It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Our Dishonest President

page: 2
30
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:03 PM
link   
I don't think there'd be such a big deal made out of Trumps lies if his supporters didn't defend them so vehemently.




posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: UnBreakable

Why do people keep bringing up Hillary still?

Simple question - no deflection to loser Hillary - do you disagree with the claim that Donald Trump is dishonest?


I was stating why the LA Times are pissed, based on their geographic location. Sure, Trump is dishonest, as every prez who's held that office, except for maybe Honest Abe. Look at dishonest Bill Clinton, who went to an impeachment trial for his dishonesty. And he was elected....twice. I just can't get apoplectic about Trump as everyone else, being his dishonesty is not different than say Nixon. And it's been that way for as long as I remember for the past fifty years.

It appears you agree with the premise of the article - that Donald Trump is dishonest.

Why complain about the LA Times' motivation then, if you agree with their article's premise?
Why do you bring up other people? They are irrelevant to the article in question.



Because the LA Times only called out Trump's dishonesty. They never seemed to have a problem with other presidents dishonesty through the years. I guess it's the hypocrisy that gets me.
edit on 4jY by UnBreakable because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
I don't think there'd be such a big deal made out of Trumps lies if his supporters didn't defend them so vehemently.


Maybe it wouldn't be such a big thing if the LA TImes had spent half as much energy being outraged over the obvious whoppers of:

If you like your doctor ...

If you life your health care ...

You will all save $2,500/year ...

And those are just the start.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: seeker1963

It's a simple question - the article claims Donald Trump is dishonest. It's not about Hillary. It's not about impeachment.

It's about him being dishonest.

Is he dishonest?


It's actually a very complex question as one's definition of dishonesty is highly subjective. Pretty much everyone I've ever met is dishonest in one way or another. When you're wife asks if she looks fat in a dress, and you lie if she does and instead tell her she looks great, that is dishonesty.

As President, there is a lot that you have to lie to the public about, so yes Trump is dishonest.

Would I describe him as a dishonest person? No.
edit on 4/2/2017 by scojak because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

I don't see supporters defending the lies so much as I see the hypocrisy of those on the left.

You don't have integrity if you point out the dishonest nature of one candidate while defending the lies of another.

Granted, for everyone that pointed out all of Obama's lies, they should do the same for Trump's lies.

The fevered hatred for Trump, as evidenced in the article, is just an indication that we'll never agree.

Rational debate with irrational people is a pointless endeavor. It's why I don't reply to so many anymore.




posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: underwerks
I don't think there'd be such a big deal made out of Trumps lies if his supporters didn't defend them so vehemently.


Maybe it wouldn't be such a big thing if the LA TImes had spent half as much energy being outraged over the obvious whoppers of:

If you like your doctor ...

If you life your health care ...

You will all save $2,500/year ...

And those are just the start.

Would you really care? Or would you be just as outraged about the people who call Trump a liar?



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
I don't think there'd be such a big deal made out of Trumps lies if his supporters didn't defend them so vehemently.


What do you expect from those of us residing in the "basket of deplorables"?



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Since the same people who are outraged about Trump are often the same ones who didn't bat an eye over these same things Obama said ... I merely yawn. The outrage over lying isn't what it's all about.

They aren't really mad about dishonesty. They're mad that what Trump is doing isn't aligned to their own preferred ideology. If it was, it wouldn't matter how many times he lied on his way to achieving it.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: DBCowboy

Do you disagree that he is dishonest?

By whose standards? Mine, yes. DC's, not even close, call him Abe.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: underwerks

I don't see supporters defending the lies so much as I see the hypocrisy of those on the left.

You don't have integrity if you point out the dishonest nature of one candidate while defending the lies of another.

Granted, for everyone that pointed out all of Obama's lies, they should do the same for Trump's lies.

The fevered hatred for Trump, as evidenced in the article, is just an indication that we'll never agree.

Rational debate with irrational people is a pointless endeavor. It's why I don't reply to so many anymore.


Are we on the same ATS? Where any story about Trump that isn't positive has been called fake since the election?

Any thinking we'll all ever agree on politics is wishful thinking on all fronts.

I agree about the arguing with irrational people, though it is kind of fun sometimes.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: UnBreakable

Why do people keep bringing up Hillary still?

Simple question - no deflection to loser Hillary - do you disagree with the claim that Donald Trump is dishonest?


I was stating why the LA Times are pissed, based on their geographic location. Sure, Trump is dishonest, as every prez who's held that office, except for maybe Honest Abe. Look at dishonest Bill Clinton, who went to an impeachment trial for his dishonesty. And he was elected....twice. I just can't get apoplectic about Trump as everyone else, being his dishonesty is not different than say Nixon. And it's been that way for as long as I remember for the past fifty years.

It appears you agree with the premise of the article - that Donald Trump is dishonest.

Why complain about the LA Times' motivation then, if you agree with their article's premise?
Why do you bring up other people? They are irrelevant to the article in question.



Because the LA Times only called out Trump's dishonesty. They never seemed to have a problem with other presidents dishonesty through the years. I guess it's the hypocrisy that gets me.

Fox News never seems to have a problem dredging up misleading footage and serving infotainment.

However, that doesn't mean they are wrong when they do portray something accurately.

Someone being hypocritical does not mean they are wrong; tu quoque is a logical fallacy.

Deflection by way of pointing at others does not somehow mean a claim is wrong, either; red herring is a logical fallacy.

Recognize that these are not valid ways to attack the article.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Greven

Looks like some people got totally sucked in by the article (which was cleverly crafted by an "editorial board").




posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: underwerks

Since the same people who are outraged about Trump are often the same ones who didn't bat an eye over these same things Obama said ... I merely yawn. The outrage over lying isn't what it's all about.

They aren't really mad about dishonesty. They're mad that what Trump is doing isn't aligned to their own preferred ideology. If it was, it wouldn't matter how many times he lied on his way to achieving it.

Well, yeah. That should go without saying. What's weird to me is that people expect it to be different this time around with Trump.

Were there not people critical of Obama for 8 years? Burning hanging effigies of him when he was first elected in office?

Trump will have to face the same scrutiny and hate from his detractors as any president in such a divisive election.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: underwerks

I don't see supporters defending the lies so much as I see the hypocrisy of those on the left.

You don't have integrity if you point out the dishonest nature of one candidate while defending the lies of another.

Granted, for everyone that pointed out all of Obama's lies, they should do the same for Trump's lies.

The fevered hatred for Trump, as evidenced in the article, is just an indication that we'll never agree.

Rational debate with irrational people is a pointless endeavor. It's why I don't reply to so many anymore.


Rationality is lacking when logic becomes secondary to emotion.

Characterizing criticism as 'fevered hatred' is but one of those appeals to emotion above logic.

I imagine folks vocal about Obama's tee time will be quite quiet regarding the current President.

Pointing out hypocrisy as support for an argument is a logical fallacy.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: underwerks
I don't think there'd be such a big deal made out of Trumps lies if his supporters didn't defend them so vehemently.


What do you expect from those of us residing in the "basket of deplorables"?

To call things what they are and not be defined by something Hillary Clinton said. But I think that's too much to ask in a lot of cases.

People would rather resort to the old playground staple, "Push me? Well I'm going to push YOU!"

And here we are.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: underwerks
I don't think there'd be such a big deal made out of Trumps lies if his supporters didn't defend them so vehemently.


What do you expect from those of us residing in the "basket of deplorables"?

Hillary lost, get over winning already.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I sympathize. I get accused of supporting Trump, all the time, simply because I am not any more outraged at him than Obama, Hillary, or either Bush.


"Donald Trump was a narcissist and a demagogue who used fear and dishonesty to appeal to the worst in American voters."


I am more outraged that voters are being attacked by the media when no person -- who simply exercised their right to cast a vote -- should be criticized more than any of the above-named 'leaders.' Yet, that is how the LA Times rolls. It's so low.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: underwerks

I don't see supporters defending the lies so much as I see the hypocrisy of those on the left.

You don't have integrity if you point out the dishonest nature of one candidate while defending the lies of another.

Granted, for everyone that pointed out all of Obama's lies, they should do the same for Trump's lies.

The fevered hatred for Trump, as evidenced in the article, is just an indication that we'll never agree.

Rational debate with irrational people is a pointless endeavor. It's why I don't reply to so many anymore.


Rationality is lacking when logic becomes secondary to emotion.

Characterizing criticism as 'fevered hatred' is but one of those appeals to emotion above logic.

I imagine folks vocal about Obama's tee time will be quite quiet regarding the current President.

Pointing out hypocrisy as support for an argument is a logical fallacy.


You call it criticism, I call it fevered hatred.

I pointed out the hypocrisy of Obama/Trump criticism in another thread.

Justifying your own biases by calling others opinions "logical fallacies".



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:36 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Yup. Insanity rules, especially in the liberals. Maybe it is all the veggies they ate, after all, Cain killed Able. Did you ever wonder why that particular story is in the bible?

Veggi, plant defense system chemicals can make you all sorts of nuts, usually by stimulating anxiousness or irrational or aggressive behavior of the browser. Follow the Kale to find the answer.
edit on 2-4-2017 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 03:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: UnBreakable

Why do people keep bringing up Hillary still?

Simple question - no deflection to loser Hillary - do you disagree with the claim that Donald Trump is dishonest?


I was stating why the LA Times are pissed, based on their geographic location. Sure, Trump is dishonest, as every prez who's held that office, except for maybe Honest Abe. Look at dishonest Bill Clinton, who went to an impeachment trial for his dishonesty. And he was elected....twice. I just can't get apoplectic about Trump as everyone else, being his dishonesty is not different than say Nixon. And it's been that way for as long as I remember for the past fifty years.

It appears you agree with the premise of the article - that Donald Trump is dishonest.

Why complain about the LA Times' motivation then, if you agree with their article's premise?
Why do you bring up other people? They are irrelevant to the article in question.



Because the LA Times only called out Trump's dishonesty. They never seemed to have a problem with other presidents dishonesty through the years. I guess it's the hypocrisy that gets me.

Fox News never seems to have a problem dredging up misleading footage and serving infotainment.

However, that doesn't mean they are wrong when they do portray something accurately.

Someone being hypocritical does not mean they are wrong; tu quoque is a logical fallacy.

Deflection by way of pointing at others does not somehow mean a claim is wrong, either; red herring is a logical fallacy.

Recognize that these are not valid ways to attack the article.


Um, I never "attacked" the article. I was giving a reason why I think the false outrage is coming from, the they eminate from a leftist stronghold, that being Cali. If you bothered to read my previous responses, I never once denied Trump is dishonest. My point is that he's no more dishonest than previous people in that office, not that it makes it any more justifiable.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join