Trump Supporter Berates Chelsea Clinton and Her Children

[esmith]

Like shoot'n fish in a barrel.

Even I can do that!

Better watch out this "fish" might have teeth

 

[Revoltingest]

Better watch out this "fish" might have teeth
View attachment 15479

You look a lot younger than your avatar suggests!

 

[esmith]

You look a lot younger than your avatar suggests!

could be many many years ago...But I must admit I just used the first picture I found of a "ma deuce".
Don't have a recent one....seem to break the camera

 

[Quetzal]

Better watch out this "fish" might have teeth
View attachment 15479

PSH! I'll take ya!

 

[Revoltingest]

PSH! I'll take ya!

Pbbbttttt!
A better weapon.....

 

[fantome profane]

No.

So I think it was rather silly of you to imply that the mainstream media would not cover it, or that they would be unfair in their coverage. Apparently that is not the case.

Never heard of TYT, but at least they had a true statement.

TYT is a far left wing youtube news channel, but even they give fair coverage to a story that makes the left look bad. Again your suggestion of unfair media coverage does not seem to pan out in this case.

I won't argue the point about Ivanka but the same goes for Chelsea.

Absolutely, I don't know who has suggested otherwise. I certainly have not. You are trying to suggest that there is a double standard here, but you have provided no evidence of such a thing.

However, if you think it is acceptable to berate someone with their children present, who have no idea why some ******* is screaming at their mother, then maybe you had better step back and take a serious look at yourself.

Excuse me? Where did I suggest such a thing? If you have an accusation to make against me, pretend you have some balls and make it.

 

[tytlyf]

Does anyone have video of the incident and a transcript? This isn't news. Read the comments at breitbart.

Chelsea Clinton gives birth to second child - Breitbart

 

[Scuba Pete]

I suggest you take a real close look at yo

Get over yourself. If you had really bothered to read my initial post, I stated very, very clearly that I thought the man getting kicked off the plane for acting like a Republican was appropriate.

But this is exactly what the right wing nuts do: they take a very clear position and try to turn it backwards. That's not only incivil, but down right dishonest when we are having a discussion. That's what Trump did the whole campaign. If you're Forrest Gump stupid, then you'll fall for this. If you have a modicum of intelligence and integrity, you'll stop silting out the place with these baseless garbage accusations like Revoltingest likes to toss out.. You're the one who needs to take a good look at yourself. If all you want to do is troll, then I have no time for you.

a government created & subsidized news source)

More ignorance. NPR was not created by the government and while it has enjoyed funding through grants, most of the money comes from member stations and users.. Like the Boy Scouts, it certainly benefited from a Congressional charter, but it is just as privately owned as they are. It has always been privately owned as the government never wanted it to be considered a propaganda machine (like Fox).

 

[Revoltingest]

More ignorance. NPR was not created by the government.....

I notice you had no supporting link.
It's good to read about the things upon which one holds forth.
Here, let me help.....
NPR - Wikipedia

National Public Radio replaced the National Educational Radio Network on February 26, 1970, following congressional passage of the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967.[5] This act was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson, and established the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which also created the Public Broadcasting Service in addition to NPR. A CPB organizing committee under John Witherspoon first created a Board of Directors chaired by Bernard Mayes.

The board then hired Donald Quayle to be the first president of NPR with 30 employees and 90 charter member stations, and studios in Washington, D.C.[6]

And now, back to you, Scooby....

......and while it has enjoyed funding through grants, most of the money comes from member stations and users.. Like the Boy Scouts, it certainly benefited from a Congressional charter, but it is just as privately owned as they are. It has always been privately owned as the government never wanted it to be considered a propaganda machine (like Fox).

NPR still receives federal funding, & is heavily subsidized with state tax credits & federal tax deductions.

 

[Quetzal]

NPR still receives federal funding, & is heavily subsidized with state tax credits & federal tax deductions.

There are plenty of examples of programs recieving federal funding that are not controlled by the government. Is your protest rooted in the idea that NPR is a government soap box or do you simply disagree with the arguments they present? Maybe both?

 

[Revoltingest]

There are plenty of examples of programs recieving federal funding that are not controlled by the government. Is your protest rooted in the idea that NPR is a government soap box or do you simply disagree with the arguments they present? Maybe both?

I underlined the answer.
(That's how lazy I am.)

 

[Quetzal]

I underlined the answer.
(That's how lazy I am.)

I gotcha. I don't honestly think their content is directly influenced by the government. But we will see. If the hosts are all replaced with conservative commentary with Trump and company at the helm, you might be on to something. If not, back to the drawing board on that front.

 

[Revoltingest]

I gotcha. I don't honestly think their content is directly influenced by the government. But we will see. If the hosts are all replaced with conservative commentary with Trump and company at the helm, you might be on to something. If not, back to the drawing board on that front.

The type & extent of government influence I cannot speak to. (Not privy to it.)
But the heavily biased coverage which borders on campaigning for one side has been
going on for decades. If government doesn't prevent this, then it is tacit approval.

 

[tytlyf]

The type & extent of government influence I cannot speak to. (Not privy to it.)
But the heavily biased coverage which borders on campaigning for one side has been
going on for decades. If government doesn't prevent this, then it is tacit approval.

The American government is responsible for where America is today. I understand that conservatives typically disfavor the American government.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Here, let me help.....

That's a scary offer to wake up to the day after Christmas. Like Trump, you're doubling down on your ignorance with even more ignorance. That you still claim to not be a Republican while acting like one is as ironic as it is silly.

From www.npr.org

NPR was incorporated on Feb. 26, 1970, by 90 forward-thinking charter stations to provide national news programming.

So there you have it: the government did not create npr in npr's own words.

The 1967 law paved the way for CPB and then NPR to exist and even provided limited funding for these privately owned CORPORATIONS, but they were never owned or controlled by the US government. Ever. As for financing here is a pie chart from Public Radio Finances. You'll see that governments (Fed, state and local) account for only 5% of their total income and it's my understanding that most of that consists of grants for Children's programming like Sesame Street.

Abraham Lincoln once opined "You can't believe everything you read on the Internet!" While I find wikipedia a wonderful resource, it's content is open for everyone to edit. Unfortunately, that allows ignorant people with an agenda (POV Warriors), such as yourself, to enter in all kinds of misinformation and obscure the facts. POV warriors delight in spewing their nonsense on the interwebs so people, such as yourself, will continue to believe and perpetrate a lie. While you Trumpeters thrive on fake news stories, those of us who maintain our integrity and intellectual honesty strive to get the facts. That people, such as yourself, prefer ideological fiction over actual facts, is why you don't like NPR and fail to understand it.

 

[Revoltingest]

That you still claim to not be a Republican while acting like one is as ironic as it is silly.

Let us not forget that you were once a Republican Party member.
I've never been one.
Perhaps that's why you wield this insult.....you feel shame for having been one.

From www.npr.org
So there you have it: the government did not create npr in npr's own words.

I'll trust the Wikipedia entry for NPR more.
Why?
NPR has a vested interest in creating the appearance of independence from government.

The 1967 law paved the way for CPB and then NPR to exist and even provided limited funding for these privately owned CORPORATIONS, but they were never owned or controlled by the US government.

This doesn't address the direct financing & even greater favorable treatment NPR receives from government.

Ever. As for financing here is a pie chart from Public Radio Finances. You'll see that governments (Fed, state and local) account for only 5% of their total income and it's my understanding that most of that consists of grants for Children's programming like Sesame Street.

You're not addressing the heavy tax subsidy, eg, 50% income tax credit in MI.
I notice that you quote a Republican (Lincoln) to bolster your case.
Well, I have a quote too.....

​

 

[Quetzal]

Ouch, @Scuba Pete, so what if @Revoltingest doesn't like NPR? He is correct about their bias this election cycle and he has a right to dislike it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Ouch, @Scuba Pete, so what if @Revoltingest doesn't like NPR? He is correct about their bias this election cycle and he has a right to dislike it.

I have a love hate relationship with NPR.
My familiarity with their evil is because I listen to them so much.
But what really burns my bacon is that A Prairie Home Companion has become uninteresting!
Garrison Keillor might be a frostbitten funny look'n commie, but he knew how to run a radio show.

 

[Scuba Pete]

But what really burns my bacon is that A Prairie Home Companion has become uninteresting!

Yes, his departure from the show seems to have killed it. The piano sounds a bit flat and the onions don't smell as sweet.

Ouch, @Scuba Pete, so what if @Revoltingest doesn't like NPR? He is correct about their bias this election cycle and he has a right to dislike it.

When the truth seems to be biased, it's best to look at the premise that opposes it.

I started a blog at www.Hatriotism.US I reaized it was featuring Trump more and more and I really didn't want it to appear to be so anti-Trump. But then, I realized that Trump is opposed to the truth unless it suits him. The man simply can't open his mouth without lying or saying something racist. He's anathema to any person or entity devoted to the truth. So was npr really biased? No. They were simply telling the truth and the contrast between that and Trump is amazingly clear.

 

[esmith]

However, if you think it is acceptable to berate someone with their children present, who have no idea why some ******* is screaming at their mother, then maybe you had better step back and take a serious look at yourself.

Excuse me? Where did I suggest such a thing? If you have an accusation to make against me, pretend you have some balls and make it.

My mistake. When I read the first line of the below is when I went off the handle. That's what you get when one reacts before all the data is in.
Sorry about that.

I will say that although I think Ivanka is fair game as she played a pivotal role in the campaign and it looks like she may play a part in the Trump administration, but I do think it is wrong to get into her face on a plane. That is just unfair, she bought her ticket, leave her alone. There is a time and a place for protest, and this is not it.