No, the FCC can't shut down TV stations just because Donald Trump is mad at the news The head of America's telly watchdog, the FCC, said he cannot follow up on Donald Trump's threat to revoke the broadcast licenses of TV networks that run unflattering news coverage of the US president. Speaking at a public policy conference at George Mason University, Virginia, FCC chairman Ajit Pai said the authority of the …
"Ah yes, the birth certificate meme that was started by Hillary's campaign before it was swallowed by the right."
Do you have a source for this to counteract the Wikipedia claim it originated before then in 2004 by this Illinois Republican: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Martin
Which is fake?
"You are seriously going to use Wikipedia, the "encyclopedia" that anyone with an axe can grind can edit, as a source on anything political or controversial?"
Only as a source of sources to question the assertion that birtherism originated from the Clinton campaign. Check those sources - the NYT (lDemocrat leaning) & FreeRepublic (Conservative leaning) and the dates of their archive.
They could be forged of course. But the onus is surely on the person who makes the claim to source it. If they cannot do that then the probability of which is fake swings one way. Which way do think that is?
Absolutely agree. The news media in the US is quite a joke. They all slant things in any way possible to fit their agenda. Whether left or right, better to take it with a grain of salt. But it isn't really due to a political stand! It is all about sensationalizing whatever they deem will garner the most views (or likes?) from their targeted clientele. Neither care too much about the topic of a news report, but rather the ratings that are intricately tied to the advertising dollars. Is it fake news? For the most part, yes, from both camps. I don't trust any news that has even the slightest political underpinnings. On the other hand, the weather seems to be fairly reported, for the most part.
Fox and NBC have been generally regarded as biased in a partisan way for years. Depending on personal political party preference it is quite likely that one will see one as culpably dishonest propaganda mill and the other as a paragon of probing and insightful journalistic virtue.
Hitler references are a bit old don't you think?
Rabble rousing populist with ludicrous hair, unexpectedly elected on a vague platform of making Germany America great again, overturning the political establishment, deeply suspicion of an Abrahamic religion, demonizing foreigners in general, berating the media, choosing lackeys on the basis of loyalty rather than competence and floating the idea of subverting the constitution by an Enabling Act Executive Order?
I see your point. No resemblance whatsoever.
deeply suspicion of an Abrahamic religion,
Really? Have you ever given a thought of exact role of his "Settlers relations" officer? Also known as Ivanka Trump? Or where does his lawyer, now ambassador to Israel sit in that? Or said lawyer relationship with settler organizations?
While Trump itself has strong ties with some financial groups in New York (the Clinton as well, both have daughters who married the son of a crook to have an entry in such groups...) - because his business needs someone else's money to stay afloat, many of his supporters are not so keen on the religion of such financial groups... if I were part of those groups I would be very careful to support Trump.
"Rabble rousing populist with ludicrous hair, unexpectedly elected on a vague platform of making Germany America great again, overturning the political establishment, deeply suspicion of an Abrahamic religion, demonizing foreigners in general, berating the media, choosing lackeys on the basis of loyalty rather than competence and floating the idea of subverting the constitution by an Enabling Act Executive Order?
I see your point. No resemblance whatsoever."
Sure. But enough about Obama, there's a new boy in the Whitehouse now.
As William Russell said to Lord Lucan, of his conduct of the Crimean War: "If you don't want me to report all the damned silly things you are doing, my lord, my advice to you is not to do them!"
(Misquoted from memory, but the spirit is accurate.)
Ah, for those days when journalists had a bit of spirit...
It's not them reporting what he doing on twitter, it's them not saying he's done great things with the economy, is building the wall, and they will not even touch a story on Hillary like how she, the FBI, and Obama made it possible for the Russians to buy 20% of the countries uranium and the Clinton foundation received 145 million and I'm sure Obama received payment and is probably the reason he can afford that fancy mansion among other things. CNN and MSNBC and the NY Times, and Washington Post and Huffington and Shareblue and BBC are all pushing fake news. Hell the worst are the Colleges pushing the crap socialism, communism, feminism, and racism crap basically brainwashing kids that are not smart enough to figure out logical reasoning.
To make sure this in context, I strongly disagree with fascist sentiments, whatever they are dressed up as. Left, right, nationlistic, ethnic whatever. If you are advocating might is right and some other group is to blame for all the ills of the world, then it's very clear down what path things will go.
Trump used his wealth and influence (well, Daddy's wealth and influence) to avoid the draft five times. He then pisses on the people in service whenever it suits him (ie when they aren't sucking up to him). Hitler was awarded the Iron Cross TWICE, and after being wounded went back to the front rather than fully recuperate.
They aren't even on the same page as far as character goes.
Hitler's actions where still horrific.
Luckily Trump is pretty incompetent at running the country. If he had any real ability to move his agenda forward, it would be dangerous. Pence is genuinely scary, since he actually understands the leavers of power. The First Lady probably has a better understanding of how the branches of government function, along with minor details like hand on heart during anthem, that sort of thing.
This post has been deleted by its author
"FCC licensing can be challenged. With some of the "great reporting" by the alleged networks recently those challenges may be interesting."
That's interesting, and it would be about time too. Fox "News" shouldn't be allowed to get away with their constant lies.
The spectrum goes something like this:
truth -> inaccuracies -> propoganda -> lies -> Fox.
About time the "fairness doctrine" was brought back. No, America, "free speech" doesn't mean you can present lies as facts on news programmes (even if you try to wing it as "commentary"), unless you support Kim Jons version of free speech.
From the IMDB trivia page
"Upon its initial release, writers Mike Judge and Etan Cohen insisted that they did not intend for the film to be a satire of modern life. However, the writers changed their tune over a decade later. Due to a particularly contentious and unpopular presidential campaign season in 2016 and social developments in the United States, Judge and Cohen admitted on social media that they fear that portions of their film are coming to fruition."
That film gets far too much credit if you ask me.
After the wonderful opening scene about hard working educated people not having time to have kids , and morons having them constantly, it pretty much descends into a series of "American Pie" style dick and fart jokes.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
