Jump to content

Fake News

Michael Stuart Kelly
 Share

Recommended Posts

Michael Stuart Kelly Grand Master

Michael Stuart Kelly

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

You ought to look at a good dictionary before lecturing us about censorship.

Brant,

And how about looking into all that Google-government cronyism?

Google is a 100% private business on paper (I think) and, reality-wise, it's 100% private in la-la-land.

:)

Out here in the real world, Google functions in certain areas like an arm of the state.

So it's more than fair to talk about censorship with Google. If it wants to be the American government, it has to submit to the checks and balances that come with it.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Jon Letendre
Jon Letendre

“I'm a bit confused, so are you saying that the news about packages targeting the Obamas, Clintons, and others is fake news and a false flag?  If so, then why does Trump say the packages exis

anthony
anthony

I was holding my breath for what the Left Dems would come up with in the runup, and this too conveniently 'fits' my concerns. Many nasties there have shown they are willing to do whatever it takes. I'

Ellen Stuttle
Ellen Stuttle

I think there is a strong enabler complicity among those who sneer at the very idea of real conspiracies being underway - a kind of informal colluding though not precisely conspiring to protect the el

Posted Images

Michael Stuart Kelly Grand Master

Michael Stuart Kelly

Posted
  • Author
Posted

What President Trump just said at CPAC about fake news is going to cause an amusing backlash from the Incredible Shrinking Mainstream Corporate Media.

He not only reiterated that the fake news media is the enemy of the American people, he talked about how the fake news media made fake news out of what he said. They leave out the word "fake." In other words, the president is not saying ALL MEDIA is the enemy, just fake news and fake news media.

As soon as it's feasible to post a video, I will do so.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites
anthony Experienced

anthony

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, KorbenDallas said:

MSK, what's your definition of 'fake news'?

There's the $64K question, I reckon a good writer with an early book on the topic will earn himself a packet. It seldom means faking the facts, as no 'reputable' newscaster relishes being caught in out and out falsehoods - but there are many ways to sway gullible viewers/readers. Emphasise the appeal to emotions and authority, give 'em what they want to/expect to hear, and play down and restrict uncomfortable or opposing facts and opinions to the inside pages and off-peak viewership, if at all. So much for "objective" journalism, or the 'full story'.

Reportage is a partial representation of reality limited by constraints of air time, space and deadlines, according to the level of a journalist's conscientuousness, and his Managing Editor's-Publisher's-Directors' ethical-political slant and metaphysical value-premises.(!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BaalChatzaf Newbie

BaalChatzaf

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

You ought to look at a good dictionary before lecturing us about censorship.

Nathaniel Branden once declaimed--on the Internet--that only government could censor. He was wrong too. Governments are only the worst actors.

Electronic dictionaries are notorious for abbreviated definitions. Don't let me get started about spell checkers and spellings.

--Brant

If Google  refuses to reference  a web-site that is not the kind of -legal- censorship  that is forbidden by the First Amendment.  It is not a punitive action nor does it deprive any party of their rights.  Just because a party has a web-site  does not given them any legal right to be referenced by Google (or any other private web browsing facility)  nor does Google have any legal duty to reference a web-site.  There is no breach of contract. 

If a newspaper  refuses to print one of your stories or articles are they "censoring" you?   A privately owned newspaper is under no obligation to print any thing submitted to then and Google  is not obliged to reference  or list  any web-site they choose not to list or reference. 

Editing and Filtering is NOT  censorship. 

I say it is you who does not understand what censorship is.   And I will get you started about dictionaries and spell checkers of any kind.  The publishers of a dictionary are under no legal obligation to  give definitions that  please you and if you don't like a spell checker than don't use it.  No private publisher has any legal duty to produce a product or service that pleases you, unless they  have entered a contract with you to do so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Michael Stuart Kelly Grand Master

Michael Stuart Kelly

Posted
  • Author
Posted

On a more serious note, fake news is a propaganda tool used by the mainstream media to spread politically motivated plausible-sounding narratives that are disconnected from reality and that advance the taking and/or keeping of power by the person or group the propagandist works for.

Note, the narratives themselves do not have to be political even though they are politically motivated. Their purpose is to get compliance from the public for the political goal--whether covert or ostensive--not get public understanding of any particular issue. Also, if there is no collusion by the mainstream press in spreading a false story, I don't consider it "fake news" as an effective propaganda tool.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites
anthony Experienced

anthony

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

CNN.

:evil: 

BBC.

I caught about 5 seconds of Anderson Cooper last night on CNN, asking a man (Mexican?) "... how will she feel about going to the police to report the crime [...]"?

I gather, and may be wrong, he was concerned or commiserating about an illegal immigrant not having recourse to the law.

But that's not my point. As he spoke, the tagline at screen bottom reported ten straight days of DOW's increase.

News priorities...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
william.scherk Mentor

william.scherk

Posted
Posted
On 2/23/2017 at 9:51 AM, jts said:

I am glad that Google is starting to stop bullshit websites such as naturalnews.

That is a false statement.

On 2/23/2017 at 9:51 AM, jts said:

Google is doing a great service to humanity by shutting down websites that disagree with what is generally accepted.

No website belonging to Mike Adams has been shut down.

On 2/23/2017 at 9:51 AM, jts said:

Nutjobs like Mike Adams will kick up a fuss and say some bullshit about freedom of information and tyranny.

Nutjob or not, something has happened that Adams is upset about. His video is titled Google Blacklists Natural News!  What actually happened? 

The video's notes say: "Borrowing a page from the book burning of Nazi fascists, Google has removed the ENTIRE NaturalNews.com website from its index, "memory holing" 140,000+ pages that helped people prevent disease, improve their health and avoid toxic chemicals."

That is all that is written. You have to watch the video or access its closed captions to understand exactly what Google has done. 

Ai Yai Yai.  Half a minute in with a THEM move. Mike says some GROUP has threatened him with ruin if he doesn't "take down Alex Jones." He says he blew the whistle on his web page, and assuredly he has done so (see below). The details rush by, but by 4:02 I hear that Soros front groups took down Milo, by 5:00 Milo said "some really twisted sick stuff," and I am still waiting for Mike to get to the meat of the matter.

THEY next moved on Infowars. Three million in lost revenue. Google. THEM. Finally, at 6:15, we hear Mike say that Google did the deed. Suddenly, not a single search result from Naturalnews.com. By 10:00 we hear praise for ZeroHedge, Breitbart and again Infowars. We find out that Google News long ago "censored" NaturalNews out of its news index (meaning Google News did not treat NaturalNews as a 'news' site).

16 minutes in we touch on transgender, climate change hoax and a fifth mention of mercury in vaccines. I still haven't heard Mike tell us what Google said to his org when they queried this De-Indexing.  I am hoping Mike will tell me more than the quick mention of a NASA cover-up of microbial life on Mars.  My remaining questions are technical (what actually happens when you search for a term on Naturalnews.com, what happens when you do a site-search, what obstacles are actually in the way of accessing content) and I don't expect Mike can focus.

Oh dear. By 20:20 I learn CNN is green-screen, false-flag, crisis-actor "Fake News" (fuck I hate the term), and hear Mike is a bearer of True News. Which is hilarious. Still haven't learned anything about the Blacklist.  At 20:50 I hear "I'm a Real Scientist." I have to take a break.

22:59, THEY are trying to destroy Trump and Trump supporters. Yah.

Getting close. Mike says his site is still going to be around, whether or not Google keeps him off out its index. Whether he beavered away to get some answers from Google is left open.  I expect I shall have to haunt some tech-y websites to figure out what Google has done, how often Google does this, what the justification is, and whether it is a 'victory' for an Objectivish classification. I consider Mike Adams to be anything but a purveyor of objective truth, and anything but a journalist. 

From the front page:

Quote
Latest News
 - 
With outrageous censoring of Natural News, Google now becomes the internet’s #1 BULLY and pusher of hate speech… #SaveNaturalNews
Google-Intenet-Bullies

(Natural News) Google's outrageous censorship of Natural News continues, all part of a coordinate campaign to assassinate my character, silence the Natural News website and empower the voices of those pharma-funded critics who have been relentlessly attempting to shut down Natural News for years. SIGN THIS WHITE HOUSE PETITION NOW to … [Read More...]

(These are the first page of Google results from this plain query: "natural news health ranger.")

Spoiler
About 835,000 results (0.65 seconds) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
On 2/23/2017 at 9:51 AM, jts said:

Get a load of how crazy Mike Adams really is.

One single video cannot capture how sadly bereft of Objectivism Adams really is.  For that you need to tease out his views on a wide range of issues.

-- I still haven't figured out the design and effect of a de-Indexing. I'll dig up some technical material with detail if any, and try out some Google searches that should reveal a blacklist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Michael Stuart Kelly Grand Master

Michael Stuart Kelly

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I speculate, but I think a little tit for tat has gone on.

A few days ago, Mika at Morning Joe on MSNBC banned Kellyanne Conway from appearing on her show anymore, calling Kellyanne the bearer of fake news. The traditional corporate fake news press had a royal field day. One article after another for days gleefully announcing her downfall and disgrace and going into all kinds of detail based on "unnamed sources."

Now they're whining about the following (from the NYT):

White House Bars Times and Other News Outlets From Briefing

From the article:

Quote

Journalists from The New York Times and several other news organizations were prohibited from attending a briefing by President Trump’s press secretary on Friday, a highly unusual breach of relations between the White House and its press corps.

Reporters from The Times, BuzzFeed News, CNN, The Los Angeles Times and Politico were not allowed to enter the West Wing office of the press secretary, Sean M. Spicer, for the scheduled briefing. Aides to Mr. Spicer only allowed in reporters from a handpicked group of news organizations that, the White House said, had been previously confirmed.

Those organizations included Breitbart News, the One America News Network and The Washington Times, all with conservative leanings. Journalists from ABC, CBS, The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, and Fox News also attended.

Reporters from Time magazine and The Associated Press, who were set to be allowed in, chose not to attend the briefing in protest of the White House’s actions.

The Trump team ain't saying, but those excluded are virtuosos in publishing one-sided articles against Trump based on made-up details in known events and made-up anonymous sources.

President Trump made a particular issue out phony anonymous sources in today's CPAC speech.

Michael

EDIT: Milo opines:

:) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KorbenDallas Apprentice

KorbenDallas

Posted
Posted

Here is Trump's tweet from a few days ago about the 'FAKE NEWS media':

Here is Trump lying about what he said, Trump has now walked it back, dropping the 'media' part, he's now saying that the 'fake news' is the enemy of the American people:

This is why I didn't vote for Trump: call it hyperbole, call it the 'bombastic offer'---it is a lie.  He clearly meant media outlets in his tweet, and even listed them.  Now he's trying to blame the media, saying it is the 'dishonest media [that] dropped the word fake' which made it seem like he was saying the news media is the enemy of the American People---

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Michael Stuart Kelly Grand Master

Michael Stuart Kelly

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

What President Trump just said at CPAC about fake news is going to cause an amusing backlash from the Incredible Shrinking Mainstream Corporate Media.

He not only reiterated that the fake news media is the enemy of the American people, he talked about how the fake news media made fake news out of what he said. They leave out the word "fake." In other words, the president is not saying ALL MEDIA is the enemy, just fake news and fake news media.

As soon as it's feasible to post a video, I will do so.

Here you go, from earlier today.

Boy, did he ream them a new one.

The corporate fake news is going down. They will soon have to earn their audience in competition with other smaller news organizations rather than wield privilege of access and gatekeeping.

The truth is, people want to read the truth. They're kinda sick of fake news. That's one of the reasons they elected President Trump.

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Michael Stuart Kelly Grand Master

Michael Stuart Kelly

Posted
  • Author
Posted
33 minutes ago, KorbenDallas said:

Here is Trump lying about what he said, Trump has now walked it back

Korben,

Lying? Walked it back?

The hell he did.

When he says "FAKE" in his tweet and in all caps, and you even post it, what part of that don't you understand?

You think the word is going to disappear just because you say so?

45 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Now they're whining about the following (from the NYT):

White House Bars Times and Other News Outlets From Briefing

Look who got banned in that article. The very outlets in his tweet.

I suggest you study a little harder about bombastic offer. From the way you described it, you don't understand it, starting with the fact that it is a negotiating tool. 

btw - It looks like we both posted the same video. I'm OK with that, though. Two times Trump is always a good thing. :) 

Also, I'm OK with you not voting for Trump. We didn't need your vote to get him elected. :evil: 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites
william.scherk Mentor

william.scherk

Posted
Posted

This information does not appear yet at Natural News. From a post at Search Engine Roundtable,

No, Google Didn't Remove NaturalNews.com Because Of Fake News:

Quote

[...]

UPDATE: John Mueller from Google posted in another Google Webmaster Help thread that the site was due to sneaky mobile redirects and also added on Twitter that site was notified via Google Search Console.

Here is the post in the forum:

Hi! I work with the Google Search team. We're seeing a bit of confusion & incorrect stories circulating about what's happening here, so just to be super clear -- Natural News is using a sneaky mobile redirect, which is prohibited by our webmaster guidelines (there's a bit about this kind of issue at https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2015/10/detect-and-get-rid-of-unwanted-sneaky.html ). These redirects aren't always easy to reproduce, they're sometimes in widgets or served by ad networks, and can target specific devices, browsers, or user locations. When we last checked, there was one on http://blogs.naturalnews.com/bentonite-clay-a-natural-medicine-cabinet-must-have/ . As soon as this is cleaned up, the site can submit a reconsideration request through Search Console, and once that's reviewed things will return to normal. No action has been taken based on the editorial content of this site.


Here is the tweet:
 

 

 

I will be on alert for a walk-back from the Health Ranger. 

If folks prefer snark from a long-time debunker of Natural News claims, read Orac's Google delists Mike Adams’ NaturalNews.com. He pokes fun at the wildly operatic conspiracy tale out of Adams. Knowing that Adams can get un-delisted by fixing his guest-artist blogger's Sneaky Code links out ... the story writes itself.

The "Skeptic" party of the Rational Blob is having a lot of fun with the Adams hysteria today.  The laugh is on them, though, perhaps -- since Adams' profile will have been elevated within the Blob of US vs THEM.

Quote

Schadenfreude feels so good. I truly enjoyed reading Adams’ rant about how you are “witnessing a modern-day book burning by the internet Gestapo that now decides what knowledge you’re never allowed to access… especially because much of that knowledge can help set humanity free.” I mean, I knew Adams was grandiose, but this is ridiculous, so much so that it’s worth quoting at more length than I normally do [...]

I have to wonder, naturally, whether Google’s decision to delist NaturalNews.com is part of its attempt to clean up fake news. To be honest, as much as I despise Adams and his website, I’m not sure that NaturalNews.com qualifies as fake news. Adams rarely makes up stories out of whole cloth. Rather, like every good propagandist he takes existing news stories and information sources, cherry picks from them, and then weaves them together into a deceptive, biased tale designed to rile up his readers by confirming their conspiracy theories, all while misrepresenting science and evidence to fuel his quackery-supporting narratives. That’s why I don’t really consider NaturalNews.com to be a fake news site, but more like a whackaloon conspiracy theory and quackery website. I realize that that could be a distinction without a true difference.

ADDENDUM: Adams’ followup post, Beyond fake news… How Google just became FAKE SEARCH by blacklisting independent journalism, is even more hilariously epic in its overwrought language.
 

Ahem. "As soon as this is cleaned up, the site can submit a reconsideration request through Search Console, and once that's reviewed things will return to normal."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KorbenDallas Apprentice

KorbenDallas

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Korben,

Lying? Walked it back?

The hell he did.

When he says "FAKE" in his tweet and in all caps, and you even post it, what part of that don't you understand?

In the tweet, he is labeling these entities as 'fake news media' outlets, in the CPAC speech he's saying these outlets produce 'fake news' content and trying to deny that he was calling the media outlets the enemy of the American people in the first place.

The lie starts at 0:47 in the video I posted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Michael Stuart Kelly Grand Master

Michael Stuart Kelly

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, KorbenDallas said:

In the tweet, he is labeling these entities as 'fake news media' outlets, in the CPAC speech he's saying these outlets produce 'fake news' content and trying to deny that he was calling the media outlets the enemy of the American people in the first place.

The lie starts at 0:47 in the video I posted.

Korben,

Everybody knows what he means. He's not lying.

The press is lying and has been doing so over and over and over. And you seem to be fine with that.

You didn't vote for Trump because of, presumably, a high moral posture, but I bet you keep consuming the news from the lying outlets as if they did nothing.

Jeez...

Where did your morality go with them? Taking a snooze?

:) 

Anyway, here's what President Trump does, if you are interested. If not, just keep on believing he's lying and this explanation is for the reader.

President Trump plays a kind of kindergarten gotcha game with the press all the time. I noticed this way back in the beginning when he said Megyn Kelly was bleeding out of her eyes and out of her wherever. He let the press run wild with it for a two or three days yakking up a storm about menstruation, then said he was talking about her nose. Gotchaaaaaaaa!

:) 

That's exactly what he did with the fake news media being the enemy of the public versus fake news as a more specific term. He made it look like he was calling all the media fake news and the press fell for it like the doofus suckers they are.

(btw - When I say "the press" in this context, we know what press I am talking about. Or do you want to play gotcha with that like they do? :) ) 

Riddle me this. It is possible for a liar to tell the truth at times? If so, why do you call him a liar? Does liar have only one meaning?

Let's go back to Dictionary 101. Is it possible for one word to have more than one meaning?

Why yes!

I believe so!

Yes it is!

It is possible!

Almost all the words in all major dictionaries in all languages the world over have more than one meaning.

:) 

So what is a fake news outlet? Does it only have one meaning?

Why, no.

In one meaning, a fake news outlet could be a mainstream news organization that publishes a lot of fake news among a lot of correct news. In another meaning, it could be a site like The Onion or Celebriticity. In another, it can even be fringe sites like MediaMatters. (All right, you will say Infowars. :) I don't agree, but I know you believe it.)

The point is, you have three different meanings for "fake news outlet" right there. And the differences are not trivial. 

If Trump calls CNN a fake news outlet or fake news media, he is using the first meaning, not the second or third. And by calling CNN--when it's on it's mission as a fake news outlet, i.e., Clinton News Network--an enemy of Americans, he's not calling ALL the media an enemy of Americans. And he's not calling ALL the media fake news.

Yet the fake news media outlets (first meaning) are going on and on and on about President Trump calling ALL the media an enemy of Americans. They didn't use the word "all," but they left it clear that's what they meant. How else to understand the phrase "Trump calls the media the enemy of the public"? Didn't you read anyone saying that, like, everywhere, like, over and over and over and over and over and over and over? It's not as if people were hiding it.

That is what President Trump was discussing in the CPAC speech. He said they kept leaving off the word "fake." And they did, too.

Trump supporters already know all this. Your argument is a serious overreach if you want to think conceptually instead of just wordplay gotcha. Since you hate Trump, I believe you prefer the concrete-bound anti-conceptual frame of mind when thinking about him. (That's how gotcha works most of the time in the press.)

But Trump thinks conceptually. Once again, that's why his buildings don't fall down. It doesn't matter if he says rock or stone, he uses the same hard-ass material for both terms to make sure the buildings don't fall down. He doesn't care about the word. He cares about the hard-ass material. Just like he differentiates between CNN as a fake news outlet and Reuters as not. He doesn't care what the term is, he wants the press to be honest.

It's a conceptual thing...

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brant Gaede Enthusiast

Brant Gaede

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

If Google  refuses to reference  a web-site that is not the kind of -legal- censorship  that is forbidden by the First Amendment.  It is not a punitive action nor does it deprive any party of their rights.  Just because a party has a web-site  does not given them any legal right to be referenced by Google (or any other private web browsing facility)  nor does Google have any legal duty to reference a web-site.  There is no breach of contract. 

If a newspaper  refuses to print one of your stories or articles are they "censoring" you?   A privately owned newspaper is under no obligation to print any thing submitted to then and Google  is not obliged to reference  or list  any web-site they choose not to list or reference. 

Editing and Filtering is NOT  censorship. 

I say it is you who does not understand what censorship is.   And I will get you started about dictionaries and spell checkers of any kind.  The publishers of a dictionary are under no legal obligation to  give definitions that  please you and if you don't like a spell checker than don't use it.  No private publisher has any legal duty to produce a product or service that pleases you, unless they  have entered a contract with you to do so. 

I didn't criticize what you have written here. I criticized what I quoted.

My criticism of that stands.

You can't correct your original statement by bloating it up and pretending no correction was needed. As for the above, it's circular--that is, you've introduced "legal" censorship. If it's that, it's government. As for "editing and filtering," it may or may not be an act of censorship depending on who's doing it and why if it's not the government. It's harder to pin the tail on that donkey.

Like I said, censorship has several meanings and imports (depending on context).

If you stop thinking how we're all dumber than you, you might stop lecturing us. We aren't in school having "facts" crammed into our heads by some teacher authority.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Michael Stuart Kelly Grand Master

Michael Stuart Kelly

Posted
  • Author
Posted

For those who still have trouble processing the concept and/or the persuasion, more clarity from President Trump this morning:

These news outlets will either clean up their act or lose massive chunks of their audience. They aren't the only mainstream outlets, either.

Being mainstream no longer comes with the privilege of constantly lying to the public and daring anyone to question their reputation for journalistic integrity. Their getting away with bullying and sleaze days are over. Oh, they'll still fool a lot people for a while since most people let authority figures run on habit in their minds. But the crack in reputation has appeared. When authority figures fall with the general public, it's hard for them to get back up.

I guarantee they will not get back up with lies. They will have to start telling the truth no matter how much it hurts them inside if they want to preserve their audience. I expect a lot of pain on their end. Liars hate telling the truth.

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BaalChatzaf Newbie

BaalChatzaf

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

 

If you stop thinking how we're all dumber than you, you might stop lecturing us. We aren't in school having "facts" crammed into our heads by some teacher authority.

--Brant

My Mission From God and my Genetic Imperative  is to be a stickler for facts and logic.  And 95 percent of the human race IS  dumber than me or at least not as smart as I am.  I do not suffer error  (especially my own)  gladly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KorbenDallas Apprentice

KorbenDallas

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

For those who still have trouble processing the concept and/or the persuasion

Trump is a narcissist.  Many narcissists find professions where their personality disorder can be seen as an advantage, which is what is happening here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Michael Stuart Kelly Grand Master

Michael Stuart Kelly

Posted
  • Author
Posted
13 minutes ago, KorbenDallas said:

Trump is a narcissist.

Korben,

That's another myth that floats around by armchair psychologists and the left-wing media. It's usually accompanied by a copy-paste list of symptoms for narcissistic personality disorder gleaned from Wikipedia.

The truth is, people equate confidence with narcissism when they don't like someone who is confident.

I can come up with a ton load of folks who say calling Trump a narcissist (as a mental classification) is not only inaccurate, it's irresponsible. See this recent article, for instance, from CBC (and Frances can't stand Trump):

Stop saying Trump has narcissistic personality disorder, says psychiatrist who defined it

From the article:

Quote

Allen Frances says he's tired of "amateur diagnosticians" insisting that U.S. President Donald Trump has narcissistic personality disorder. 

And he should know. As the chair of the task force that wrote the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV, Frances literally helped write the definition of NPD.

In a letter to the New York Times, Frances, a retired Duke University professor, wrote that Trump "may be a world-class narcissist, but this doesn't make him mentally ill, because he does not suffer from the distress and impairment required to diagnose mental disorder."

In other words, if you are saying President Trump is a narcissist meaning he's mentally ill, that's wrong.

If you're saying he's a narcissist, meaning he's self-centered or selfish, OK. Maybe even an asshole at times, OK.

But in that sense, Ayn Rand was a narcissist, also.

And maybe you are, too, if you follow her...

:) 

And once again, we are back to concept versus wordplay.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...