FAKE NEWS EXPOSED: A Service of PoliticalChat.com

[Chicks]

Originally Posted by whell

They believe in freedom of the press.

Nonsense.

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by whell

They believe in freedom of the press. They also believe in protecting kids, and there will be plenty of kids in attendance. They also likely believe that the press is more interested in advancing narratives rather than simply reporting the news, and they'd probably be right.

The event is not open to the public - tickets must be purchased to attend - so its not required that that the press be given unfettered access.

How is restricting access to the press believing freedom of the press? Sounds like snake oil.

Protecting kids from whom? So press is the evil, not the flame throwers on stage like Ron and JD who are the ones speaking to the kids? For that matter, shouldn't they be speaking to adults rather than kids if they are campaigning? For instance, how do you explain flat tax to a kid?

Besides, someone better tell the kids DeSantis is a cheapskate. His tax relief was a paltry $1.2Billion whereas CA gov. Newsom gave $9Billion+ back as tax refunds.

[donquixote99]

Whell, you've gone full fascist.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

They believe in freedom of the press.

You mean the thing Trumpkins call "fake news" and "the enemy of the people?"

They also believe in protecting kids, and there will be plenty of kids in attendance.

It's a feckin' wingnut rally (sponsored by Turning Point USA, the modern day equivalent of the Hitler Youth), but kids need protection from the local press (and not the fascists in attendance)?

The event is not open to the public - tickets must be purchased to attend - so its not required that that the press be given unfettered access.

It's a political rally featuring a (likely) presidential candidate and a Senate candidate and attendance is free (not purchased) and the press is welcome. The issue is the restrictions they intend to put upon the press including review of video and restriction upon its use and prohibition of press at any venue area, panel or event not approved in advance by Turning Point. Restricting access in such a manner and prohibiting the use of reporters' own videos is not "press freedom."

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Whell, you've gone full fascist.

Why? For suggesting that the press doesn't have a right to unfettered access to a private event?

Does that mean that the Biden crowd has gone full fascist as well for barring journalists access?

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/22/polit...ies/index.html

https://nypost.com/2022/06/16/wh-den...-biden-events/

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021...f-biden-access

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5...round-ukraine/

https://kesq.com/money/2021/03/22/re...mexico-border/

There's lots more, but I'll save the bandwidth for someone else.

The point is, that the current administration - and prior administrations - in many circumstances and situations pick and choose where they allow the press access. And here were talking about the press having access to government officials or the military working in their professional capacities at places or events that are under the control of those government officials. Nothing new about any of this.

Compare that to an organization of students who happen to be conservative - a population that the MSM generally hates anyway - having a private event, and the presumption in this thread is that the media MUST be granted access. Or, if they are granted access, and such access is restricted, that's just so outside the norm as to be considered an affront to freedom of the press? And the government officials attending are there on their personal time and not strictly acting in their professional capacities.

And if the articles linked above signify anything, it's that controlling press access by government officials is not "highly unusual" as the idiot WaPo journalist suggests in his slanted article.

Do you guys actually think things through before you post?

Oh, and about the kids. Yes, if I'm a parent, I don't want the press to have unfettered access to my kids if I'm not present. That goes double for the press like the MSM when they're attending an event full of folks that they hate, like a gathering of conservatives.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

It's a feckin' wingnut rally (sponsored by Turning Point USA, the modern day equivalent of the Hitler Youth), but kids need protection from the local press (and not the fascists in attendance)?

So, if my kids were to go to one of these, they're the equivalent of the Hitler Youth?

And you call folks who disagree with YOU extreme?

'Nuf said.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

So, if my kids were to go to one of these, they're the equivalent of the Hitler Youth?

And you call folks who disagree with YOU extreme?

'Nuf said.

If your kids go to this, your wishes for the fascist upbringing will be duly fulfilled.

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/...ance-alt-right

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/...d-conservative

https://www.adl.org/resources/backgr...ning-point-usa

https://truthout.org/articles/young-...t-connections/

Their objective is to inculcate/indoctrinate impressionable youth of America into the wonders of Trumpism. In that Trumpism is inherently fascist, my comparison to the Hitler Youth is apt, if a bit exaggerated. Read up a bit on Charlie Kirk and Candace Owens, TPA's leaders, and if you still want your kids to be influenced by them, you too are a fascist. If the shoe fits ...

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

Why? For suggesting that the press doesn't have a right to unfettered access to a private event?

Does that mean that the Biden crowd has gone full fascist as well for barring journalists access?

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/22/polit...ies/index.html

https://nypost.com/2022/06/16/wh-den...-biden-events/

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021...f-biden-access

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5...round-ukraine/

https://kesq.com/money/2021/03/22/re...mexico-border/

There's lots more, but I'll save the bandwidth for someone else.

The point is, that the current administration - and prior administrations - in many circumstances and situations pick and choose where they allow the press access. And here were talking about the press having access to government officials or the military working in their professional capacities at places or events that are under the control of those government officials. Nothing new about any of this.

Compare that to an organization of students who happen to be conservative - a population that the MSM generally hates anyway - having a private event, and the presumption in this thread is that the media MUST be granted access. Or, if they are granted access, and such access is restricted, that's just so outside the norm as to be considered an affront to freedom of the press? And the government officials attending are there on their personal time and not strictly acting in their professional capacities.

And if the articles linked above signify anything, it's that controlling press access by government officials is not "highly unusual" as the idiot WaPo journalist suggests in his slanted article.

Do you guys actually think things through before you post?

Oh, and about the kids. Yes, if I'm a parent, I don't want the press to have unfettered access to my kids if I'm not present. That goes double for the press like the MSM when they're attending an event full of folks that they hate, like a gathering of conservatives.

Yes, my comment was more for the 'protect the children' bit. Sounded like a demagogic suggestion that the press were a bunch of pedophile groomers or something. Fine, you demonize the press to the point that you fear them baiting you kids to mouth off in an embarrassing way. Sounds like you aren't exactly sure the views you are teaching them should be let out unfiltered.

But there is a Orwellin tone to 'The press is free, free to print/televise what we approve.' 'Control is freedom?'

And that bit "a population that the MSM generally hates anyway" is really awful. It is very fascist to normalize hate and project it onto political opponents. Hate is not normal and I think vanishingly few MSM reporters go around hating even conservatives, let alone the children of conservatives. Counterexamples found in fringe pubs and online certainly, but you said MSM.

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Fine, you demonize the press to the point that you fear them baiting you kids to mouth off in an embarrassing way. Sounds like you aren't exactly sure the views you are teaching them should be let out unfiltered.

Nope, not the point at all. 1) People tend to not act like themselves when you put a camera on them, and that goes double for kids. 2) I'd rather my kid not become the next Nick Sandmann.

Originally Posted by donquixote99

But there is a Orwellin tone to 'The press is free, free to print/televise what we approve.' 'Control is freedom?'

That's way overstating the type of "control" in this case. And, again, its a private event.

Originally Posted by donquixote99

And that bit "a population that the MSM generally hates anyway" is really awful. It is very fascist to normalize hate and project it onto political opponents. Hate is not normal and I think vanishingly few MSM reporters go around hating even conservatives, let alone the children of conservatives.

Sure it's awful. It doesn't make it untrue. Maybe "hate" is too strong a word. Maybe "hold in contempt" or "disdain" might be better, but the result is the same.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

If your kids go to this, your wishes for the fascist upbringing will be duly fulfilled.

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/...ance-alt-right

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/...d-conservative

https://www.adl.org/resources/backgr...ning-point-usa

https://truthout.org/articles/young-...t-connections/

You quoted from the left-most sources available. Unsurprising.