The press and the new administration

Having dealt with local and national media a number of times in the last 10 years I can assure you of one thing......they will NEVER consider themselves accountable to anyone.  There is no honor in journalism anymore....it's all about clicks.

Trump's attack on the media is a very calculated move to uneducate his followers. As is his choice to nominate Betsy De Vos, an obvious opponent of the concept of public education.

I agree that the press has it's issues, but facts are facts and "alternative facts" are not, and picking and choosing your news sources to be more closely aligned with your political views doesn't change the facts.

I'm no far left liberal, I voted for GW Bush twice, and I'd vote for him again - but I don't believe our president is leading us anywhere good. I see in him a number of terrifying traits that do not bode well for our freedoms. The press opened itself to criticism during the election, and he has taken that and run with it because he knows that if he can manipulate his followers into dismissing truth, he can manipulate them into anything. The less educated the people, the further he can get with his agenda.

Prior to being hung by the Nazis, Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote the following from jail. I find it depressingly apropos to the rise of our current leader:

"Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than evil is. Against evil, one can protest; it can be exposed and, if necessary, stopped with force. Evil always carries the seed of its own self-destruction, because it at least leaves people with a feeling of uneasiness. But against stupidity, we are defenseless. Neither with protest nor with force can we do anything here; reasons have no effect. Facts that contradict one’s own prejudice need only to be disbelieved – in such cases stupid people even become critical, and when facts are unavoidable, they can simply be swept aside as meaningless isolated cases. Stupid people, in contrast to evil ones, are satisfied with themselves. Indeed, they become dangerous in that they may easily be stimulated to go on the attack. Therefore, more care must be taken in regard to stupidity than to evil…"

I've been on BT a long time, and used to love the political discussions here - I could count on finding educated posts addressing both sides of every issue, and I learned a lot from the people on this site, but even here the discussion has atrophied because it's no fun to discuss anything with folks who see a blue sky and argue that it is indeed yellow instead, and that the press just got it wrong. This forum has become an echo chamber for a few who believe the same. It's been interesting to see the dissenting posters drop off slowly, one by one to our current state - 3-4 of you talking about how great Trump is.

See, I don't think Trump is great.  In fact, I'm open to the idea that he may be dangerous.....although I'm not ready to start espousing what I think he may be trying to do to the collective intelligence of "the masses".

I'm simply happy that the name calling, belittling, liberals got their arses handed to them.  They've earned it and it will be good for the country in the long run.

Seriously Stacers......before the election the 3 or 4 posters you are talking about WERE the dissenters.  Funny how that works.

This is where those of us who find Trump's words and actions disturbing choose to disagree. I'm worried for my children. Time will tell.

If any other Republican who ran were in the white house right now, I would not be feeling that way. It's not a partisan thing, or a policy thing. It's the character of the man. And this isn't something the press has said or done to make him look bad, despite his attempts to make it seem so - these are his own words, his own actions that have convinced me.

The month after the election, I set about my days determined to give him a chance. I have watched him nominate unqualified cabinet members, continue to tweet about inane issues, undermine our country's intelligence, put forth a cabinet who refuse to submit to ethics rules, and give a rambling speech his second day in office more focused on crowd sizes than on the challenging issues we are facing as a country. I'm not convinced.

He keeps showing us who he is, and so many people keep ignoring it. 

Eh - let it play out.  It's mostly politics.  Every cabinet has had members who didn't fit what most of us thought were proper qualifications....nothing new there.  I can tell you that I'm not ignoring it, but I don't see where he has done anything to hurt this country.  And honestly, after the Comey debacle over Hillary's emails, Russian intel (that nobody can prove exists), and the general commentary coming out of those offices......our intelligence community doesn't need any help from President Trump to look stupid.

This country is a mess right now......but NONE OF THAT IS TRUMP'S FAULT. How could it be?  he has been in charge of NOTHING.  That's where I fall off the page you are on.  Let's see what happens.  You and I may yet end up on the same page.....one way or another.

Look, the man was trying to win an election against all odds.  He found the rhetoric to get it done. Like it or not......I doubt he could have pulled it off any other way....that's just about unarguable.

All I need to do is look at his kids to know he's at least got plenty of redeeming qualities....that's an impressive bunch.  All of this BS about his character and business dealings is just that.....a giant bunch of BS by people who wouldn't have a clue what it takes to manage a multi-billion dollar company or be in the constant spotlight like he has been.  So let's just tear him down because we didn't get our way, huh?  No....that's an even BIGGER pile of bullchit.  He's the President of the United States.  Let the man do his damn job without all this whiny crap.

As for your patience.....dude....I had 8 years...gimme a break.

And that's a good point too...he certainly needs to learn that.  But let's not forget he's not a politician....this IS his first rodeo.  Do you know how long it takes us to train Police Officers that they have to learn to stand and be the target of whatever someone in the public wants to spew?  Some of them never get it....some get it eventually.....and some just inherently understand it.  President Trump does not look like he falls into that last category.....let's hope he doesn't end up falling into the first.

Yeah.....here's to hoping he has some keenly developed skills (negotiating, etc).......but it's pretty damn obvious they aren't political ones. LMAO 

I wake up every day and at some point when I'm having my coffee I have this thought...."hmmmmm, let's look and see what lunatic boy had to say last night".

I think that's a big reason for his record viewing attendance from TV and live streams.

"We're just trying to get a handle on everything and make sure what goes out reflects the priorities of the new administration," - Doug Erickson, communications director for Trump's transition team at the EPA.

If this doesn't reek of controlling the information we have at our fingertips, I'm not sure what does.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/rundown/trump-issues-epa-media-blackout-suspends-agencys-grants

Since when does the executive branch of our government have 100% say over every government agency communication? First the national parks can't tweet about climate change. Now the EPA can't release fact sheets and press releases until someone decides whether or not they agree with the new administration. Do our scientists get fired when their actual scientific research doesn't agree with Donald Trump's unscientific opinion? I find it disturbing that the new administration feels that it knows more about science than actual scientists who have been researching and administering environmental protections. 

Another day, another attack on information, science, and facts.

Are any of you Trump supporters at least a little bit uncomfortable with any of this?

Stacers - my wife is employed by the Social Security Administration as a regional manager.  She says they have NEVER been allowed to talk to the press regarding their agency. (BTW, making disparaging comments toward the president can be grounds for dismissal too.....ALWAYS BEEN IN PLACE)  She can't remember if this was from President Obama's administration or prior to his since it's been in place so long.  Either way, it was in place looooong before President Trump brought it up, at least for her department.  I've been a cop for 30 years.....  our department policy prohibits us from speaking to the press without consent of the city I work for.  This is pretty standard govt. stuff.

Once again this is a non-issue that has been done FOR YEARS and through many administrations......but now it's news out of President Trump's administration. This is ridiculous.

I'm all for calling a spade a spade......right now, unfortunately, the spade is the media......and they've got plenty of people soaking it up. Do you really think President Trump, under constant scrutiny, would do something that was as far out in left field as the news media wants people to believe?  That's craziness.

Like I said, you and I may end up on the same page yet.......but not over this crap the media is throwing out the first few days because, as far as i can tell, it's ALL about hyping up the masses with bullcrap and disparaging our President.

Everything you just described is exactly what the Obama administration was doing with the various scientific groups.  Any scientist who was not in lock step with the political agenda was fired and shamed.  I'm genuinely looking forward to real science getting back into these agencies that are supposed to be scientific. 

Here's an article you've never heard about (cough corrupt media) from last month: http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/obama-fires-scientist-promote-climate-change/

There is no such thing as denial in science, there is only hypothesis, observation, and experimentation.  That's it. 

As for the faux outrage of the administration giving them a gag order.  They simply looked up the rules of the departments and requested that they follow the existing rules about communications that were already in place before they got there.  I know, absolutely scandalous. 

I'm mostly staying out of this because I've learned that certain opinions aren't going to change.  But on this topic -- don't pretend to be pro-"pure"-science as a debating tactic.

1) Are you really going disparage *every* climate scientist out there as being dishonest and influenced by the Obama administration?  Really?  That's possibly the biggest whopper of a conspiracy theory I've yet heard.

2) The Obama administration agreeing with general scientific consensus doesn't mean it *determined* it.

3) Is the administration also telling Chinese scientists to confirm their viewpoint?  Or other nations that don't get along with us?  Because I don't think that would work so well.  And yet, the consensus is worldwide.

4) What about scientific studies run and paid for by Big Oil, with no federal dollars, that produced similar outcomes?  Yes they exist.

I'd suggest setting aside *all* news sources for a few minutes, to avoid confimation bias, and instead do some real digging in arXiv or some other repository for actual scientific publications.  The best way to read data is to go to the source.

I don't disparage every climate scientist at all, in fact I commend the ones who are able to work in such a dogmatic science.  The problem is that the politics has corrupted the institutions so badly that scientists who do anything other than confirm what the politicians want are promptly expelled from the scientific community. 

I know you believe in the scientific process and I do as well.  Where we differ is you believe climate science is without compromise and I believe it has been compromised.  If it's truly a science and not a religion then they should welcome those from the scientific community who disagree with the amount of forcing CO2 provides.  You can't hide behind the consensus word because I and virtually every other climate skeptic is part of that consensus which is that the earth is warming and CO2 contributes to that warming.  

The news article I linked above was an example of the problem.  Somebody said something that didn't jive with the political agenda, and they were terminated.  That is not science no matter how much you try to convince me otherwise. 

Your statement is just so filled with propaganda and misinformation that I don't even know where to start.... If this is your view of how scientific research works in our country then we shouldn't even bother having this discussion.  I'm not trying to say this as a dig, I'm just so exasperated with this line of thinking that I don't know what else to say. 

Climate scientists aren't under political pressure to do anything.  If you say they are making things up to get money then why wouldn't they flip their opinions every time a republican is in office?  If they are doing this than what about every other scientific field?  It really doesn't add up my friend.

And then, every time the money that the oil lobby is using to put pressure on politicians and convince them to say things like "climate change isn't real," or "the science is still out on this" you brush it aside as unimportant.

So, essentially, the answer to my question is NO, none of this bothers you. Could Trump do anything that would bother you at this point? Not being sarcastic - that's a genuine question...

This isn't about climate change, it's about signing away grants to the EPA And USDA with the swipe of a pen and issuing a gag order on those and other government institutions. It's over the top, and disturbing. No other administration has ever started their term by issuing a gag order to the EPA, USDA, and Interior - it's unheard of.

I have a degree in Chemical Engineering and Environmental Science, so I'm well aware of how the scientific method works, but thanks.

I spent my engineering career working at ExxonMobil and designing pollution controls for Syncrude up in Canada. All of the engineers I worked with at Exxon believed that global warming was occurring, and you'd be hard pressed to argue that scientists at Exxon of all places are politically leftist. The company spent a lot of time trying to argue how it should be addressed, but never did I see a denial that it existed. But I'm not going to argue climate change with you, because I don't think it's the key issue here.

I spent a lot of time working in the oil sands of Alberta, where I saw what a less regulatory oil industry looks like, and it's really not pretty. It looks like the surface of the moon up there for miles and miles, and a lot of what goes on up there would never fly at the refineries in the United States. It's not a nice place, and the regulations we have in place in the USA make sure that we don't end up there. The EPA is not all about climate change, and shutting down grants for research shouldn't happen overnight.

Beyond that, it's just plain wrong to insist that the USDA and Dept of the Interior not communicate with the public. That is what those organizations are for, for cripes sake.