(02-18-2019, 11:36 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ] (02-17-2019, 06:39 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Coulter was known for a bit more scholarship and sense of history than a lot of her peers. I'm glad she's jumping off the wagon. Could have done so a lot sooner. I hope she considers her own role in what has gone wrong and writes a book about that, or at least offers some interviews.
If you've never heard Bill O'Reilly discuss American history, particularly back when he used to be a frequent guest on NPR, you're missing out.
Yes, O'Rielly is also a scholar and a student of history.
He would write books that avoided hot political topics of the day. And they are good books.
Then he would go on his show and discuss the hot topics of the day but with events that was more angry than informed or scholarly.
Unfortunately he's lost his reputation in this sexual harassment scandal. He deserves to have lost his show, but I think the books can stand on their own.
Coulter's books were always jumping right on top of the hot political issue of the day, but trying to add some historical context to it.
In any case, both of them confuse me because they seem too smart to have fallen for Trumpism.
Did O'Reilly endorse Trump during the primaries? Coulter did. She was too smart for that.
(02-18-2019, 01:04 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 11:36 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]If you've never heard Bill O'Reilly discuss American history, particularly back when he used to be a frequent guest on NPR, you're missing out.
Yes, O'Rielly is also a scholar and a student of history.
He would write books that avoided hot political topics of the day. And they are good books.
Then he would go on his show and discuss the hot topics of the day but with events that was more angry than informed or scholarly.
Unfortunately he's lost his reputation in this sexual harassment scandal. He deserves to have lost his show, but I think the books can stand on their own.
Coulter's books were always jumping right on top of the hot political issue of the day, but trying to add some historical context to it.
In any case, both of them confuse me because they seem too smart to have fallen for Trumpism.
Did O'Reilly endorse Trump during the primaries? Coulter did. She was too smart for that.
Bill O'Reilly a scholar? Really? Why does he need a co-author?
Ann Coulter used to be somewhat interesting. Who doesn't like to see the high and mighty get poked in the eye once in a while? But now she's become a one-trick pony.
Ann has always known which way the wind is blowing - among a certain segment of the conservative movement. She figured she could make the most money catering to the racist, nativist segment of that community. She's become boring. Every column, every book seems to say the same thing. Hey, perhaps she actually believes some of what she writes.
It is cool to see Trump attacked from the right. I guess Ann knows a sinking ship when she sees one.
(02-18-2019, 01:46 PM)Adam2012 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 01:04 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, O'Rielly is also a scholar and a student of history.
He would write books that avoided hot political topics of the day. And they are good books.
Then he would go on his show and discuss the hot topics of the day but with events that was more angry than informed or scholarly.
Unfortunately he's lost his reputation in this sexual harassment scandal. He deserves to have lost his show, but I think the books can stand on their own.
Coulter's books were always jumping right on top of the hot political issue of the day, but trying to add some historical context to it.
In any case, both of them confuse me because they seem too smart to have fallen for Trumpism.
Did O'Reilly endorse Trump during the primaries? Coulter did. She was too smart for that.
Bill O'Reilly a scholar? Really? Why does he need a co-author?
Ann Coulter used to be somewhat interesting. Who doesn't like to see the high and mighty get poked in the eye once in a while? But now she's become a one-trick pony.
Ann has always known which way the wind is blowing - among a certain segment of the conservative movement. She figured she could make the most money catering to the racist, nativist segment of that community. She's become boring. Every column, every book seems to say the same thing. Hey, perhaps she actually believes some of what she writes.
It is cool to see Trump attacked from the right. I guess Ann knows a sinking ship when she sees one.
Ah. I forgot about the co-author. Good point.
(02-18-2019, 01:46 PM)Adam2012 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 01:04 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, O'Rielly is also a scholar and a student of history.
He would write books that avoided hot political topics of the day. And they are good books.
Then he would go on his show and discuss the hot topics of the day but with events that was more angry than informed or scholarly.
Unfortunately he's lost his reputation in this sexual harassment scandal. He deserves to have lost his show, but I think the books can stand on their own.
Coulter's books were always jumping right on top of the hot political issue of the day, but trying to add some historical context to it.
In any case, both of them confuse me because they seem too smart to have fallen for Trumpism.
Did O'Reilly endorse Trump during the primaries? Coulter did. She was too smart for that.
Bill O'Reilly a scholar? Really? Why does he need a co-author?
Because at the time he had a daily TV show, radio appearances and in-person appearances to attend to on top of writing a book?
If you can track down one of his old NPR interviews, listen to it. I don't care for O'Reilly as a person and don't care for the character he played on Fox News (he was as sincere as Colbert), but his knowledge and understanding of American history is remarkable.
(02-18-2019, 03:05 PM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 01:04 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, O'Rielly is also a scholar and a student of history.
He would write books that avoided hot political topics of the day. And they are good books.
Then he would go on his show and discuss the hot topics of the day but with events that was more angry than informed or scholarly.
Unfortunately he's lost his reputation in this sexual harassment scandal. He deserves to have lost his show, but I think the books can stand on their own.
Coulter's books were always jumping right on top of the hot political issue of the day, but trying to add some historical context to it.
In any case, both of them confuse me because they seem too smart to have fallen for Trumpism.
Did O'Reilly endorse Trump during the primaries? Coulter did. She was too smart for that.
Define TRUMPISM
As simple as possible, the belief that if we just give the loud business man enough power, all of our problems will be solved. That all Trump has to do is name the problem, then work on it, and it's solved. No need to examine root causes. No need to compare possible courses of action. No need to consider unintended consequences. Just listen to the loud business man and do what he says. That's Trumpism. Trump has never espoused any other belief.
(02-18-2019, 04:19 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 01:46 PM)Adam2012 Wrote: [ -> ]Bill O'Reilly a scholar? Really? Why does he need a co-author?
Because at the time he had a daily TV show, radio appearances and in-person appearances to attend to on top of writing a book?
If you can track down one of his old NPR interviews, listen to it. I don't care for O'Reilly as a person and don't care for the character he played on Fox News (he was as sincere as Colbert), but his knowledge and understanding of American history is remarkable.
I'll try to find some. I just assumed he was repeating whatever his ghostwriter had written. Perhaps I'm wrong. If so I wish he'd tried that role as historian rather than the bloviator he was on tv.
I've often thought that Donald's Bloviator in Chief act was modeled on O'Reilly.
(02-18-2019, 07:51 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 03:05 PM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ]Define TRUMPISM
As simple as possible, the belief that if we just give the loud business man enough power, all of our problems will be solved. That all Trump has to do is name the problem, then work on it, and it's solved. No need to examine root causes. No need to compare possible courses of action. No need to consider unintended consequences. Just listen to the loud business man and do what he says. That's Trumpism. Trump has never espoused any other belief.
You really don't pay attention do u? Oh well. I understand. Most people can't get beyond stylistic or personal differences to actually evaluate the positions of those they disagree with. Don't feel bad.
You Trumpsters are such low brow morons. You should be willing to compromise your principles to get along with the left like all your Establishment and NeverTrumper betters.
(02-18-2019, 07:51 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 03:05 PM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ]Define TRUMPISM
As simple as possible, the belief that if we just give the loud business man enough power, all of our problems will be solved. That all Trump has to do is name the problem, then work on it, and it's solved. No need to examine root causes. No need to compare possible courses of action. No need to consider unintended consequences. Just listen to the loud business man and do what he says. That's Trumpism. Trump has never espoused any other belief.
I don't think a single person on this board fits into what you've just described.
(02-18-2019, 07:51 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 03:05 PM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ]Define TRUMPISM
As simple as possible, the belief that if we just give the loud business man enough power, all of our problems will be solved. That all Trump has to do is name the problem, then work on it, and it's solved. No need to examine root causes. No need to compare possible courses of action. No need to consider unintended consequences. Just listen to the loud business man and do what he says. That's Trumpism. Trump has never espoused any other belief.
Ironically, the "loud business man" is listening to the border patrol agents at ground zero and is now being held up by states that aren't even on the border. What were your thoughts about the situation when you visited the border Mike? Very curious to hear.
What do you mean by examine root causes? Should the US spend trillions rebuilding these countries so they don't migrate here?
(02-19-2019, 01:04 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 07:51 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]As simple as possible, the belief that if we just give the loud business man enough power, all of our problems will be solved. That all Trump has to do is name the problem, then work on it, and it's solved. No need to examine root causes. No need to compare possible courses of action. No need to consider unintended consequences. Just listen to the loud business man and do what he says. That's Trumpism. Trump has never espoused any other belief.
I don't think a single person on this board fits into what you've just described.
Maybe not.
The main question is if you supported him in the primary or not. If you did, you're almost certainly a Trumpist. If you did not, you almost certainly are not. I didn't browse this board during the 2016 primaries
(02-19-2019, 09:03 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 07:51 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]As simple as possible, the belief that if we just give the loud business man enough power, all of our problems will be solved. That all Trump has to do is name the problem, then work on it, and it's solved. No need to examine root causes. No need to compare possible courses of action. No need to consider unintended consequences. Just listen to the loud business man and do what he says. That's Trumpism. Trump has never espoused any other belief.
Ironically, the "loud business man" is listening to the border patrol agents at ground zero and is now being held up by states that aren't even on the border. What were your thoughts about the situation when you visited the border Mike? Very curious to hear.
What do you mean by examine root causes? Should the US spend trillions rebuilding these countries so they don't migrate here?
Donald listens to border patrol agents but doesn't listen to his intelligence chiefs?
Who you kidding? Donald only listens to Vladimir Putin and Sean Hannity. Oh - and his gut.
(02-19-2019, 09:57 AM)Adam2012 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-19-2019, 09:03 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Ironically, the "loud business man" is listening to the border patrol agents at ground zero and is now being held up by states that aren't even on the border. What were your thoughts about the situation when you visited the border Mike? Very curious to hear.
What do you mean by examine root causes? Should the US spend trillions rebuilding these countries so they don't migrate here?
Donald listens to border patrol agents but doesn't listen to his intelligence chiefs?
Who you kidding? Donald only listens to Vladimir Putin and Sean Hannity. Oh - and his gut.
He used to listen to Ann Coulter too, right? Any particular reason you left that name out this time?
You should just stop talking. It is embarassing.
(02-19-2019, 09:59 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-19-2019, 09:57 AM)Adam2012 Wrote: [ -> ]Donald listens to border patrol agents but doesn't listen to his intelligence chiefs?
Who you kidding? Donald only listens to Vladimir Putin and Sean Hannity. Oh - and his gut.
He used to listen to Ann Coulter too, right? Any particular reason you left that name out this time?
You should just stop talking. It is embarassing.
Ann senses that Donald is a loser and doesn't want to be associated with a loser. How hard is that to understand? Duh.
Please, don't stop talking. It's fun to see the lengths you'll go to defend Agent Orange.
(02-19-2019, 09:03 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 07:51 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]As simple as possible, the belief that if we just give the loud business man enough power, all of our problems will be solved. That all Trump has to do is name the problem, then work on it, and it's solved. No need to examine root causes. No need to compare possible courses of action. No need to consider unintended consequences. Just listen to the loud business man and do what he says. That's Trumpism. Trump has never espoused any other belief.
Ironically, the "loud business man" is listening to the border patrol agents at ground zero and is now being held up by states that aren't even on the border. What were your thoughts about the situation when you visited the border Mike? Very curious to hear.
What do you mean by examine root causes? Should the US spend trillions rebuilding these countries so they don't migrate here?
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
(02-19-2019, 10:27 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (02-19-2019, 09:03 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Ironically, the "loud business man" is listening to the border patrol agents at ground zero and is now being held up by states that aren't even on the border. What were your thoughts about the situation when you visited the border Mike? Very curious to hear.
What do you mean by examine root causes? Should the US spend trillions rebuilding these countries so they don't migrate here?
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
I don't know what that means.