not simply supplying another companion source. That's dishonest. That's not "simply" what you are doing.

    So, I'll ask again - do tell, what is a "credible" news source of yours?
    National Enquirer & Salon

  6. #181

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by Sancho View Post
    National Enquirer & Salon
    Not interested in honest discussion, I see. Why are you on here?

  7. #182

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTravellers View Post
    Lots of long-serving and important State Dept. officials resign/retire (entire senior mgmt, the article says), most likely because of Trump/Tillerson, but not sure if we'll ever know definitively.

    "“It’s the single biggest simultaneous departure of institutional memory that anyone can remember, and that’s incredibly difficult to replicate,” said David Wade, who served as State Department chief of staff under Secretary of State John Kerry."

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.773c9af4824c
    To be fair, politicians have memories about as long as a gnat.

  8. #183

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTravellers View Post
    Yes, you could, but you would be seen as a complete buffoon and laughing stock for drawing those conclusions from whatever articles and journals you cited (because there are no articles or journals that support that conclusion). You don't quite understand the meaning of credible, I think. The Slate article/author is *completely* credible, you just don't agree with it.
    Not supporting Sancho necessarily, but you lending credibility to Slate any more than testicle research doesn't make it so.

  9. Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    Not supporting Sancho necessarily, but you lending credibility to Slate any more than testicle research doesn't make it so.
    So did you read all those articles that the author based his article on? Are all those non-credible sources? Yeah, the author and site has a bias, but saying "this decision from this court said this" and quoting said court's decision is not biased, it's a fact, and not an alternative fact.

  10. Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    To be fair, politicians have memories about as long as a gnat.
    Not sure what your point is, the mass exodus is not about memories, it's about institutional knowledge, and everybody knows that when people that have been employed a very long time at a place and they leave, there is usually a big problem with their accumulated knowledge (and procedures and contacts, etc.) going away.

  11. #186

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTravellers View Post
    Not sure what your point is, the mass exodus is not about memories, it's about institutional knowledge, and everybody knows that when people that have been employed a very long time at a place and they leave, there is usually a big problem with their accumulated knowledge (and procedures and contacts, etc.) going away.
    Which is why thy these officials are a complete disgrace if they resigned over some BS faux indignation regarding Trump.

  12. #187

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by Sancho View Post
    Which is why thy these officials are a complete disgrace if they resigned over some BS faux indignation regarding Trump.
    Does not seem like the diplomatic thing to do.
    Don't hassle me, I'm local.

  13. #188

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by Stew View Post
    Does not seem like the diplomatic thing to do.
    OMG, Trump kissed a woman 20 years ago so I am going to **** all over my nation to show how outraged I am!

  14. #189

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTravellers View Post
    So did you read all those articles that the author based his article on? Are all those non-credible sources? Yeah, the author and site has a bias, but saying "this decision from this court said this" and quoting said court's decision is not biased, it's a fact, and not an alternative fact.
    The sources can be perfectly fine, but the user of that information is still capable of coming to all the wrong conclusions. You realize that is possible right?

    This perfectly summarizes Slate/Salon/Huffington.

    Ever heard "I could show that an elephant can hang from a daisy with theoretical physics"? Well, I can show just about anything I want with some handy statistics. They can make it whatever they want.

  15. #190

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTravellers View Post
    Not sure what your point is, the mass exodus is not about memories, it's about institutional knowledge, and everybody knows that when people that have been employed a very long time at a place and they leave, there is usually a big problem with their accumulated knowledge (and procedures and contacts, etc.) going away.
    It's commentary on the "this is the worst ever" or that was the "greatest game I have ever seen" mentality of those that couldn't remember what happened yesterday. So taking their word for it that they haven't seen anything like this that they can remember doesn't really mean all that much to me. I'm sure some people are going to be butt hurt over a new administration (ANY new administration) taking power.

    I'm sure it will be a real hardship for them to leave "public service" for K Street.

  16. Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    The sources can be perfectly fine, but the user of that information is still capable of coming to all the wrong conclusions. You realize that is possible right?

    This perfectly summarizes Slate/Salon/Huffington.

    Ever heard "I could show that an elephant can hang from a daisy with theoretical physics"? Well, I can show just about anything I want with some handy statistics. They can make it whatever they want.
    OK, then prove that the article I posted came to wrong conclusions while using all those sources. Or is "wrong conclusions" code for "I don't agree with them"?

  17. #192

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTravellers View Post
    OK, then prove that the article I posted came to wrong conclusions while using all those sources. Or is "wrong conclusions" code for "I don't agree with them"?
    You are being intentionally obtuse. No one is going to "prove" anything, because no one is going to read anything you link, because you repeatedly link to opinion/propaganda pieces in publications that have no credibility like Slate, Salon, Huffpo, MSNBC, and the National Enquirer.

    You dont even know what "prove" means. You thought a worthless decree made by the UN somehow "proved" that healthcare is a right. You are so far out in left field you cant even see home plate. You are beyond the wall. You are outside of the stadium.

  18. #193

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTravellers View Post
    OK, then prove that the article I posted came to wrong conclusions while using all those sources. Or is "wrong conclusions" code for "I don't agree with them"?
    You can't it's opinion. Which is why you can't either. It's not that I don't agree with fact. I don't agree with opinion.\

    You however are trying desperately to peddle this stuff out as some sort of hard science fact based whatever. It's not.

  19. #194

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by Sancho View Post
    You are being intentionally obtuse. No one is going to "prove" anything, because no one is going to read anything you link, because you repeatedly link to opinion/propaganda pieces in publications that have no credibility like Slate, Salon, Huffpo, MSNBC, and the National Enquirer.
    Would intentionally obtuse also be not reading something that is presented yet proclaiming it wrong? Unless you think every sentence in that article is completely made up, there are ways to use your intelligence when reading something from slate or breitbart to find the actual facts and dismiss any slants or opinions the writer might have. Facts and commentary arent hard to differentiate.

    Its always best to at least read something first before commenting.

  20. #195

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by onthestrip View Post
    Would intentionally obtuse also be not reading something that is presented yet proclaiming it wrong? Unless you think every sentence in that article is completely made up, there are ways to use your intelligence when reading something from slate or breitbart to find the actual facts and dismiss any slants or opinions the writer might have. Facts and commentary arent hard to differentiate.

    Its always best to at least read something first before commenting.

    I didnt say it was "wrong". It is pretty clear that I dismissing out of hand any Slate opinion piece because it is not a credible publication.

    The boy who cried wolf was RIGHT the third time. Too bad. He shouldn't have spent so much time establishing his reputation as a liar if he wanted to be taken seriously in the future.

  21. Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by Sancho View Post
    I didnt say it was "wrong". It is pretty clear that I dismissing out of hand any Slate opinion piece because it is not a credible publication.

    The boy who cried wolf was RIGHT the third time. Too bad. He shouldn't have spent so much time establishing his reputation as a liar if he wanted to be taken seriously in the future.
    Ha, speaking of liars, our liar-in-chief has cried wolf about, what, hundreds of times now?

    If you dismiss anything on slate.com, you're doing yourself a disservice, but that's too much to ask of a conservative, who by definition has a closed-type of mind. I have to ask - did you read the articles/court decisions the slate article was based on?

  22. Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Back to nominees/appointees.

    Puzder may be qualified, but he's certainly not the right person for the job - a Labor secretary who has shown disdain for and flouted workplace rules and laws, and whose company has been sued dozens of times for wage theft, unfair labor practices, sexual harrassment, etc.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/15/u...secretary.html

    https://thinkprogress.org/puzder-cke...413#.yf0j0uowx

    From the latter article:

    "In fact, an investigation by Capital & Main found that the company was hit with more federal racial discrimination and sexual harassment lawsuits than any other major hamburger chain in the country since Puzder became CEO in 2000."

  23. #198

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTravellers View Post
    If you dismiss anything on slate.com, you're doing yourself a disservice, but that's too much to ask of a conservative, who by definition has a closed-type of mind.
    That right there is hilarious coming from the guy that continually posts these highly slanted articles but fails to open his mind on why no one takes them seriously.

  24. #199

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTravellers View Post
    Ha, speaking of liars, our liar-in-chief has cried wolf about, what, hundreds of times now?

    If you dismiss anything on slate.com, you're doing yourself a disservice, but that's too much to ask of a conservative, who by definition has a closed-type of mind. I have to ask - did you read the articles/court decisions the slate article was based on?
    Im not a conservative. Your narrow and warped view of the world is perfectly in line with the biases, misconceptions, and false premises you choose to reinforce it with.

  25. #200

    Default Re: Trump's nominees and appointees

    Quote Originally Posted by Sancho View Post
    Im not a conservative. Your narrow and warped view of the world is perfectly in line with the biases, misconceptions, and false premises you choose to reinforce it with.
    You owe me a new irony meter (ironometer?).

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Why I am still a Trump supporter..
    By SoonerQueen in forum Politics
    Replies: 333
    Last Post: 01-17-2019, 01:52 PM
  2. Donald Trump
    By Outhunder in forum Politics
    Replies: 205
    Last Post: 10-01-2015, 12:08 PM
  3. 2015 ULI Impact Award nominees
    By Pete in forum General Real Estate Topics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-16-2015, 06:33 AM
  4. 2015 R&R Hall of Fame nominees
    By kelroy55 in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-16-2014, 04:13 PM
  5. Political Appointees as Ambassadors
    By ThomPaine in forum Politics
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 02-09-2014, 02:26 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO