"The Resistance" is unhinged

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

Trump was just named "The World’s No. 1 Oppressor Of Press Freedom" by the Committee to Protect Journalists. I have been asked why I'm not more vocal about the things I dislike about Trump or why I don't consider myself part of "The Resistance". This is an excellent example of why. The opposition is just as unhinged and given to idiocy as Trump is. To name Trump the world's #1 oppressor of press freedom in a world with China, Russia, N. Korea, most of the Middle East, Venezuela, Cuba, Pakistan and Myanmar is hysterical, idiotic hyperbole at its finest. We certainly haven't had a POTUS as hostile towards the press since Nixon, but last I looked we had unrestricted internet access, no journalists were being jailed, etc. Is name calling and denigration really on par with physical violence and threats now? I may not like Trump, but I cannot, and will not, align myself with simpletons just as extreme. This kind of idiocy is what passes for discourse on both sides nowadays. No thanks, I'll play Switzerland with no qualms about it.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-oppressor-press-freedom_us_5a54bc75e4b003133ecc3439?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

[Belsnickel]

I don't disagree. I may make jokes about him, because it is hard to resist, but my arguments are more about what he actually does. The sensationalism that these people engage in is harmful to the country, and harmful to their cause. I would rather use my energy working on policies, working to win elections, etc.

[GMDino]

(01-09-2018, 08:01 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't disagree. I may make jokes about him, because it is hard to resist, but my arguments are more about what he actually does. The sensationalism that these people engage in is harmful to the country, and harmful to their cause. I would rather use my energy working on policies, working to win elections, etc.

Except the OP is a bit misleading.

Trump was given an award for:

Overall Achievement in Undermining Global Press Freedom



Luckily I read why.

Quote:The United States, with its First Amendment protection for a free press, has long stood as a beacon for independent media around the world. While previous U.S. presidents have each criticized the press to some degree, they have also made public commitments to uphold its essential role in democracy, at home and abroad. Trump, by contrast, has consistently undermined domestic news outlets and declined to publicly raise freedom of the press with repressive leaders such as Xi, Erdoğan, and Sisi. Authorities in China, Syria, and Russia have adopted Trump's "fake news" epithet, and Erdoğan has applauded at least one of his verbal attacks on journalists. Under Trump's administration, the Department of Justice has failed to commit to guidelines intended to protect journalists' sources, and the State Department has proposed to cut funding for international organizations that help buttress international norms in support of free expression. As Trump and other Western powers fail to pressure the world's most repressive leaders into improving the climate for press freedom, the number of journalists in prison globally is at a record high.

It *is* about what he does.  And how his "brand" of oppression has helped other countries do the same thing.  And how as the American President he should be telling other countries that the free press is a GOOD thing.

Oh, and they handed out plenty of other "awards" to other world leaders:

Quote:Most Thin-skinned

Presidents Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Turkey and Donald Trump of the U.S. (AP/AFP)
Winner: President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkey


Turkish authorities have repeatedly charged journalists, news outlets, and social media users for insulting Erdoğan, insulting other Turkish leaders, and insulting "Turkishness" in general. Over the course of 2016, the Turkish judicial system handled 46,193 cases of "insulting the president" or "insulting the Turkish nation, the Republic of Turkey, the parliament, the government, or the institutions of the judiciary," the daily newspaper Cumhuriyet reported in June 2017, citing figures from the Justice Ministry.

Runner-Up: President Donald Trump, United States

In response to media coverage critical of him, Trump has threatened to "open-up" U.S. libel laws, sue news outlets, and subject their broadcast licenses to review. He regularly attacks outlets and individual journalists on Twitter and in speeches, calling them "sad," "failing," or "garbage." Since declaring his presidential candidacy in 2015, Trump has posted about 1,000 tweets critical of the press. CPJ research shows that when public figures and political leaders lob insults at the media, they encourage self-censorship and expose journalists to unnecessary risk.

Most Outrageous Use of Terror Laws Against the Press
President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, pictured in December 2017. Turkey is the leading jailer of journalists. (AP/Pool)
Winner: President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkey

Turkey is the world's worst jailer of journalists, with at least 73 behind bars when CPJ conducted its most recent prison census on December 1. Every journalist jailed for their work in Turkey is under investigation for, or charged with, anti-state crimes -- in most cases for belonging to, aiding, or making propaganda for an alleged terrorist organization.

Runner-Up: President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, Egypt
Egypt's President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. (AFP/Pool)

Of at least 20 journalists jailed in Egypt at the time of CPJ's latest prison census, 18 were charged with, or convicted of, anti-state crimes such as aiding or inciting terrorism or belonging to banned groups.
In 2017, Sisi's government passed a new anti-terrorism law that furthered its crackdown on the press by, among other things, enabling authorities to put journalists acquitted of terrorism-related charges on a watch list that restricts their financial and other rights, according to news reports.



Tightest Grip on Media*
Presidents Xi Jinping of China and Vladimir Putin of Russia. (AP/AFP)
Winner: President Xi Jinping, China
Beijing, under the increasingly iron grip of Xi, uses a combination of traditional censorship and internet controls to keep the news media in line. China is consistently one of the world's worst jailers of the press; in 2017 it was the second worst globally, with at least 41 journalists in prison. Most traditional media is controlled by the government, and journalists risk losing their jobs or being banned from traveling if they push the boundaries of censorship directives at their news outlets or in personal blogs. Reporters' sources and international journalists are also harassed and obstructed. Internet controls include the Great Firewall, human and automated censors, and pressure on technology companies to comply.

Runner-Up: President Vladimir Putin, Russia

Under Putin, independent media has been all but eradicated as journalists experience threats of violence or imprisonment and other types of harassment. His government recently ordered international news outlets including Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty to register as foreign agents (in response to a parallel move by the U.S.), and blocked their journalists from entering Parliament. Russian authorities have tried with varying success to emulate the Chinese model of internet censorship.

*This category excludes countries with no independent media, such as North Korea and Eritrea.


Biggest Backslider in Press Freedom
Myanmar's Aung San Suu Kyi and Poland's Andrzej Duda. (Reuters)
Winner: State Counselor and de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar

CPJ listed Myanmar in 2015 as the ninth most censored country worldwide, but after Suu Kyi's party took power in 2016, the last five journalists in jail were pardoned and hopes for media freedom were high. However, most of the legal structure that has long restricted the press remains in place and journalists continue to be imprisoned. Security officials obstruct and harass journalists trying to cover what the U.N. has termed "a textbook example of ethnic cleansing" by authorities in the country's northern Rakhine State. On December 12, two Reuters reporters covering the crisis were arrested on suspicion of violating the Official Secrets Act and held incommunicado for two weeks before being allowed to see their lawyer and families. Reuters reported that if convicted, the pair could face up to 14 years in prison.

Runner-Up: President Andrzej Duda, Poland

So less "the resistance is unhinged" (this time) and more a group concerned with journalism around the world recognized his actions and words as the "leader of the free world" as being bad for them.

[6andcounting]

It has to be exhausting going nuts over every little thing he does every single day.

The left's version of Sean Hannity is literally everyone on the left.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-09-2018, 08:01 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't disagree. I may make jokes about him, because it is hard to resist, but my arguments are more about what he actually does. The sensationalism that these people engage in is harmful to the country, and harmful to their cause. I would rather use my energy working on policies, working to win elections, etc.

Precisely.  Too bad the following poster doesn't realize this.

(01-09-2018, 08:20 PM)GMDino Wrote: Except the OP is a bit misleading.

Direct quotes from HuffPo.  

Quote:Trump was given an award for:

Overall Achievement in Undermining Global Press Freedom

Ah, the semantic argument.  How I've missed you.

Quote:Luckily I read why.



It *is* about what he does.  And how his "brand" of oppression has helped other countries do the same thing.  And how as the American President he should be telling other countries that the free press is a GOOD thing.

Yes, I remember how much better press freedoms were in oppressive countries when Obama was POTUS.  So much has changed in a single year.   

Quote:Oh, and they handed out plenty of other "awards" to other world leaders:

How would that make their hyperbolic "award" to Trump any less hyperbolic?

Quote:So less "the resistance is unhinged" (this time) and more a group concerned with journalism around the world recognized his actions and words as the "leader of the free world" as being bad for them.

Nah, more a group looking to grab headlines by making an inane claim and piling on in hyperbolic fashion.  I know when you're fully immersed in the crazy it's hard to see it.  Those of us outside of it don't seem to have any problems recognizing it though.

The journalism profession has descended into the muck with Trump and are trying to fight him at his own game.  The look only the worse for doing so.

[StLucieBengal]

The more SSF posts the more I just say ..... I agree.

[*bfine32*]

(01-09-2018, 08:20 PM)GMDino Wrote: Except the OP is a bit misleading.

Trump was given an award for:

Overall Achievement in Undermining Global Press Freedom



Luckily I read why.

 So "Overall Achievement in Undermining Global Press Freedom" is different than "The World’s No. 1 Oppressor Of Press Freedom" because......

[GMDino]

(01-09-2018, 11:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  So "Overall Achievement in Undermining Global Press Freedom" is different than "The World’s No. 1 Oppressor Of Press Freedom" because......

Because they didn't say he was oppressing the free press.  They said he was undermining it on multiple levels.  Through his speech and his lack of standing up for the press in his own country and around the world.

He didn't shut them down...he simply insists they are liars and "fake" and....wait for it...undermines their legitimacy to reach his own ends.

Two very different meanings to the words "undermining" and "oppressing".  

Not just semantics...real world definitions.

There are plenty of groups and individuals who go to far with everything Trump does.  This doesn't quite come close to that level unless someone wants to force it in.

[hollodero]

(01-09-2018, 11:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  So "Overall Achievement in Undermining Global Press Freedom" is different than "The World’s No. 1 Oppressor Of Press Freedom" because......

But that are actually two things that ring a bit different. This "No.1" wording is way more bombastic and hence sounds even more ridiculous. Might not be much, but they are not the same and it takes no native speaker to see that.

I generally agree though that it's ridiculous in both cases. The OP has a point, I just believe that at some point it gets evenly petty to complain about the other side's pettiness, at least evenly pointless. This is a fake award given out by a group of people who might very well overdo it and act hysterical, but in no way align with the "left" in general or paint an accurate picture of everything anti-Trump. You can very well be quite anti-Trump without having to resort to any king of exaggerations or even hysterias like those.

Trump and what he does is so way more important than what the "Committee to Protect Journalists" does, or Huffington or whatever targets there are. I feel it's beside the point to focus on those possible or actual missteps and hence indirectly end up giving Trump a pass. All hysteria aside, there's a reason why things like these happen to Trump, and that's on him, not this committee. Their line of reasoning for handing out the award isn't just nonsense.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-09-2018, 11:33 PM)GMDino Wrote: Because they didn't say he was oppressing the free press.  They said he was undermining it on multiple levels.  Through his speech and his lack of standing up for the press in his own country and around the world.

He didn't shut them down...he simply insists they are liars and "fake" and....wait for it...undermines their legitimacy to reach his own ends.

Two very different meanings to the words "undermining" and "oppressing".  

Not just semantics...real world definitions.

There are plenty of groups and individuals who go to far with everything Trump does.  This doesn't quite come close to that level unless someone wants to force it in.

If you have a problem with the term "oppressor" then take it up with HuffPo, they chose the label.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-09-2018, 11:51 PM)hollodero Wrote: But that are actually two things that ring a bit different. This "No.1" wording is way more bombastic and hence sounds even more ridiculous. Might not be much, but they are not the same and it takes no native speaker to see that.

I agree, although as I've pointed out it HuffPo that used the term initially.  That being said, even including Trump on this list, given the far more egregious (actual) oppression of the press in the other countries mentioned is hyperbolic and done intentionally.  Let's not pretend this is a blatant attempt to conflate Trump with autocratic and dictatorial figures.

Quote:I generally agree though that it's ridiculous in both cases. The OP has a point, I just believe that at some point it gets evenly petty to complain about the other side's pettiness, at least evenly pointless. This is a fake award given out by a group of people who might very well overdo it and act hysterical, but in no way align with the "left" in general or paint an accurate picture of everything anti-Trump. You can very well be quite anti-Trump without having to resort to any king of exaggerations or even hysterias like those.

I get what you're trying to say here, but the thing is it's not petty to point this out because it is completely ignored by many in this country.  If what I pointed out was routinely mocked by many as the inane sham that it clearly is then harping on it would be whinging and petty.  Unfortunately, this is not the case.  Especially if you live in an echo chamber state like I do.

Quote:Trump and what he does is so way more important than what the "Committee to Protect Journalists" does, or Huffington or whatever targets there are. I feel it's beside the point to focus on those possible or actual missteps and hence indirectly end up giving Trump a pass. All hysteria aside, there's a reason why things like these happen to Trump, and that's on him, not this committee. Their line of reasoning for handing out the award isn't just nonsense.

Pointing these things out does not minimize anything Trump does.  If anything, the constant hysteria over Trump minimizes what Trump does.  By making everything he does the beginning of the 4th Reich you obscure his more egregious acts within the smoke emitted by the bullshit dumpster fire over his getting two scoops of ice cream.

[GMDino]

(01-10-2018, 12:35 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: If you have a problem with the term "oppressor" then take it up with HuffPo, they chose the label.

Okay.  But it's still wrong.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-10-2018, 12:46 AM)GMDino Wrote: Okay.  But it's still wrong.  

I agree, Trump does not oppress the free press.

[GMDino]

(01-10-2018, 12:52 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I agree, Trump does not oppress the free press.

Right...he just undermines it.  

[StLucieBengal]

(01-10-2018, 12:57 AM)GMDino Wrote: Right...he just undermines it.  

Calling them out for lazy journalism isn’t undermining. The press is free to print or report anything they wish. That is the very definition of free press. All trump does is express his right to let them know when they are wrong or over the top.

[hollodero]

(01-10-2018, 12:44 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I agree, although as I've pointed out it HuffPo that used the term initially.  That being said, even including Trump on this list, given the far more egregious (actual) oppression of the press in the other countries mentioned is hyperbolic and done intentionally.  Let's not pretend this is a blatant attempt to conflate Trump with autocratic and dictatorial figures.

Sure, I see it similarly, no argument here.

(01-10-2018, 12:44 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I get what you're trying to say here, but the thing is it's not petty to point this out because it is completely ignored by many in this country. 

Pointing it out is ok and good, of course it is. It just gets blown out of proportion.

(01-10-2018, 12:44 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: If what I pointed out was routinely mocked by many as the inane sham that it clearly is then harping on it would be whinging and petty.  Unfortunately, this is not the case.  Especially if you live in an echo chamber state like I do.

Yeah, you expect more as you can get. Every side has many individuals going through lengths and exaggerations. Their existence is annoying, and I really know what you mean there, it's just...
if anything what Trump does gets overblown some places, you might see every Trump story coated with a crust of hysteria at said places. And that's fair enough, as is saying so. But what I feel you do is taking that crust as some kind of evidence there's not much substantial to see under this crust. I feel you lose a bit focus on these things, that are actually not just annoying or hypocritical or whatever the resistance might be guilty of, but actually worrying. To me you lose some perspective on that.

(01-10-2018, 12:44 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Pointing these things out does not minimize anything Trump does.  If anything, the constant hysteria over Trump minimizes what Trump does.  By making everything he does the beginning of the 4th Reich you obscure his more egregious acts within the smoke emitted by the bullshit dumpster fire over his getting two scoops of ice cream.

Yeah, but honestly, the only people mentioning scoops of ice cream these days are people using that example for MSM sensationalism. It's a non-issue, sure, but it doesn't seem to be all that big of a topic on the "left" side as well. I agree with the rest. (I just dismiss the idea that this is a valid reason to not forcefully speak out against said egregious acts.)

[Johnny Cupcakes]

The Huffington Post is the left's version of Brietbart. If you want your biased partisan news with slanted and distorted facts, it's a nice go-to source.

This doesn't change the FACT that Donald Trump is an enemy of a free press. When you make it part of your job to discredit news sources because they do not report on you in an unrealistically positive manner, there is a problem. And when you're the POTUS, and you have a rabid lemming base, that problem can/will result in damage to that freedom. Using a position of power to undermine and discredit the press is scary.

[hollodero]

(01-10-2018, 11:05 AM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: The Huffington Post is the left's version of Brietbart.  If you want your biased partisan news with slanted and distorted facts, it's a nice go-to source.

This doesn't change the FACT that Donald Trump is an enemy of a free press. When you make it part of your job to discredit news sources because they do not report on you in an unrealistically positive manner, there is a problem. And when you're the POTUS, and you have a rabid lemming base, that problem can/will result in damage to that freedom. Using a position of power to undermine and discredit the press is scary.

I have to slightly disagree with that. Huffington Post is not a place people should get their information from. They are definitely heavily biased, and even hysterical maybe. But they are not like Breitbart. Breitbart is vile. The articles aside (and those are sometimes awfully close to propaganda hate speech), their comment section is full of absurd conspiracies, racial slurs, calls for taking aut the guns and march and murder etc., and it's all designed that way.

(For the rest, fuill agreement of course. An example for things that might get lost in a media bias debate.)

[Johnny Cupcakes]

(01-10-2018, 11:57 AM)hollodero Wrote: I have to slightly disagree with that. Huffington Post is not a place people should get their information from. They are definitely heavily biased, and even hysterical maybe. But they are not like Breitbart. Breitbart is vile. The articles aside (and those are sometimes awfully close to propaganda hate speech), their comment section is full of absurd conspiracies, racial slurs, calls for taking aut the guns and march and murder etc., and it's all designed that way.

(For the rest, fuill agreement of course. An example for things that might get lost in a media bias debate.)

Ha...maybe. I originally typed "The left's version of InfoWars", but no, HuffPo is not nearly that insane.  Maybe it isn't even as bad as Breitbart....but it seems like a worthy comparison.  I just must not read enough Breitbart to get the full scale of how bad it is.

As for the comment sections....that's where you'll find the worst of the worst people on both sides. Reading that shit stresses me out.

[Goalpost]

(01-10-2018, 11:05 AM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: This doesn't change the FACT that Donald Trump is an enemy of a free press. When you make it part of your job to discredit news sources because they do not report on you in an unrealistically positive manner, there is a problem. And when you're the POTUS, and you have a rabid lemming base, that problem can/will result in damage to that freedom. Using a position of power to undermine and discredit the press is scary.

He is an enemy of fake news.