PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: invflatspin on November 13, 2018, 10:48:16 AM
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/to-mark-end-of-world-war-i-frances-macron-denounces-nationalism-as-a-betrayal-of-patriotism/2018/11/11/aab65aa4-e1ec-11e8-ba30-a7ded04d8fac_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ef43fffaea49
Also says globalism of liberal values is worth defending.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it France who has been the most outspoken nationalists since - forever? As I recall me French history, they have fought with EVERYONE in Europe and parts of the African and islands around them. Refused US troops on French soil under NATO command. they also just passed, and Macron signed a very tough new immigration bill: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43860880 to stem the tide of 'global' people from entering the country.
So, I think what he meant is: Nationalism, and being elite in France is good. Nationalism by the US, Russia, Germany, etc is bad - because, well they are not French.
Macron is a lightweight douche bag.
-
Merkel doubles down.
https://dailycaller.com/2018/11/13/merkel-macron-european-army-trump/
At the cost of nothing, and the gain of plenty, I'm ready to take my US Army and all our materiel and come home from EU. Let them fight off the bear if they want to get a big head about it.
BTW, I served in NATO, if anyone cares.
-
The entire argument is a smokescreen.
According to The President of the United States (The REAL President, NOT hilary for steingar) macron and merkel, (heckle and jeckle), are politically unpopular and attempting to change the focus of frogs and krauts off of their incompetence by using the worn out tactic of attacking Donald J. Trump, The PRESIDENT of the Unites States (still not hilary, mikey).
The two incompetent whiners walked right into a bee hive of push back because The PRESIDENT of the United States of AMERICA (not hilary's fantasy world) made them both look weak and stupid.
-
Semantics. Macron means using people to build national strength. Trump means making the country strong so people have better lives.
I'm going to go with the guy for whom English is the native language.
-
Semantics. Macron means using people to build national strength. Trump means making the country strong so people have better lives.
I'm going to go with the guy for whom English is the native language.
Uh, I didn't listen to the speech in the original language, but from what I can gather, you have it just backwards. Macron was triumphing globalism, and universal values, which certainly sounds like the decline of the individual. Trump has worked just the opposite. To remove structure and authority mechanisms from fed control and let the individual determine their nations greatness.
I don't see any relationship in Macron's speech to focus on his people. He's all about the UN, and global vision, etc. People be damned.
-
Talking about their meanings of the words "Nationalism". Macron assumes it means a dictator accumulating power. Trump assumes it means making the people of the country better off by making the country stronger.
The first one is bad. The second is good, m'kay?
Which reminds me that Dems are already talking about Trump using the military to commit a coup if he doesn't win in 2020. As if the military would sacrifice their honor and duty to the country for any individual.
-
The Left, including American Democrats want to associate nationalism, and patriotism with fascism, and Nazi Germany. Where the vast majority of Americans just want to put our citizen's interests, and country first the Left perverts this to demonize and push Globalism.
These Statists are willing to give up our national Sovereignty for international policies, and laws to take precedent over ours. Things like gun control, gun bans, and confiscation. Man made climate change taxes, and surcharges, etc. They want to push these far left policies through using global power because they can't get them through here.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/to-mark-end-of-world-war-i-frances-macron-denounces-nationalism-as-a-betrayal-of-patriotism/2018/11/11/aab65aa4-e1ec-11e8-ba30-a7ded04d8fac_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ef43fffaea49
Also says globalism of liberal values is worth defending.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it France who has been the most outspoken nationalists since - forever? As I recall me French history, they have fought with EVERYONE in Europe and parts of the African and islands around them. Refused US troops on French soil under NATO command. they also just passed, and Macron signed a very tough new immigration bill: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43860880 to stem the tide of 'global' people from entering the country.
So, I think what he meant is: Nationalism, and being elite in France is good. Nationalism by the US, Russia, Germany, etc is bad - because, well they are not French.
Macron is a lightweight douche bag.
Macron is a twerp who apparently doesn’t know his own history. My dad has a picture of himself and another soldier standing next to the Cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris. A couple weeks later he “earned” a Purple Heart in Macron’s ungrateful country as the front moved East.
He is a lightweight who must listen to CNN for his knowledge is the USA.
-
From what I understand CNN is the most common source of news from the USA overseas. Some of you who have been overseas might chime in to give your opinions on that.
-
From what I understand CNN is the most common source of news from the USA overseas. Some of you who have been overseas might chime in to give your opinions on that.
Yep. Every airport overseas has the Crap News Network on 24/7. That, and in several countries they are in their local cable systems.
I have friends from overseas, whenever we're talking will ask me what's going on back here. Their source is, you guessed it, CNN. I've been educating them on to avoid the constant bullshit being spewed and passed off as "news".
-
From what I understand CNN is the most common source of news from the USA overseas. Some of you who have been overseas might chime in to give your opinions on that.
Oh yes, very much so. The intl CNN is the only thing that most of the rest of the world knows about the US. To listen to them for only a few minutes one would think our nation is on the verge of collapse, and that we are being led by a madman bent on world destruction. It's nutty.
-
Damn! Why’d I have to read this before trying to sleep!?!?
I can’t stand misinformation being promulgated here or abroad.
How can CNN be stopped? I had heard their viewership was low and dropping. Apparently not so.
-
Damn! Why’d I have to read this before trying to sleep!?!?
I can’t stand misinformation being promulgated here or abroad.
How can CNN be stopped? I had heard their viewership was low and dropping. Apparently not so.
It's dropping in the US I wonder if it's growing elsewhere and it's going to focus on foreign markets just like the NFL.
-
Damn! Why’d I have to read this before trying to sleep!?!?
I can’t stand misinformation being promulgated here or abroad.
How can CNN be stopped? I had heard their viewership was low and dropping. Apparently not so.
As far as the airports are concerned, CNN pays them to have their network playing publicly.
And there are news outlets in various regions and countries that make CNN look down right legit.
-
Oh yes, very much so. The intl CNN is the only thing that most of the rest of the world knows about the US. To listen to them for only a few minutes one would think our nation is on the verge of collapse, and that we are being led by a madman bent on world destruction. It's nutty.
Are they broadcasting the same shit sandwich that we are seeing in the US, or are there “international” panelists who spew the same shit sandwich in a different wrapper?
-
Are they broadcasting the same shit sandwich that we are seeing in the US, or are there “international” panelists who spew the same shit sandwich in a different wrapper?
The international CNN version is just as bad as the domestic version.
-
The international CNN version is just as bad as the domestic version.
I’m sure it it, but I was asking if they have the same way of delivering it. In other words, does CNN India get Wolf Blitzer, or an Indian or other non-US announcer?
-
I’m sure it it, but I was asking if they have the same way of delivering it. In other words, does CNN India get Wolf Blitzer, or an Indian or other non-US announcer?
OK.
CNN International uses a different set of on air personalities. On occasion they cross over with segments from the CNN domestic programming.
-
I’m sure it it, but I was asking if they have the same way of delivering it. In other words, does CNN India get Wolf Blitzer, or an Indian or other non-US announcer?
It's a mix. There is a bureau chief for each segment of the world. There's one in the ME, one in EU, one in SEA and they will take feeds from both US and also will use the editorial agenda from the US broadcasts to re-broadcast with local language. Sometimes they use the US broadcast and simply have a translation below, and other times they use a local outlet(like the Times of India) which takes CNN feed. To be fair, FoxNews also is an outlet with the Times of India, and so is AP. So taking CNN feed is no different.
The problem arises when the national govt decides which feed to take and make more prominent. In the case of England, the CNN feed is almost all they get of the US. Same with most of the rest of EU. However, other nations with a more conservative view will take less CNN and maybe more FoxNews feeds. But - CNN is still the largest aggregator of news feed from the US as they built a world empire back in the 80s when they actually reported news.
-
It's a mix. There is a bureau chief for each segment of the world. There's one in the ME, one in EU, one in SEA and they will take feeds from both US and also will use the editorial agenda from the US broadcasts to re-broadcast with local language. Sometimes they use the US broadcast and simply have a translation below, and other times they use a local outlet(like the Times of India) which takes CNN feed. To be fair, FoxNews also is an outlet with the Times of India, and so is AP. So taking CNN feed is no different.
The problem arises when the national govt decides which feed to take and make more prominent. In the case of England, the CNN feed is almost all they get of the US. Same with most of the rest of EU. However, other nations with a more conservative view will take less CNN and maybe more FoxNews feeds. But - CNN is still the largest aggregator of news feed from the US as they built a world empire back in the 80s when they actually reported news.
Thanks.