Re: the typical trumpey economy
I still say that to cast a ballot you should have to bring in last years tax returns and PROVE that you paid at least 50 lousy dollars in income taxes...or you don`t vote! If you didn`t owe income tax and want to vote, fine write out a check for $50 and vote, but at least have a little skin in the game.
But the crooked media spins this stuff, we`ve heard for years that "stagnant wage growth stagnant wage growth!" and we hear it today "no wage growth in Trump`s economy!" ...BUT out of the other side of their mouth, often on the SAME page they say "Trump`s tariffs are causing wage inflation!!! Your Jello Puddin` Pops are getting more expensive due to Trump`s tariffs!!!". That man could walk on water and the headlines would be "Trump can`t swim!".
Re: the typical trumpey economy
Well I think he's starting to drop the gloves, like the other day when he banned that little disrespectful ***** from CNN from covering the White House any longer. I wish I worked in downtown DC, I would cruise the streets near the CNN offices looking for that little twerp, and if I found him I would manufacture an incident that would seemingly give me license to beat the crap out of him. Trump should ban from the White House all news organizations that blatantly lie or deliberately work to denigrate him or his staff or his accomplishments and efforts, especially when they try covering up their attempts to make news instead of report news.
Re: Used to be the news rented
Facilities down the road and the press rooms were not us govt property.
soooo I'm not really a fan of having press facilities in the White House at all.
if networks want news they can go out and Work to find such.
in the meantime the whole thing is an opinionated joke either from cnn or fox it seems.
i miss Walter Cronkite...he simply stated the news and that was it.
Re: Used to be the news rented
Save for the time when Cronkite did a whole special on the Viet Nam war, and stated his opinion that the war was not winnable even though he had no experience whatsoever in formulating war strategy and nevermind the emboldening effect that his un-asked for opinion had on the enemy who was in the field trying to kill young American and South Vietnamese defenders of democracy. Cronkite was no hero, he was one of the most valuable players for the opponents of freedom. The only reason anyone had a favorable opinion of him was because in those days there were only three networks from which people received news, and they all had the same political ideology. There was no alternative source to counter the mis-information that the three big networks decided that they wanted to broadcast, It was because of decades of one sided news that a guy like Limbaugh and all the other talking heads who followed were able to gain a large receptive following for their opposition to the drivel that came from the three network newsrooms.
Re: Perhaps you should have
No, their opinion was not right at all. American forces won every major battle they fought in that war. In just one month (February to March of 1968), American forces repelled a major all-out offensive by both of the military enemies they were fighting, and completely destroyed one (the Viet Cong) and rendered the other one so defeated that they could not mount another major offensive for five years.
The US won the war but lost the country of South Vietnam because of the traitorous democrats who stopped all weapons provision to the South Vietnamese military in 1975 as a way to get back at Nixon for Watergate and other shenanigans he pulled while in office. The South Vietnamese had risen to a level of military proficiency that they were defending their country satisfactorily on their own, until they had the rug pulled out from under them when the weaponry stopped coming in.
Cronkite was the mouthpiece who provided a false justification to those bastards who gave up on the South Vietnamese. He wasn't alone either...the entire television broadcast news media was the enemy within during that war. They knew that by showing the gruesomeness of war to Americans while they were eating dinner, at some point people would get sick and tired of seeing it and want the war to end.
And the Republicans shared in the blame as well...Nixon wrote in his memoirs that he could have ended the war conventionally in days, by bombing the dams and dykes in the north of Vietnam, virtually flooding the northern half of the country that sits below sea level. But, as he wrote, he feared that his legacy would be that of a genocidist, a killer of innocent people, and he did not want to be remembered for that. Which led me to believe when I read that passage that Nixon preferred to be remembered for letting his own country's young men die for nothing and the South Vietnamese people be subjected to a totalitarian communist dictatorship rather than have his name sullied by historians after he died. It was disgraceful.
And even though he was so careful to cultivate a beneficial remembrance by historians, he still wound up being remembered in disgrace. He should have flooded the North and ended the war and dealt with the historian consequences, much like Truman did to end the war in the Pacific...at least then if he was sullied in history, he still would have redeemed the sacrifice of the young men who he sent to die in a war he was not willing to end because of his own vanity.
The only news person I admired from that era was a guy named Roger Mudd, who became famous later for his work with the History Channel. Mudd had the balls during an interview with Teddy Kennedy during the fall of 1979, when Kennedy was mulling a challenge to Jimmy Carter for the 1980 democrat nomination, to ask Kennedy a question that exposed the shallowness and charlatan nature of the guy. He asked him why he wanted to be President, and Kennedy gave about as incoherent answer as anyone who ever contemplated a serious run for the Presidency ever could. Even if Kennedy ever could overcome the Chappaquidick event, he forever cast the die with that one answer in the minds of a majority of Americans that he did not have the intellectual strength to sit in the Oval Office.
Mudd was very brave to ask that question , even if he didn't know that Kennedy would provide such a tattered answer. Because as any good newsman knows, the roughest questions are the ones that give a candidate plenty of rope to hang himself, which is why most of the left-leaning media never asked obama any rough questions. But Mudd felt America deserved to hear the man's reasoning for wanting to lead the country, even if he would trip himself up in a hornest's nest with his answer. And in so doing, Mudd saved the country from the travesty of having the murderer of a slightly-less-than-innocent young woman occupying the White House as the President.
Re: perhaps since the consumer does
WHY DO PACKERS WASTE TIME & $$$$ LABELING EXPORT MEAT ???????????????
Waste time & $$$$$$ - can't believe anyone still believes that ole wives tail -
When whining & dining at a gala convention in some exquisite, over the top so called elaborate info gathering , then talk about saving $$$$$ - dream on - - -
Re: I don't know Why Anyone
Even calls the new trump export sales tax, a tariff.
theres no such thing as an export tariff.
Tarriffs are on Imported goods.
irregardless, If farmers want labels on meat they can make that a Sales Condition when selling their product to a packer.
as far as the darn govt doing all this for farmers, ?
Perhaps don't hold your breath waiting for yet another govt rule.