Arizona Senators bashing Trump

[twenty02]

Pointing out the lasting damage the President is doing to democracy around the world with his relentless attacks on the free press.

First McCain:

This assault on journalism and free speech proceeds apace in places such as Russia, Turkey, China, Egypt, Venezuela and many others. Yet even more troubling is the growing number of attacks on press freedom in traditionally free and open societies, where censorship in the name of national security is becoming more common. Britain passed a surveillance law that experts warn chills free speech, and countries from France to Germany are looking to do the same. In Malta, a prominent journalist was brutally murdered in October after uncovering systemic government corruption. In Poland, an independent news outlet was fined (later rescinded) nearly half a million dollars for broadcasting images of an anti-government protest.

Unfortunately, the Trump administration’s attitude toward such behavior has been inconsistent at best and hypocritical at worst. While administration officials often condemn violence against reporters abroad, Trump continues his unrelenting attacks on the integrity of American journalists and news outlets. This has provided cover for repressive regimes to follow suit. The phrase “fake news” — granted legitimacy by an American president — is being used by autocrats to silence reporters, undermine political opponents, stave off media scrutiny and mislead citizens. CPJ documented 21 cases in 2017 in which journalists were jailed on “fake news” charges.​

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...3614530bd87_story.html?utm_term=.d725a8544754



And tomorrow Flake intends to give the first of a series of speeches outlining the impacts of this so-called Presidency (which is nothing more than a massive, grotesque vanity project), comparing Trump's methods to those of Stalin.

“2017 was a year which saw the truth — objective, empirical, evidence-based truth —more battered and abused than any other time in the history of our country, at the hands of the most powerful figure in our government,” Flake will say in his speech, according to excerpts provided by his office
​

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...enate-speech-slamming-trumps-attacks-on-media



Trump is nothing but an ugly form of ass cancer that is spreading throughout the body of democracies world-wide. It's eradication needs to be sooner rather than later.

 

[UncleMark]

Talk is cheap. Flake and McCain nearly always vote to promote Trump's agenda. If you find him so reprehensible, why are you helping him succeed?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Pointing out the lasting damage the President is doing to democracy around the world with his relentless attacks on the free press.

First McCain:

This assault on journalism and free speech proceeds apace in places such as Russia, Turkey, China, Egypt, Venezuela and many others. Yet even more troubling is the growing number of attacks on press freedom in traditionally free and open societies, where censorship in the name of national security is becoming more common. Britain passed a surveillance law that experts warn chills free speech, and countries from France to Germany are looking to do the same. In Malta, a prominent journalist was brutally murdered in October after uncovering systemic government corruption. In Poland, an independent news outlet was fined (later rescinded) nearly half a million dollars for broadcasting images of an anti-government protest.

Unfortunately, the Trump administration’s attitude toward such behavior has been inconsistent at best and hypocritical at worst. While administration officials often condemn violence against reporters abroad, Trump continues his unrelenting attacks on the integrity of American journalists and news outlets. This has provided cover for repressive regimes to follow suit. The phrase “fake news” — granted legitimacy by an American president — is being used by autocrats to silence reporters, undermine political opponents, stave off media scrutiny and mislead citizens. CPJ documented 21 cases in 2017 in which journalists were jailed on “fake news” charges.​

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...3614530bd87_story.html?utm_term=.d725a8544754



And tomorrow Flake intends to give the first of a series of speeches outlining the impacts of this so-called Presidency (which is nothing more than a massive, grotesque vanity project), comparing Trump's methods to those of Stalin.

“2017 was a year which saw the truth — objective, empirical, evidence-based truth —more battered and abused than any other time in the history of our country, at the hands of the most powerful figure in our government,” Flake will say in his speech, according to excerpts provided by his office
​

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...enate-speech-slamming-trumps-attacks-on-media



Trump is nothing but an ugly form of ass cancer that is spreading throughout the body of democracies world-wide. It's eradication needs to be sooner rather than later.

The notion that criticizing the press, even by POTUS, would jeopardize the first amendment easily ranks in the top 5 of dumbass policy arguments of the 21st century.

The first amendment protects freedom of expression. The first amendment was never intended to shield the expression from criticism. As far as I am concerned, politicians in general are too timid with press criticism by taking too seriously the notion one does not fight with those who buy printer's ink by the trainload.

Serious criticism of the press is way overdue. While I wouldn't use some of the words Trump uses, such as "enemy of the people," criticizing them gives me no heartburn whatsoever.

Flake and McCain get one thing absolutely correct. A free and independent press is vital to our, or any, democracy. Along with this comes serious responsibilities. The press doesn't fulfill its responsibility with crappy and shoddy journalism, even though the press has a constitutional right to deliver shoddy and crappy journalism. Part of the basis of a free press is to stimulate public discussion and debate. The first amendment obviously protects, and I'd argue encourages, discussion and debate, including debate about the quality of the free press. Absent press accountability does not help the press serve its purpose. If the press really believes that POTUS criticism is tantamount to restricting press freedom, then I suggest that the press has lost the ability to speak truth to power. Instead it has become whinny sniveling snowflakes. In short, POTUS press criticism instead of being a threat to the first amendment actually helps strengthen the first amendment.

That is not to say there are not threats to our first amendment out there. Clinton proposed an amendment to weaken it. Trump has proposed changing defamation laws which I think would weaken it. Free expression has been limited in recent years in Europe and Canada. There are calls, mostly in the academic arena, to limit it here. We need to be aware of all of this and resist by every means possible.

 

[UncleMark]

That is not to say there are not threats to our first amendment out there. Clinton proposed an amendment to weaken it.

I wish you'd knock it off with that idiotic Republican talking point. Clinton proposed an amendment to fix the absurdity that is Citizens United. That is no more an attempt to weaken the 1st amendment than are proposed amendments to overturn Roe are to the 14th.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I wish you'd knock it off with that idiotic Republican talking point. Clinton proposed an amendment to fix the absurdity that is Citizens United. That is no more an attempt to weaken the 1st amendment than are proposed amendments to overturn Roe are to the 14th.

No I won’t knock it off. Clinton proposed to weaken the first amendment by removing certain kinds of expression from protection.

I have never considered your abortion and 14th point. Bringing that up seems to me to be a vacuous point. But if you care to elaborate I’ll consider your point even though it has nothing to do with this thread.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

The notion that criticizing the press, even by POTUS, would jeopardize the first amendment easily ranks in the top 5 of dumbass policy arguments of the 21st century.

The first amendment protects freedom of expression. The first amendment was never intended to shield the expression from criticism. As far as I am concerned, politicians in general are too timid with press criticism by taking too seriously the notion one does not fight with those who buy printer's ink by the trainload.

Serious criticism of the press is way overdue. While I wouldn't use some of the words Trump uses, such as "enemy of the people," criticizing them gives me no heartburn whatsoever.

Flake and McCain get one thing absolutely correct. A free and independent press is vital to our, or any, democracy. Along with this comes serious responsibilities. The press doesn't fulfill its responsibility with crappy and shoddy journalism, even though the press has a constitutional right to deliver shoddy and crappy journalism. Part of the basis of a free press is to stimulate public discussion and debate. The first amendment obviously protects, and I'd argue encourages, discussion and debate, including debate about the quality of the free press. Absent press accountability does not help the press serve its purpose. If the press really believes that POTUS criticism is tantamount to restricting press freedom, then I suggest that the press has lost the ability to speak truth to power. Instead it has become whinny sniveling snowflakes. In short, POTUS press criticism instead of being a threat to the first amendment actually helps strengthen the first amendment.

That is not to say there are not threats to our first amendment out there. Clinton proposed an amendment to weaken it. Trump has proposed changing defamation laws which I think would weaken it. Free expression has been limited in recent years in Europe and Canada. There are calls, mostly in the academic arena, to limit it here. We need to be aware of all of this and resist by every means possible.

LOL! You were one of the guys complaining about how Obama's criticism of the press was a threat to democracy! GTFO of here with this crap.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

LOL! You were one of the guys complaining about how Obama's criticism of the press was a threat to democracy! GTFO of here with this crap.

Does this rant mean you agree with me, or are just mouthing off about me once again?

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Does this rant mean you agree with me, or are just mouthing off about me once again?

I think you're a flaming hypocrite. You take positions based almost entirely on which politicians support those positions, and then do a 180 when the politician changes.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I think you're a flaming hypocrite. You take positions based almost entirely on which politicians support those positions, and then do a 180 when the politician changes.

If you have an argument about my point, or in defense of Flake and McCain, say so. Otherwise you are just bloviating.

 

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

I find Flake to be pretty transparent. Many of his criticisms are valid, but I have a hard time believing all this hoopla isn't just him setting himself up to try and primary Trump.

Comparing Trump's jabs at the media to Stalin is essentially the equivalent of playing the Hitler card. It's cheap and excessive.

 

[T.M.P.]

I think you're a flaming hypocrite. You take positions based almost entirely on which politicians support those positions, and then do a 180 when the politician changes.

He's a trained parrot.

 

[twenty02]

If you have an argument about my point, or in defense of Flake and McCain, say so. Otherwise you are just bloviating.

LOL.

You are the most pure lawyer. That's a compliment.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Talk is cheap. Flake and McCain nearly always vote to promote Trump's agenda. If you find him so reprehensible, why are you helping him succeed?

They have been voting for the things they support and against those they don’t. More Republicans and Democrats should do that rather than thinking of it as “supporting the agenda of the President,” whomever the President is. Generally lock step voting on both sides is a very serious problem that has led to our elected representatives often voting against their true beliefs and those of their constituents.

 

[iuwclurker1]

They have been voting for the things they support and against those they don’t. More Republicans and Democrats should do that rather than thinking of it as “supporting the agenda of the President,” whomever the President is. Generally lock step voting on both sides is a very serious problem that has led to our elected representatives often voting against their true beliefs and those of their constituents.

No, what politicians should do is vote for laws that forward their state and the country, not the special interests they're beholden to. "Support" doesn't distinguish those two choices.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

No, what politicians should do is vote for laws that forward their state and the country, not the special interests they're beholden to. "Support" doesn't distinguish those two choices.

Well, of course. I believe most people in Congress want to do that. I also think the people on both sides sometimes vote otherwise purely due to politics.