Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

US Politics Hamsterwheel V3.0

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

US Politics Hamsterwheel V3.0

Old 27th May 2020, 21:50
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 616
My point, VP959, is simply that we constantly hear requests to "curb" Trump's opinings on various topics, along with exaggeration and distortion of what he says being apparently the duty of the media.

So, for instance, when he asked, in his often silly stream-of-verbiage method, whether there was a way to utilize the disinfectant properties of external chemicals in some sort of internal application (no, there is not, we agree) -- that was taken by multiple media outlets to indicate that he was suggesting drinking Lysol. And when some mental moron did so, he was solely responsible for their death.

So when he then comes out with "I'll regulate and maybe shut down Twitter", the opponents pounce on it as some sort of major assault on the First Amendment. Well, it's not. He couldn't function without Twitter.

And you'll be pleased to hear that nobody here believes he can shut down Twitter. This whole episode is another mountain made over a molehill, mainly so that by Friday the media can pronounce that this was "the worst week ever for Trump".

Meanwhile, on the other side of the ballot page, the presumptive nominee goes from one ridiculous mis-speak to another, while the press simply snickers a bit.
obgraham is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 21:57
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 378
My post was absolutely nothing to do with anything related to curbing what your president may or may not say on Twitter, or anywhere else, it was a pretty simple question about whether or not he could do as he said he could in that tweet, regulate or close down Twitter. My assumption was that he probably couldn't, because of your constitutional right to free speech.

The disinfectant thing I mentioned was, as you'll have seen from the link to today's other current news article, about 796 people in Iran that died after drinking disinfectant, as a consequence of misinformation spread via social media, nothing to do with your president (as far as I know). It just happened that both BBC news articles came up next to each other in my feed today, first the one about misinformation resulting in hundreds of deaths, then the story about the tweet threatening to regulate or close down Twitter.
VP959 is online now  
Old 27th May 2020, 22:02
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 546
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/27/us/mi...ath/index.html

Is this what freedumb looks like in America?
wishiwasupthere is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 22:22
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,037
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
So, given that you have a right to free speech, has the president got the authority to regulate or close down a publisher?
A less argumentative answer. No.

It is possible for the government to attempt to prevent the publication of a specific article or specific information - so-called prior restraint, perhaps similar to your DSMA but more specific as to who and what. But that can be taken to court by the publishers' lawyers, and is rarely successful. It is generally not considered Constitutional except in very limited cases of classified military or diplomatic information. And in any case, it never involves closing down the publisher or publication in toto.

Nor can the President do it personally - it gets done formally through departments like Justice or Defense.

Now, in our history, mobs have burned newspaper offices and/or killed publishers or journalists - mostly related to slavery, but not necessarily, nor all that long ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_Gazette_shooting

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elijah_Parish_Lovejoy
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 22:30
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,037
Originally Posted by wishiwasupthere View Post
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/27/us/mi...ath/index.html

Is this what freedumb looks like in America?
Not sure of your point. Are you talking about the event - or about the grieving family in the picture, who don't look dumb to me?

But this may well be charged as manslaughter by the state, and a violation of civil rights by the Feds.

Dumb cops for sure, clearly violating all kinds of procedures....
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 23:12
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,585
Originally Posted by pattern_is_full View Post
Not sure of your point. Are you talking about the event - or about the grieving family in the picture, who don't look dumb to me?

But this may well be charged as manslaughter by the state, and a violation of civil rights by the Feds.

Dumb cops for sure, clearly violating all kinds of procedures....
The firing seems appropriate as the former officer used unauthorized techniques. If the death is attributed to those unauthorized techniques (which would seem likely) then he should be tried and if found guilty spend a lot of time behind bars, not only to ponder his mistakes but to give pause to other cops.
West Coast is online now  
Old 27th May 2020, 23:29
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Yakima
Posts: 94
Originally Posted by West Coast View Post
The firing seems appropriate as the former officer used unauthorized techniques. If the death is attributed to those unauthorized techniques (which would seem likely) then he should be tried and if found guilty spend a lot of time behind bars, not only to ponder his mistakes but to give pause to other cops.
I've watched the video and was shocked at the casual way that man was murdered, even as bystanders were begging the cop to let the man breath or, more probably, get blood to his brain. The guy wasn't fighting yet that 'policeman' kept his knee on his throat for seven minutes. I'm curious what the police would have done if they came across two civilians in this position; would they have just watched? Doubt it. What's good for the goose is good for the gander....
Winemaker is online now  
Old 28th May 2020, 00:24
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 546


wishiwasupthere is offline  
Old 28th May 2020, 00:31
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Yakima
Posts: 94
Originally Posted by pattern_is_full View Post
A less argumentative answer. No.

It is possible for the government to attempt to prevent the publication of a specific article or specific information - so-called prior restraint, perhaps similar to your DSMA but more specific as to who and what. But that can be taken to court by the publishers' lawyers, and is rarely successful. It is generally not considered Constitutional except in very limited cases of classified military or diplomatic information. And in any case, it never involves closing down the publisher or publication in toto.

Nor can the President do it personally - it gets done formally through departments like Justice or Defense.

Now, in our history, mobs have burned newspaper offices and/or killed publishers or journalists - mostly related to slavery, but not necessarily, nor all that long ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_Gazette_shooting

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elijah_Parish_Lovejoy
On the flight back to Washington, press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters President Trump is going to sign some kind of executive order on social media. No further details appear to have been offered, but it comes after he lashed out over fact checks on his tweets.

— Kaitlan Collins (@kaitlancollins) May 27, 2020
No comment necessary....
Winemaker is online now  
Old 28th May 2020, 00:33
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 763
Originally Posted by obgraham View Post

So, for instance, when he asked, in his often silly stream-of-verbiage method, whether there was a way to utilize the disinfectant properties of external chemicals in some sort of internal application (no, there is not, we agree) -- that was taken by multiple media outlets to indicate that he was suggesting drinking Lysol. And when some mental moron did so, he was solely responsible for their death.
No, the mainstream media never reported that Trump “suggested drinking Lysol”. They reported, as below, he “suggested injecting disinfectant”, because here’s what he said:


Trump suggests 'injection' of disinfectant to beat coronavirus and 'clean' the lungs - NBC

Trump speculates about injecting disinfectants to treat COVID-19 - CBS

Doctors reject Trump's dangerous suggestion to use disinfectant as a coronavirus treatment - CNN

Trump Suggests Injecting Disinfectant Into The Body To Treat Coronavirus - MSNBC


And what the President actually said:

"And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning, because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me.
To me, and any reasonable person, that is very much a “suggestion” of injecting disinfectant. A suggestion is an idea or fact put forward for consideration, according to the dictionary. It’s clear he believes that disinfectant will do a “tremendous number on the lungs” and is suggesting it be considered as a treatment. So CNN, MSNBC, CBS et all are completely accurate when they report “Trump Suggest Injecting Disinfectant”, as that’s what he said.

I now realise the real “Trump Derangement Syndrome” is the gold medal worthy mental gymnastics performed by Trump supporters who twist, re-interpret or lie about Trump’s actual words, or just blindly attack the “fake news lame stream media” when they accurately report what he said in order to defend their hero at all costs.






dr dre is offline  
Old 28th May 2020, 01:22
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 3,273
And this is why also, what is it with some people?

megan is offline  
Old 28th May 2020, 01:55
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 616
Well, Dre, if you make that conclusion from what Trump actually said (as reported in your post) I don't see how you can call yourself a "reasonable person".
The only suggestion in Trump's question was that it sounded interesting to him.

Actually, it is interesting to me, too: "what is the mechanism of action of disinfectants, and is there a way to apply that on an intracellular or antiviral basis"? That is called "research", and it doesn't sound much crazier than using moldy bread to kill bacteria.
obgraham is offline  
Old 28th May 2020, 03:35
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,297
I don't get the message in your photos??

Hopefully it's not in poor taste
lomapaseo is online now  
Old 28th May 2020, 03:45
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 138
Originally Posted by obgraham View Post
Well, Dre, if you make that conclusion from what Trump actually said (as reported in your post) I don't see how you can call yourself a "reasonable person".
The only suggestion in Trump's question was that it sounded interesting to him.

Actually, it is interesting to me, too: "what is the mechanism of action of disinfectants, and is their a way to apply that on an intracellular or antiviral basis"? That is called "research", and it doesn't sound much crazier than using moldy bread to kill bacteria.

Personally I think anyone would, to a layman seeing/knowing/being told by medical professionals that:

Quote:
"And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute”.

No dispute there.

So, again to a layman, if it can be done outside the body that fast, can , or why can’t it, be done inside the body before it damages the lungs:


“And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning, because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that”.

And the caveat from a layman that if indeed it was to proven possible, then it would have to be done under medical supervision:

“so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me”.

Now is it, would it be possible to achieve that result, pretty sure no one knows right now, but it does sound interesting.

To quote Elon Musk, as long as it doesn’t violate the rules of physics, anything can be done, it may be difficult, but not impossible.


Perhaps that might apply to the field of medicine, I would like to think so.
fltlt is offline  
Old 28th May 2020, 04:15
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Yakima
Posts: 94
Originally Posted by obgraham View Post
Well, Dre, if you make that conclusion from what Trump actually said (as reported in your post) I don't see how you can call yourself a "reasonable person".
The only suggestion in Trump's question was that it sounded interesting to him.

Actually, it is interesting to me, too: "what is the mechanism of action of disinfectants, and is there a way to apply that on an intracellular or antiviral basis"? That is called "research", and it doesn't sound much crazier than using moldy bread to kill bacteria.
Oh come on ob, apply Occam's razor, don't be dense. The man is an idiot and spews stuff without thought of consequences and you know it.
Winemaker is online now  
Old 28th May 2020, 04:16
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,585
Originally Posted by Winemaker View Post
Oh come on ob, apply Occam's razor, don't be dense. The man is an idiot and spews stuff without thought of consequences and you know it.
Watch CNN do ya?
West Coast is online now  
Old 28th May 2020, 05:03
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Yakima
Posts: 94
Originally Posted by West Coast View Post
Watch CNN do ya?
Nope, don't watch TV. I just actually read what people, including Dear Leader, actually say and do. You might try it.
Winemaker is online now  
Old 28th May 2020, 05:16
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 616
Originally Posted by Winemaker View Post
Oh come on ob, apply Occam's razor, don't be dense. The man is an idiot and spews stuff without thought of consequences and you know it.
Is that all you got tonight?

Can you at least point me to a nice Washington Viognier?
obgraham is offline  
Old 28th May 2020, 08:05
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Not where I want to be
Age: 66
Posts: 247
Originally Posted by West Coast View Post
Watch CNN do ya?
Will Twitter do?
Per
Ancient Mariner is offline  
Old 28th May 2020, 09:13
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 54
Posts: 840
Originally Posted by West Coast View Post
Watch CNN do ya?
Originally Posted by obgraham View Post
Is that all you got tonight?

Can you at least point me to a nice Washington Viognier?
Trump supporters often seem to disregard his musings in the same way that they would stuff the barman at the sports bar in Nowhereville Tennessee came out with after a few Jack Daniels. Does it not trouble you that as President, Trump’s words carry vastly more weight in the US (and further) and so there are often consequences? Even if some of them are just some numbskull proving Darwin right with a slurp of disinfectant?

Curious Pax is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.