It's worth noting that the 4th estate also includes Fox News and Breitbart, who are hardly engaged propaganda against Trump.

It’s also worth noting you guys keep bringing up Fox News and breitbart, but oddly never the rest.

I wonder why you dodge all questions about whether Trump's behaviour is appropriate, ethically, constitutionally or otherwise. Perhaps that's just your style of trolling, but I am not sure yet.

Sure, I think it’s appropriate, but then again I don’t want a pope or a lawyer running things.

Whitehouse propaganda is tame by any measure. — NOS4A2

Getting back to the example of Trump attacking the 'squad', in an interview Trump said, "The first lady thinks that it's horrible what they've said about Israel and horrible what they've said about our country, these congresswomen. They can't call our country and our people 'garbage.' They can't be anti-Semitic. They can't talk about evil Jews, which is what they say. 'Evil Jews,' ".

In both cases, he was twisting a quote to bolster his allegation that "they hate our country."

You call that tame? I don't think even Breitbart puts that much of a twist on what liberals say.

I don’t want a pope or a lawyer running things. — NOS4A2

Why not?

That’s politics, but I don’t see how that gives licence for the press to do the same thing. There is a standard of journalistic ethics that the yellow journalism of today has tossed to the wind.

Why not?

What has a pope or lawyer ever done, besides talk?

Yes, I too miss the good old days when the media was completely objective and honest. :love:

Right next to the good old days when politicians were truth-telling saints.

This is the sort of word politics and policing we’re dealing with here. No injustice, no tyranny, no authoritarianism, just crimes of speech and political correctness. — NOS4A2

And all of his objectionable policies relating to tax cuts, foreign policy, immigration, the enivonment, trade, gun control, healthcare...

If a pope and a lawyer stand for high ethics and intelligence/competence, respectively, you're suggesting that a lack of these qualities leads to increased productivity. Even if that were true, the results of that productivity are likely to be of poor quality and largely self-serving.

Right next to the good old days when politicians were truth-telling saints. — NOS4A2

So Trump should be condemned, as you condemn the media.

If a pope and a lawyer stand for high ethics and intelligence/competence, respectively, you're suggesting that a lack of these qualities leads to increased productivity. Even if that were true, the results of that productivity are likely to be of poor quality and largely self-serving.

If the point of a leader is to speak political niceties, engage in public relations and sing the public lullabies, hell, any actor would be fit for the role.

The point of a leader is to lead. Trump only leads his base, which is not even half the nation. And let's not forget that Trump is a TV celebrity. He owes his presidency to that celebrity.

Does anyone doubt that his role as a conservative is an act?

He also has half a century worth of leadership experience.

I think Trump is one of the most liberal presidents in a long time. He upended the GOP so much that they welcome the LGBT community with open arms, something that was unthinkable only 5 years ago.

He also has half a century worth of leadership experience. — NOS4A2

It's reported that in some of those years he lost more money than practically any American, which could make him the worst businessman in history. Then how is he so rich, you ask? His father, who gave him over 400 million and, by the way, was making money in the years that Trump was losing it.

I think Trump is one of the most liberal presidents in a long time. He upended the GOP so much that they welcome the LGBT community with open arms, something that was unthinkable only 5 years ago. — NOS4A2

It's hard to tell if he's liberal or conservative because he doesn't appear to actually stand for anything.

Not quite true. Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway lost $4.3 billion in a single day. Wouldn’t call him the worst businessman in history. It’s in the nature of business to have gains and losses.

I think Trump is one of the most liberal presidents in a long time. He upended the GOP so much that they welcome the LGBT community with open arms, something that was unthinkable only 5 years ago. — NOS4A2

In what way? ‘cause from what I’ve seen he’s being taking away LGBT protections.

Trump has a devastating record on LGBTQ rights. Don’t deny the truth..

“LGBT protections.” For instance?

I don’t have a subscription to the WaPo. Can you formulate your own argument here, or absent that, summarize the WaPo?

Okay, he's the second worst businessman in history. In any case, the act (as seen on The Apprentice) is that he's a great businessman.

Religious extremists opposed to LGBTQ equality can confidently tout Trump as being down with their agenda by pointing to a speech in February in which Trump defended state-funded adoption agencies that turn away gay couples on religious grounds.

...

The Justice Department filed a brief Friday urging the Supreme Court to allow employers to turn away or fire transgender workers based solely on their gender identity. The department is expected to file a similar brief this week in a separate case asking the high court to legalize discrimination against gay, lesbian and bisexual workers, as well.

...

On Aug. 14, the Labor Department proposed a rule rolling back an executive order that President Barack Obama signed in 2014 banning anti-LGBTQ discrimination among federal contractors

...

But Trump began unraveling Obama-era progress on LGBTQ rights almost immediately. Within its first weeks, his administration withdrew an Obama directive on treatment of transgender students. A few months later, Trump fired off a tweet announcing that he’d reinstate a ban — which Obama had ended — on transgender people serving in the military. This year, the Department of Health and Human Services moved to strip anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people in the Affordable Care Act.

Lol. No, that would be Abe Lincoln, who’s business record was %100 failure.

We don't need to look at ancient history, unfortunately. All of Trumps meddling with foreign trade, damaging American industries and raising prices for consumers, and the trade deficit is still higher than it was under the Obama administration.

Arguably, yes, trump has little time for the transgendered argument and their “protections”. I shouldn’t have said LGBT and limited the nonsensical acronym to LGB.

Sure, I think it’s appropriate, but then again I don’t want a pope or a lawyer running things. — NOS4A2

This sentiment seems at the heart of a lot of support for Trump, but I just can't wrap my head around it. Basically it seems to imply there are not actually any virtuous people. Anyone who looks virtuous is merely an actor playing, and is in reality just as much of a lying asshole. So it's better to have someone in charge who is obviously a lying asshole, since at least they can't be worse than they appear.

Did I get that about right?

I shouldn’t have said LGBT and limited the nonsensical acronym to LGB. — NOS4A2

Did you miss these parts?

Religious extremists opposed to LGBTQ equality can confidently tout Trump as being down with their agenda by pointing to a speech in February in which Trump defended state-funded adoption agencies that turn away gay couples on religious grounds.

...

The department is expected to file a similar brief this week in a separate case asking the high court to legalize discrimination against gay, lesbian and bisexual workers, as well.

...

On Aug. 14, the Labor Department proposed a rule rolling back an executive order that President Barack Obama signed in 2014 banning anti-LGBTQ discrimination among federal contractors

I fully agree with deregulation. But it would be absurd to claim, without evidence, that he is doing it for the sole purpose of making discrimination legal.

I fully agree with deregulation. But it would be absurd to claim, without evidence, that he is doing it for the sole purpose of making discrimination legal. — NOS4A2

What? This makes no sense. It was illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation and Trump is trying to make it so that it is legal to discriminate based on sexual orientation.

If Trump thinks it's better for people to be allowed to discriminate based on sexual orientation than for there to be regulations that protect LGB people from discrimination then Trump isn't LGB-friendly. It's absurd to claim otherwise.

I think Trump is one of the most liberal presidents in a long time. — NOS4A2

Hahahahaha!