President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Could you try a more direct approach, please? Remember, I'm stupid.

 

Bet you’d never say that to my face!

 

That I'm stupid?

 

Badger. Have you ever been in a Turkish prison?

 

So in your article, would you focus on OJ the running back or OJ the actor?
Does his "single incident" continue to become less relevant as he ages?

 

Only in the feminine.

 

Comcast hints at plan for paid fast lanes after net neutrality repeal

 

I never realized paying somebody to pretend they were raped in an attempt to make actual victims of sexual assault look like liars was a conservative action.

 

It's now the party of Trump. And as long as that's the case, it will ALWAYS be party over principles.

The O'Keefe thing is beyond disgusting. Paired with Trump's performance's it's been a puke-inducing day.

But hey, billionaires might finally get that tax break!

 

Well, I'd start by saying that on the sliding scale of disappointing behaviour in our fellow man, there's a considerable gap between flawed TV report and murder, but your mileage may vary.

This is what the linked story says about the Rather incident:

"The basic premise of the report was true—Bush had failed to meet his obligations to the National Guard and gotten away with it—but the authenticity of the documents could not be verified. A CBS-commissioned independent review panel made no “definitive conclusion” about whether they were actually “fake.” Even so, four of Rather’s co-workers were let go, and Rather got everything but."

The story gives the incident more airtime—it's referenced in the story's second graf—so it doesn't skate around it, and it shouldn't. But the story does exhibit it differently than I remember it. For instance, there were on-camera interviews, of which I remember none. All I remember is the document. That's an incomplete recollection now made more complete.

Setting aside that helpful revisiting, the story is incredibly illuminating about Rather and why he is who he is, which is both interesting and, today, given his resurgence, useful to explore. Had it just been a piece on the incident in isolation, which seems to be what you want, none of that nuance and context would be there. The story is better for its being there.

Am I saying that you don't lead the Charles Manson obits with the murders? Of course not. I'm saying that "Helter Skelter," the book, was so much more revealing than a story that just reads "This hippie dude killed a bunch of people" might be. Or, to use your reference, the OJ 30-for-30 was so good, so laudatory, because of its completeness: It explored OJ the football player, the actor, and the murderer. It looked at him in full.

I would suggest that's the way we should try to look at most people.

 

It’s so very evangelical. Christ himself would come down from the cross to thank his conservative worshippers for their actions.