Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: roo_ster on September 16, 2016, 02:38:21 PM
-
Media Outraged After Trump Tricks Them To Cover Endorsements From Military Heroes
http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/16/media-outraged-after-trump-tricks-them-to-cover-endorsements-from-military-heroes/
The media showed up to the presidential ballroom of the new Trump International Hotel on Friday morning expecting Donald Trump to take questions about whether he still questions President Obama’s birthplace.
Instead, they got more than a half hour of a variety of military heroes — generals, medal of honor recipients and a gold star wife — expressing support for the Republican nominee. And it all aired live on the cable news networks...
Realizing Trump was not using the occasion to address that subject — and instead focus it on the military — many in the press were not happy — and vented about it on Twitter...
Mash linky up top to read the butthurt.
At the very end of the campaign event, Trump finally addressed the topic the media was there to hear. “Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy. I finished it.”
“President Barack Obama was born in the United States,” Trump said. “Period. Now we all want to get back to making America strong again...”
Trump uses the innate perfidy and corruption of the DNC-MSM to get free air time.
Beautiful.
-
Good move. That is exactly what every TV show, radio show, and advertisement does; they make you wait for what you want.
-
I have to say, hearing his economic speech yesterday, and how he handled the Hillary birther stuff today, I was impressed. I think the one flaw today was the nearly hour delay in his speech, when everyone speculated that his team was busily doing rewrites following Hillary's speech 30 minutes prior to when Trump was supposed to speak.
I thought the very short dialogue to address the birther issue was brilliant, as it gave the MSM pretty much no soundbites to manipulate*. That shouldn't have taken an hour to work out though. I never like when a President (or nominee) keeps everyone waiting via tardiness. I always appreciated Bush's promptness. It showed respect for his audience and the taxpayers.
*Of course it hasn't kept the usual MSM sources from lambasting Trump and ignoring the fact that it was in fact Clinton who was doing the birther stuff eight years ago.
-
Well played, Trump.....
-
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I want 8 years of this!
(Or 4 years, and then get a serious president, but I'll settle for 8.)
-
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I want 8 years of this!
(Or 4 years, and then get a serious president, but I'll settle for 8.)
Previous "serious" candidates were fools who did not know that the DNC-MSM despised them. Trump treats them like the vile scum they are.
Give me a fool who fights over a fine & proper gentleman more worried about losing with dignity.
-
When I said "serious," did you think I meant a RINO, or an establishment guy? That's a funny definition of serious.
(I just complimented your boy. Don't get grouchy about it.)
-
Of course in a later talk today he put his foot in it again off teleprompter. He did everything right until the last six words. I think I even heard the NRA groan.
http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2016/09/16/libs-furious-after-trump-jokes-that-hillarys-bodyguards-should-be-unarmed-lets-see-what-happens-to-her/
-
The above twitchy link leaves out a goodly bit of content.
Holy sheepdip political jiu-jitsu, Batman:
'Welcome you Deplorables!': Trump turns Hillary's insulting words about his supporters into a slogan then starts new violence row by telling her guards to drop their guns to 'see what happens to her'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3793718/LES-DEPLORABLES-Trump-floors-cheering-Miami-crowd-enters-Broadway-anthem-speaks-giant-Les-Mis-video-screen-art.html
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2016%2F09%2F17%2F00%2F38768B4400000578-3793718-image-a-1_1474068199674.jpg&hash=a16cc56cce9ff711656d0e4ca8eb640e76c61ea3)
* Donald Trump adopted a new campaign theme on Friday in Miami
* Came on stage as music from 'Les Misérables' played
* Video screen showed a take-off on the 2012 film adaptation's poster
* It read 'Les Deplorables' – and replaced French revolutionary flags with the Stars and Stripes – and a 'TRUMP' flag
* Hillary Clinton insulted Trump supporters a week ago by saying 'half' of them belong in 'the basket of deplorables' and some are 'irredeemable'
Donald Trump unveiled a new visual campaign theme in Miami on Friday Рa mashup of the Broadway musical 'Les Mis̩rables' and an epithet Hillary Clinton leveled at his supporters one week ago.
He took the stage, introduced by former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, as the 'Les Mis' anthem 'Do You Hear the People Sing' blasted through loudspeakers.
The video screen behind the podium flashed to an artistic rendering of 'Les Deplorables,' complete with USA and 'Trump' flags replacing the French colors, and a bald eagle soaring over the revolutionary scene.
'Welcome to all of you deplorables!' Trump boomed as thousands screamed 'Trump! Trump! Trump!' and 'We love you!'
Do You Hear the People Sing?
General LeMarque's Funeral Procession
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47E2tfK5QAg
Death of Jean Valjean
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=RtbcZmCc7rg#t=112
The Presidential candidate then went on to revive an old campaign controversy by implying violence against his opponent.
He sarcastically called for Clinton's Secret Service agents to drop their weapons, "and let's see what happens to her."
'I think that her bodyguards should drop all weapons. They should disarm, right?' Trump said. "Take their guns away, she doesn't want guns. Take their — and let's see what happens to her. Take their guns away. OK, it would be very dangerous.'
Trump has previously come under fire for such comments with many saying it it tantamount to advocating violence against his White House foe...
Clinton said 'half' of Trump voters belonged in 'the basket of deplorables' as 'racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic [and] Islamaphobic' Republicans.
'Some of those folks – they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America,' Clinton said.
His supporters have embraced the Clinton label and worn it as a badge of honor, and in the space of just a few days Trump rally-goers have already begun to sport 'I am deplorable' t-shirts and signs.
'My opponent slanders you as "deplorable" and "irredeemable" – boy that second word is tough,' he said Friday night.
'Deplorable' has become the Trump campaign's new battle cry as his supporters wear the epithet as a badge of honr
'You don't hear that much. It means you can never come back.'
'I call you hard-working American patriots who love your family,' he continued, 'and really, really, really love your country.'
The man who created the artwork he used Friday, an artist known online as 'Keln,' was banned from using Reddit on Saturday, shortly after posting the image there.
Dang.
FTR, if you have not seen the 2012 Le Mis musical, run out and do so, even if you are not musically inclined. I also enjoy the 1998 non-musical Les Mis with Liam Neeson and Geoffry Rush. Rush plays the best Javert I have ever seen.
-
Yeah, it doesn't really matter what all else he said. If he were an APS member, as per our rules, he would have had his post edited and/or received a warning. If he were Wayne LaPierre or Larry Pratt or some random "gun owner" in a tshirt with no sleeves and a ball cap on backwards, most everyone here would be talking about how much "those morons" are hurting gun owners.
90% of that statement was right on and is a popular NRA talking point, but those six words were stupid. I don't care about him "sticking it to the media" or "driving liberals crazy" or if it gets him more votes. I care about how it affects the PR for 2nd Amendment rights.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa57.foxnews.com%2Fimages.foxnews.com%2Fcontent%2Ffox-news%2Fpolitics%2F2015%2F01%2F18%2Fwashington-state-senate-bans-open-carry-guns-in-public-gallery%2F_jcr_content%2Fpar%2Ffeatured-media%2Fmedia-0.img.jpg%2F876%2F493%2F1438274102181.jpg%3Fve%3D1%26amp%3Btl%3D1&hash=d62fe5561042bb2ad45d1e9aec3aca7ff3169f28)
-
I disagree. Once again, just like the last time, Trump did NOT call for violence against Hillary. His statement was a metaphor. It's just saying that, "If she thinks guns are so evil, why does she have a Secret Service escort with guns? If guns are not necessary, she shouldn't need to have guns protecting her, so why doesn't she disarm her security detail and see what happens?"
Sorry, I just don't see that as a call to violence. I see it as calling out a hypocrite who doesn't want you or me to have a gun for protection, but she's perfectly happy to have half a dozen or more guns around to protect her.
-
I disagree. Once again, just like the last time, Trump did NOT call for violence against Hillary. His statement was a metaphor. It's just saying that, "If she thinks guns are so evil, why does she have a Secret Service escort with guns? If guns are not necessary, she shouldn't need to have guns protecting her, so why doesn't she disarm her security detail and see what happens?"
Sorry, I just don't see that as a call to violence. I see it as calling out a hypocrite who doesn't want you or me to have a gun for protection, but she's perfectly happy to have half a dozen or more guns around to protect her.
It gives the "libtards" a talking point because of the inference of violence toward a presidential aspirant.
That's NOT good for the pro 2A community.
Yes, it is optics ....NOT reality .... but far too many of the people we want to POSITIVELY influence do not think beyond what something "looks like." You have to account for the lowest common denominator ... unfortunatly.
-
Only people who WANT to believe Trump is inciting violence will interpret his comments that way. Everyone else will either ignore it or roll their eyes at the overly sensitive Dems.
Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
ugg, autocorrect...
-
<snip>
Trump uses the innate perfidy and corruption of the DNC-MSM to get free air time.
Beautiful.
Tee-hee-hee-hee-giggle-giggle-snarf-tee-hee.
Pause...
Only people who WANT to believe Trump is inciting violence will interpret this comments that way. Everyone else will either ignore it or roll their eyes at the overly sensitive Dems.
True, true, very true.
Tee-hee-hee-hee-giggle-giggle-snarf-tee-hee.
"."
Terry of the irredeemably deplorable citizenry, 230RN
-
Previous "serious" candidates were fools who did not know that the DNC-MSM despised them. Trump treats them like the vile scum they are.
Give me a fool who fights over a fine & proper gentleman more worried about losing with dignity.
Well said! And that's why I enjoy it when Trump sticks it to BOTH establishment parties....
Yeah, it doesn't really matter what all else he said. If he were an APS member, as per our rules, he would have had his post edited and/or received a warning. If he were Wayne LaPierre or Larry Pratt or some random "gun owner" in a tshirt with no sleeves and a ball cap on backwards, most everyone here would be talking about how much "those morons" are hurting gun owners.
90% of that statement was right on and is a popular NRA talking point, but those six words were stupid. I don't care about him "sticking it to the media" or "driving liberals crazy" or if it gets him more votes. I care about how it affects the PR for 2nd Amendment rights.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa57.foxnews.com%2Fimages.foxnews.com%2Fcontent%2Ffox-news%2Fpolitics%2F2015%2F01%2F18%2Fwashington-state-senate-bans-open-carry-guns-in-public-gallery%2F_jcr_content%2Fpar%2Ffeatured-media%2Fmedia-0.img.jpg%2F876%2F493%2F1438274102181.jpg%3Fve%3D1%26amp%3Btl%3D1&hash=d62fe5561042bb2ad45d1e9aec3aca7ff3169f28)
If that's the case, then it's probably time for APS to close the doors and turn off the lights. That....or change the name to "FISTFUL'S BEERS AND SPIDERS DISCUSSION SITE"....
-
So if I'm reading this correctly, he simply said that he had a big announcement to make, the media interpreted it all on their own as he was going to talk about the birther issue, then when for all but the very end he does something else and they get all pissy? :rofl:
-
This would land any citizen a Secret Service interrogation. Trump cannot be above the law. https://t.co/p0hVQJ7Ik7
— Peter Daou (@peterdaou) September 16, 2016
That one made me howl with laughter.
Anywho. Props to Trump for doing that to the MSM. It actually is finally good to see a Republican candidate NOT play by the rules and make the MS play be his rules and also clearly show their biases. It is sadly sickening to see the MSM swimming around looking not only the chance to "end" Trump's run. But they want to be the ones to "Count Coup" and claim his scalp. Each and everyone of those slimy bastards wants to be the next Woodward and Bernstein.
So 4 or 8 years of this will be nothing if not entertaining.
[popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn]
-
If that's the case, then it's probably time for APS to close the doors and turn off the lights. That....or change the name to "FISTFUL'S BEERS AND SPIDERS DISCUSSION SITE"....
Wow. Really? That Donald pours a stiff Kool-Aid.
On the one hand, I kinda wanna vote for him just because he pisses off liberals. On the other hand, when I see this "Clever Donald can do no wrong and only stupid people misunderstand him and you're stupid" cult of personality stuff, it makes me want to go back to a write-in.
He's not a misunderstood genius. He's a jackass like pretty much 90% of the politicians out there. As an American, I don't worship my leaders - I hold them accountable. If one of them says something stupid, I call them on it, I don't defend it. If they do something good, they get a thumbs up. They keep their job until somebody better comes along.
At any rate, I'll definitely be remembering this thread the next time some of the members gleefully posting in it PM staff complaining about "member 'X' " engaging in non-APS behavior (because they said the same kind of *expletive deleted*it the Donald says) and that we need to do something about it. Don't be surprised if you get a "suck it up buttercup" response.
-
Well, he coulda said, "Let's see how she feels about that."
But the crux, the meat, the core of it was the same thing "we" have been bellyaching about for years... that these people who've been so well-protected by armed staff do not feel that you and I, deplorable or not, should be able to defend our little lonesomes.
I wish I could find that picture of Michael Bloomberg emerging from a building surrounded by at least five stern-looking NYPD bodyguards. I feel confident, without committing slander or libel, that he paid many green dollars to have that pic removed from all the sites displaying it..
Terry (tee-hee-hee-hee-giggle-giggle-snarf-tee-hee)
-
Well, he coulda said, "Let's see how she feels about that."
But the crux of it was the same thing "we" have been bellyaching about for years... that these people who've been so well-protected by armed staff do not feel that you and I, deplorable or not, should not be able to defend our little lonesomes.
That's exactly what he could have said, and it would have gotten the point across 100% better without any distracting backlash, as would have leaving it out all together. Everything else he said in that snippet was spot on and a boost for the 2nd Amendment community.
-
Well, I coulda said =D instead of tee-hee-hee-hee-giggle-giggle-snarf-tee-hee, but I ain't no born and bred finely trained diplomat either. Raised in the same area of Noo Yawk as Mr. Trump wuz, wuz I.
Terry, 230RN
-
Wow. Really? That Donald pours a stiff Kool-Aid.
On the one hand, I kinda wanna vote for him just because he pisses off liberals. On the other hand, when I see this "Clever Donald can do no wrong and only stupid people misunderstand him and you're stupid" cult of personality stuff, it makes me want to go back to a write-in.
He's not a misunderstood genius. He's a jackass like pretty much 90% of the politicians out there. As an American, I don't worship my leaders - I hold them accountable. If one of them says something stupid, I call them on it, I don't defend it. If they do something good, they get a thumbs up. They keep their job until somebody better comes along.
At any rate, I'll definitely be remembering this thread the next time some of the members gleefully posting in it PM staff complaining about "member 'X' " engaging in non-APS behavior (because they said the same kind of *expletive deleted*it the Donald says) and that we need to do something about it. Don't be surprised if you get a "suck it up buttercup" response.
Ben, you're misjudging here. Not so much on the optics, but on whatever implied threat or suggestion of violence you see in Trump's words. Whether or not he should have said it, it wasn't a threat or an invitation. He wouldn't break forum rules if he said it here.
Oh, and my record here is one of both criticism and support for Trump. No koolaid mustache here.
-
I enjoyed Hillary calling a good portion of Americans deplorable. It motivated my monthly lunch bunch to temporarily change our name from The Congregation of Coots to The Despicable Order Of Deplorables.
-
Ben, you're misjudging here. Not so much on the optics, but on whatever implied threat or suggestion of violence you see in Trump's words. Whether or not he should have said it, it wasn't a threat or an invitation. He wouldn't break forum rules if he said it here.
Oh, and my record here is one of both criticism and support for Trump. No koolaid mustache here.
I'm actually only judging on the optics, which was my original point about PR. But to be clear, "optics" can also be a break of forum rules here. There have been plenty of times a member has said something that sounded like they were implying a politician should be killed or making a joke about a recently deceased or ill politician. Most of the time they don't mean it, but staff has still taken action, specifically because of optics on a public forum whose middle name is Polite.
At any rate, people who are fully in the Trump camp are going to vote for him no matter what outrageous stuff he says or doesn't say. People on the other side are not going to vote for him no matter what he says. As a matter of optics though, he should at least be aware that there are a good percentage of voters on the fence whether in the write-in/third party camp or "might stay home" camp who will vote for him or not partially based on optics. So people who want Trump to win might want to take a different tact than "screw the idiots who don't "get" Trump", because in this election, that 15-20% of "idiots" could very well sway the outcome.
-
And you really think someone should be, or would be, banned for saying "Take away the Secret Service's guns, and see what happens to her"? =|
-
And you really think someone should be, or would be, banned for saying "Take away the Secret Service's guns, and see what happens to her"? =|
Did I say banned? And there's also something called context.
At any rate, I'm done here. November 9th can't come soon enough, whoever wins.
-
Well, since Ben is off the thread now, I can talk behind his back... right?
On the one hand, I kinda wanna vote for him just because he pisses off liberals. On the other hand, when I see this "Clever Donald can do no wrong and only stupid people misunderstand him and you're stupid" cult of personality stuff, it makes me want to go back to a write-in.
I hope Ben takes the first choice. As I've said before,
"voting for unviable 3rd party candidates or not voting 'in protest' is handing Ms. Clinton the winning ticket, and thank you very much. Principles are one thing, who nominates SCOTUS candidates in the next 4 years is another."
Terry
-
Principles are one thing, .......
Terry
Not just in elections but just in life in general, I've found that when you make this statement with the implied "but", It's time to stop and take a real long, hard look at what you're about to do.
-
I don't think Donald was saying "Hey Folks, It's open season on Hillary." I took it to mean: She wants to take away your guns, but is protected by folsk with guns. Take those away from protecting her, and I'd bet that the next Lee Harvey Oswald(s) or John Hinckley(s) will come crawling out of the woodwork.
-
There are some concepts that those who would rule us have deemed un-thinkable. Examples include deporting 11-30 million illegal aliens, the effect of legal immigration since 1965 on the nation and polity of America, and conscious white self-interest similar to that of other races and ethnicities in America.
Another is getting at the root of ruling class antipathy to easy access to firearms. The nub: "Goodwhites" (ruling class white and jewish folk) are morbidly afraid of black and hispanic violence, want it abolished by any means, but dare not speak the reality of their fear. So they displace their animosity on to those it is socially acceptable to hate (Badwhites and especially Christian whites) and agitate for them to be disarmed (thereby disarming* all to include those they truly fear). Really, NYC is the town where "stop and frisk the scary black and brown people" was allowed to continue for ~20 years, thereby incarcerating so many blacks and puerto ricans that populations of both have declined in Manhattan over those 20 years. And let us not forget that Goodwhites have been slyly hinting at Trump's assassination for many months. Or maybe not so sly, since it someone already tried to off Trump...and got a slap on the wrist for the attempt and then deportation**.
The point being...
...Trump's particular wording was immaterial. Merely broaching the unthinkable concept of Goodwhite gun hypocrisy was gay-run-gawddam-teed to result in the DNC-MSM taking the worst construction on his words. It is especially sensitive because all of Goodwhite (perception of) safety is in the mix, not just HRC's. NYC was made relatively safe by denying firearms to common Badwhite & minority folk, allowing Goodwhites access, and using the NYPD to target scary black and brown people for "walking while black (in Manhattan)."
About the only topic Trump could have zinged Goodwhites on that would cause even more Goodwhite rage would be for Trump to attack the Goodwhite hypocrisy of deviously arranging for their children to go to NYC public schools mysteriously devoid of violent black and puerto rican children. While Goodwhites vigorously impose "diversity" on Badwhite children in flyover country with Section 8 housing, housing vouchers, lawsuits, and executive branch action.
Trump plays THAT card, and DNC-MSM Goodwhitopia goes flipping nuclear.
* Yes it won;t work as there are too many guns, but actual reality is something the "reality based community" has but a tenuous grasp upon.
** "Come to America and try to kill Trump. If you fail you get three hots and a cot for 2 years and then we send you home."
-
I think Ron hit my view already. If we ever want politicians to speak their mind instead of reading carefuoly worded speeches off a Teleprompter, we must realize they will occasionally put their feet in their mouth or use poorly chosen words. IMO, I don't think he meant anything by the comments, so I don't care. Trump seems to be sticking to his base issue messages without getting too mushy when pressed. Better than a lot of past R candidates so I am not inclined to get too critical.
-
. . . Trump uses the innate perfidy and corruption of the DNC-MSM to get free air time.
Beautiful.
Once your recognize the media's perfidy - you can USE it.
Case in point: During Desert Storm, Gen. Schwartzkopf had a "secret" briefing for reporters, swore them to secrecy, told them that American lives were at risk, and then informed them that Coalition forces were going to smash right through Iraqi defenses in a frontal assault.
Of course, this was IMMEDIATELY reported by virtually all media outlets, which were of course being monitored by Saddam's generals, who prepared for it.
Everyone was caught off guard when Coalition forces did an end run.
When the media later challenged Stormin' Norman, he said he DELIBERATELY misinformed them, because a US media sworn to secrecy was the BEST way to distribute disinformation to the enemy - he could DEPEND on their perfidy. :rofl:
-
When even The Federalist congratulates Trump, you know he did something right. :laugh:
-
When even The Federalist congratulates Trump, you know he did something right. :laugh:
When both the Federalist and the New York Times congratulate Trump, you know he did something wrong.
-
When both the Federalist and the New York Times congratulate Trump, you know he did something wrong.
By "wrong," of course you mean, "naughty-naughty," as in "Ohhh, you baaaad-baaad boy, you."
Quote from: 230RN on September 17, 2016, 05:26:21 PM
Principles are one thing, .......
Terry
Not just in elections but just in life in general, I've found that when you make this statement with the implied "but", It's time to stop and take a real long, hard look at what you're about to do.
And, in principle, I agree about the "but." But when one is facing an unprincipled antagonist, one must reconsider one's options regarding one's own principles with a view toward what's "practical."
Thus, my rigid opinion which I ain't changing:
Voting for unviable 3rd party candidates or not voting "in protest" is handing Ms. Clinton the winning ticket, and thank you very much. Principles are one thing, who nominates SCOTUS candidates in the next 4 years is another.
Terry
-
Content from here incorporated into the above post.
-
I tend to agree with practical voting. It is pretty much how I have always looked at it. We are in a representative republic and since none of you seem to want to select me as the dictator for life, I have to settle for voting for candidates that I don't 100% agree with. Some match my ideals more than others. I am forced to choose the best of the available options. Just because you decided you don't want to play the game, doesn't mean you aren't still in it.
-
Voting for unviable 3rd party candidates or not voting "in protest" is handing Ms. Clinton the winning ticket, and thank you very much. Principles are one thing, who nominates SCOTUS candidates in the next 4 years is another.
^^^ This.
A couple of decades ago I made a "principled" decision that I was through with voting against candidates, and that henceforth I would only vote for someone -- which meant that if I didn't like either candidate, I would write in my own name. Which I have done in more than one election.
However, the prospect of Hillary Clinton being afforded the opportunity to reshape the Supreme Court in a liberal, globalist, anti-constitutional framework is sufficiently terrifying that this election I will set aside my principled decision, and I will vote against Hillary Clinton. And the ONLY effective way to vote against her is to vote for Trump.
So... yea, Trump!
-
^^^ This.
A couple of decades ago I made a "principled" decision that I was through with voting against candidates, and that henceforth I would only vote for someone -- which meant that if I didn't like either candidate, I would write in my own name. Which I have done in more than one election.
However, the prospect of Hillary Clinton being afforded the opportunity to reshape the Supreme Court in a liberal, globalist, anti-constitutional framework is sufficiently terrifying that this election I will set aside my principled decision, and I will vote against Hillary Clinton. And the ONLY effective way to vote against her is to vote for Trump.
So... yea, Trump!
No, your principles are you outlined in your second paragraph.
-
MechAg94 spake thus:
Just because you decided you don't want to play the game, doesn't mean you aren't still in it.
Golden words.
Terry
-
Optics? ???
How anyone can misconstrue what he said to mean he is calling for an assassination is completely beyond me. The only way is if that is just what they have been hoping he would say. Same thing with the whole Russian hacking. Same thing when I think it was the NRA that put out a picture of anti-gun politicians using bullet holes to mark them off. You have to be purposely taking it that way to even come close to such a conclusion.
-
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/media-reject-trumps-birther-switch-after-media-asked-for-it/article/2602295
"It matters not a whit," the paper said, "that Mr. Trump has finally, for blatant political purposes, admitted that the president was born in the United States; large numbers of his partisans, and of Republicans generally, still don't believe Mr. Obama has a legitimate claim to the office he has held for nearly eight years. ... The cancer of corruption perpetuated by Mr. Trump's dazzling dishonesty has infected not only his campaign but also the Republican Party, which falls in line, sheeplike, to defend his every lie."
OK, besides the obvious irony of a left-wing press organ attacking the Republican Party for allegedly doing what the Democratic Party does quite blatantly; it's rather amusing that they just can't get over the fact that a politician's place of birth was questioned. 'Tis a sacrilege never to be forgiven - unless your name is Clinton. Why it should matter, in 2016, whether someone doubted Obama's place of birth, no one can satisfactorily explain.
And now that questions about a brown person's citizenship have been established as racist, they get to play that angle, too. :facepalm:
-
Optics? ???
How anyone can misconstrue what he said to mean he is calling for an assassination is completely beyond me. The only way is if that is just what they have been hoping he would say. Same thing with the whole Russian hacking. Same thing when I think it was the NRA that put out a picture of anti-gun politicians using bullet holes to mark them off. You have to be purposely taking it that way to even come close to such a conclusion.
It is the standard Republican behavior. A candidate says something that liberals misinterpret and blow out of proportion. Republican voters don't blame the idiot liberals. They blame the candidate saying he should be more careful.