President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

"Slathered" is undisputed? We all have a universal description of what that looks like?

The sentence is there as a cultural critique. Again: I'm fine with that. But the consequences of that dig is that people know you did it and a have pretty damn good hunch why you did.

This is true of journalists on both sides of the equation, and I have empathy for my former field. But I also know the field as I knew myself: A lot of journalists can be passive -aggressive. We like sticking a little dig in there, even in objective stories. We think it's cleverer than it is. Just like most journalists think they're way funnier than they are - they are not that funny, almost always - they also figure they can slip in a line and play the "who me?" game. It's fine. I get it. I did it, too. But I know it when I see it, and that's what it is.

 

There are more HCAs in cooked meat than rare meat.

 

You are actually trained to do this in law school. Write "facts" that can't be challenged as "facts," but also slyly pitch your side of the story.

 

The very definition of slather is to spread something liberally.

Hmmmm ...

 

Maybe it does. But those people don't generally read the NYT, unless they do so to hate-read it.

Again: I don't have a problem with it so much as I know what it is and what purpose it serves. It's not there for color. It's there as commentary on the man's diet.

 

Strange that no moralist here has issues with his Twitter being referred to as "Excaliber" instead of "an app on his phone that serves as a megaphone for his old man ramblings and conspiracy theories."

But how dare you say the man likes well done steak, which is obviously meant to cast him as rube!

The noble king is swinging his sword to slay the Saxons attempting to overthrow him ... in between bites of overcooked steak. What a clueless commoner!

 

What is the negative connotation to the word "slathered"?

There is none.

I don't have hard data on this, but I'm guessing uncultured pigs aren't the only people who use generous helpings of salad dressing.

My mom slathers everything with butter. Neither she nor I feels any shame. It is of little regard to us what some random, pretentious dickhead may or may not think.

 

Is it mentioning McDonalds that has people accusing the NYT of looking down its nose at Trump? If the sentence had just mentioned that he eats "two double cheeseburgers, two fried fish sandwiches, french fries and a chocolate shake" would it have better?

 

Pretend the Wall Street Journal wrote this and pretend that it was about President Elizabeth Warren.

 

I did not receive one. Cheers.

 

I'd have the same reaction as I had with NYT and Trump - "Damn, that one meal is more calories than I eat for the whole day! That can't be healthy."

 

True things are omitted from stories all the time. If some source had told the NYT that Trump's bowel movements stink up the bathroom, do you run it because it's a "true thing" or no?

Do you think it's a "true thing" that Trump never eats anything other than the meal described? I'm not even sure what the "tureens of gravy" is for. Off-screen potatoes?

I'm guessing the meal may be amalgam of various meals he has. To which, again, I would say: It's written just so.