January 12, 2017

"Today Trump called these new reports 'fake news.' So despite an incredibly short run, I think it is time to retire that term."

"It used to be one thing, but now everyone is using it for everything. 'Fake news' as a term is busted."

Said Seth Meyers (of "Late Night with Seth Meyers"), in a sound clip played on Rush Limbaugh's show today.  Limbaugh lit into Meyers:
Let me tell you what’s busted. What’s busted is the left’s attempted exclusive use of it to describe me, to describe Fox News, to describe conservative media anywhere. They set up the term “fake news” to discredit and impugn anybody not themselves....

And it’s backfired on ’em, because now the president-elect has called them fake news. And that’s why they’re banning it because... it’s boomeranged on ’em and they are the ones now accused of in the public mind of broadcasting, harboring, reporting fake news.

So of course they want to get rid of it...

228 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 228 of 228
exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

Original Mike said...
"Is Inga Russian?"

Nah, you live in Milwaukee."

Better yet, she lives in deep red Waukesha County, surrounded by Trump voters.

It's driving her quite mad.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Well just wait and see who is right. I'm patient.

Todd Roberson said...

Kudos to blogger Fernandinande @7:55 pm. I couldn't agree more.

The whole Chuck/Unknown/Drago/"lifelong Republican" pissing contest axis is getting a bit stale.

Howard said...

Birkel: Don't confuse yourself with mens problems, you can't treat every international problem like your future ex-husband.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

Unknown said...
Well just wait and see who is right."

Sure. Your track record of predictions absolutely stinks so far, but

KEEP HOPE ALIVE!

exhelodrvr1 said...

Unknown,
"Discussions held in closed forums recently"

Apparently not that closed.

Jon Ericson said...

Never change, Sugartits.

Francisco D said...

Inga, the retired psych nurse, seems to be in a manic phase.

Given your high level of training and education (LOL!) you should know the signs of an incipient manic phase.

That's why your Doc prescribed you Seroquel (or maybe Depakote).

Gretchen said...

It really cracks me up that the left has created a new red scare. Four short years ago, Mitt was derided for suggesting Russia was a geopolitical threat. Which they were. Obama glibly said "the 80's wants its foreign policy back", and told Medvedev he'd have more flexibility once the election was over.

The left is completely under the spell of whatever BS the media spews. Russia is bad, Putin is bad, but compared to China, ISIS, NK, and Iran, they are not a huge threat to the US, because Putin isn't surrounded by zealots and their economy is in no position to put a squeeze on us. Putin is a bad actor, but unlike Kim Jung Il or ISIS leaders he isn't bat-shit nuts, and would likely avoid a war with the US. I didn't hear a peep on the left when Obama let Iran get uranium recently, etc.

However, all the lefties are wild-eyed about Russia. Putin = Emmanuel Goldman. The lefties are having their 15 minutes of hate.

chickelit said...

My how time flies. 3

& 1/2 years ago, I recorded a parody of Inga's effect on the Althouse commentariat: link (should play by clicking on the play tab in upper right). I made a whole slew of chirbits (ca. 100) back then which was a troubled time for the Althouse blog. Each chirbit was tied someone's words in a comment thread, usually voiced as a celebrity. I should put together a hyperlinked guide to the whole catalog. I'm sure Inga would appreciate it.

damikesc said...

Who knows who is leaking all this garbage... What's up with the hysterical overreaction? You replorables need to learn to control your hormonal emotions. Sad.

If the leak is indicating that the US intel community is working against the President, they need to be replaced ASAP. We do not want, need, or desire the CIA running things.

chickelit said...

If the leak is indicating that the US intel community is working against the President, they need to be replaced ASAP. We do not want, need, or desire the CIA running things.

Lefties should agree to that, but they can't or won't.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Chuck: So that's the point, Fabi; you actually object to my linking to Snopes, when the point is to supply video of Trump doing that thing with his voice and his hands? Is Snopes' video somehow less credible than CNN video or WaPo video or YouTube video or Breitbart video?

No idiot we object to your stubbornly obtuse avoidance of the catholicsfortrump.com videos (links I and others have provided for you, lifelong republican) that show Trump doing exactly the same hand & silly voice gesture toward two other non-disabled people, but for exactly the same reason he did it at the reporter. The reason? Because each person had said or published remarks that Trump quoted favorably, followed by the person in question disavowing their own words just to disagree with Trump. He's calling them out for being pussies.

The whole mocks-the-disabled meme is FAKE NEWS. And you keep spreading it because you like to smear Trump with half-assed bullshit. You won't look at the evidence. You just hate Trump.

FAKE NEWS = great term that isn't going anywhere. It's what real lifelong Republicans have been calling the MSM for years. Now our party figurehead is on board and calling out the clowns with bylines. No way we're going to give up this term now that it's found widespread purchase AND assaults the monoculture! FTW

Howard said...

Yes, it's the entire US intel community, not just a few politically connected individuals. Y'all think like old women.

Kyzer SoSay said...

Well shit this was gonna be my next comment thread to read. It's been a long semi-exciting day, and I sometimes read these comment threads to help me get tired - and that is not an insult I promise. But I can't get past the first few dozen here. I mentioned it at the end of the post before this too, but the "lifelong Republican"/"Drago you shithead" comments are difficult to read. Particularly so because until y'all start going at it there's more interesting stuff being said from each. Then it turns into a shitstorm.

Could be wrong, but seems most of the folks here get that Chuck isn't a Trump fan and is basically hoping for the best, and Drago is a strong Trump supporter who had a good line of retort - for awhile. But just like the term "fake news", it's overused and tired now. Also seems that Chuck is finding some rays of hope already, and though it didn't seem like it for a long time, is open to the idea that Trump maybe might just possibly do a decent job, rather than his long-expected (and probably, for a time, spitefully hoped-for) vision of a yuuuuge disaster. That's cool with me. Meanwhile, trolls like Unknown (one of 'em), fools like sunsong and vicki, the more interesting of the usual suspects like ARM and Cook are still mostly gargling the Obama Kool-Aide and putting their faith in the aforementioned Fake News. Much more satisfying to read that than petty squabbles that quickly become semi-personal and mean.

Maybe I'm being some kind of buzzkill. But I come here to learn stuff and am usually too busy during my workday and on weekends to interact a whole lot. Maybe other night-owl lurkers and posters are the same way, I dunno. When it reaches critical mass over the same tired stuff the rest of what's being said gets lost. Or maybe that's one man's opinion, shared by nobody else.

grackle said...

... just think about what Trump has to do, to keep all of the following group happy; John McCain, Marco Rubio, Chuck Grassley, Rand Paul, Roy Blunt, Rob Portman and Pat Toomey … You better get an attitude adjustment about working with Senate Republicans.

I don’t believe Trump will have much trouble “working” with most Republicans.

Some, like McCain, will have to be written off. He’s a NeverTrumper who spread the Russian-Trump fake news story after he came into possession of it from apparently Jeb Bush, who originally employed the author of it to come up with opposition research about Trump during the primaries.

Bush never used the slander, probably because of the danger of backfire over such a ridiculous bunch of bullshit. But, as Chuck says, McCain doesn’t have to worry about reelection, so naturally the aging whore spreads wide for the Democrats.

No stunning news there; McCain has been bending over for the MSM and the Democrats most of his career. That’s why he was so popular with them until he ran for POTUS. Ever since, he’s been longing wistfully for that same status and believes now with this slander that he can be their favorite bitch once again. Sad!

Readers, below is a link to an interview with a bona fide Russian expert about the slime job McCain and the Democrats are attempting.

link

grackle said...


Kyzernick said... Well shit this was gonna be my next comment thread to read. It's been a long semi-exciting day, and I sometimes read these comment threads to help me get tired - and that is not an insult I promise. But … [virtue signaling, holier-than-thou crap and other irrelevant bullshit, etc., etc.] … Or maybe that's one man's opinion, shared by nobody else.

Fuck your “opinion.”

JAORE said...

"He will not have prosecuted or jailed "Hillary";"

Thought he pretty well laid that to rest. Of course if new information comes out ...

But, in any event, the new administration does not have to prosecute Hillary. Imagine instead they successfully prosecute Huma, Podesta, Weiner and the 5th Amendment Tech dude..... (among others) for possessing, failing to protect and disseminating the classified information all without clearances.

Does anyone think that such prosecutions would not forever tar the name of Hillary Clinton?

And I say that even though I'm aware that White Water was "nothing" yet sent several influential people linked to the Clinton's to prison. I think this one would stick.


Lloyd W. Robertson said...

There are a lot of people trying to establish a meme based on little or no evidence: media people, politicians, lobbyists. Sometimes they succeed. I think rather than get caught up in "the Internet makes things worse, it's a Wild West for liars," we can go back a bit to some major fake news stories, and try to understand them.
1. Hanna Rosin has brought up Kitty Genovese: she was attacked and killed in New York City, and the Times claimed, based on lazy reporting at best, that 38 people were aware of the attack and did nothing. The real story was probably two people, and the context made this understandable. The Times could present itself as revealing that street crime, supported by apathy, was worse than anyone suspected; they were nice liberals deploring all this; yet by their huge success in getting this story accepted into folklore, they almost certainly made all the relevant problems, including white flight, worse.
2. Who killed JFK? The main reason for raising endless doubts about this was that for liberals/progressives, it caused cognitive dissonance to think that one hero, JFK, was killed either by another hero, Castro, or by a freelance supporter of Castro.
3. There were no known Soviet spies in the U.S. during the Cold War; specifically, Alger Hiss and Julius Rosenberg were innocent. Justifiably pushing back against the notion that all progressives were at least soft on treason, they put a lot of efforts into supporting ridiculous falsehoods.
4. The staffs of large daycare centres have conspired to commit violent sexual acts on the children in their care; for some reason, clown suits are often used. Progressives joined with social conservatives in worrying about what was going on when children were left somewhere for the day; progressives, unlike conservatives, obviously wanted the best possible daycare, paid for by taxpayers. Individuals and families had their lives destroyed over this one.
5. Adults, especially women, will suddenly remember being sexually abused as children. Progressives wanted to raise consciousness: crimes of this type have probably always been under-reported.That is true. Recovered memory is probably almost never true--usually it just meant a therapist or counsellor could dig up a so-called memory he or she had buried in earlier discussions. Again lives and careers were destroyed.
6. Might as well add: liberals know, based on modern social science, how to eliminate poverty and crime. It is not by criminalizing the actions of people when it is too late--they have already had poor educations, no good role models, etc. Money should be spent on schools and income supports, on the one hand, and rehabilitation programs (even though this contradicts the "too late" piece) on the other. Unimpressive results are downplayed or denied. Mickey Kaus would probably mention workfare: it works, but liberals don't want to admit that it works. Of course progressives will say conservatives place too much faith in the benefits of having a huge population in prison.

Mick said...

Chuck said...
"It really should be no mystery, how Trump won the votes of however-many "Micks" there are. I'd go further and say that the "Micks" of America created candidate Trump".


Really, so why does a grown (single) man like John Podesta have sick child torture art in his home?
Why does he wax poetically about "Pizza" and "hotdogs" out of context and seemingly in code in his emails so many times?
How is it that the police sketch of the 2 men suspected of kidnapping Madeleine McCan look almost exactly like Podesta and his brother, who were also in Europe in the area at the time?
Why does Podesta not offer any outrage or denial at the accusations against him?
How does a Pizza shop owner become one of the 50 most influential people in DC?
What business does a Pizza shop owner have at the White House, and with POTUS?
How does a "pizza party" cost $65K at the WH?

Where is the discussion in the media about THE CONTENT of the emails that were supposedly "hacked", and which were never denied as to provenance or content, i.e the rigging against Bernie, selling of the office of SOS to foreign nations, Pizzagate, etc.?

Podesta has disappeared, and says not a word. WHY is that?

Mick said...

Static Ping said...
"Mick is simply someone playing a character, a (mostly) benign troll. Debating him can be entertaining but do not expect victory. The moment you responded was the moment he won".


You don't know enough to "debate" me.

Drago said...

Kyzernick: "Could be wrong, but seems most of the folks here get that Chuck isn't a Trump fan and is basically hoping for the best, and Drago is a strong Trump supporter who had a good line of retort - for awhile."

Egads.

Again, probably for about the 50th time, I was a Cruz supporter during the primaries.

Actually a Rubio supporter a couple years back until he went completely wobbly on immigration and joined McCain helping the dems.

So there you go.

Anonymous said...

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/trumps-new-cyber-security-advisor-runs-a-very-very-insecure-website/

"Yesterday, President-elect Donald Trump announced the appointment of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani as his cyber security advisor concerning the US private sector.

The news made headlines, mostly because Rudy Giuliani is the last person who someone would think to be qualified to handle "the cyber," and because nobody seemed to know what Giuliani's security firm actually does.

The infosec community didn't take the news lightly, hoping to see someone with more expertise in that position. It also didn't took long for cyber-security experts around the world to find flaws in the website of Giuliani's security firm."

Kyzer SoSay said...

LOL @ Grackle. Your weenie is far too small to fuck anything, including my opinion.

Mick said...

"Egads.

Again, probably for about the 50th time, I was a Cruz supporter during the primaries.

Actually a Rubio supporter a couple years back until he went completely wobbly on immigration and joined McCain helping the dems.

So there you go"


And neither Cruz nor Rubio were eligible natural born Citizens, so there you go.

Guildofcannonballs said...

Where do I go though?

Michael McNeil said...

You don't know enough to "debate" me.

Ann Althouse doesn't know enough—according to you.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 228 of 228   Newer› Newest»