Anybody going to be watching the State of the Union Address?

[Omar Bongo]

Omar...was he correct directionally in any of those 10 things you listed?

I admire your candor, but is that the highest we can aspire to with this shill...directional correctness?

Why bore people with the truth when you can dazzle them with directionally correct alternative facts?

[Vilepagan]

Best ever!!!!!
Not bad for a non-politician!

Red, your hypocrisy is showing. Three pages of comments about Obama's shameful use of a teleprompter and when trump uses one he's the "best ever". Your comments are as valuable as they are consistent.

http://www.occonnect.com/community/sear ... mit=Search

[Wabash]

I just figured anyone buying into the teleprompter schtick was being coy. Teleprompters are a standard part of speech giving. Have been for some time.

[Bick]

I admire your candor, but is that the highest we can aspire to with this shill...directional correctness?

I think it's called politics, and politicians take the most optimistic view of their "accomplishments" to portray themselves in the most favorable light. Opponents seek to discredit each other by finding holes in the optimistic view, and call the other guy a liar...just like you could righteously call me one for saying there were actually12 points instead of 10 as I said.

Doesn't finding what's wrong get old?

[Vilepagan]

Doesn't finding what's wrong get old?

Did it get old for you about Obama?

[Bick]

Listen Junior Moderator - we have no respect for each other so just run along and troll someone else.

[Vilepagan]

I'll take that as a no.

[Bick]

How about just taking a hike?

[Omar Bongo]

Omar...was he correct directionally in any of those 10 things you listed?

"Correct directionally" sounds like what Steven Colbert calls "truthiness"...

Okay, let's take them one at a time -

1. "we enacted the biggest tax cuts and reforms in American history"

A blatant, easily disprovable lie. The cold hard numbers are out there and have been widely reported. He could have easily said "one of the biggest", but he chose to lie instead. Why? I guess that's not really important.

Here's your chance to explain how he was "directionally correct" and why that's okay for the president when he's speaking to the American people and the world.

After that, we'll move on to:

the Chrysler plant that isn't moving

the "finally rising" wages that have actually fallen during his term

the green card requirements and visa procedures he lied about

the "hundreds and hundreds" of dangerous terrorists we supposedly released and met again on the battlefield

the net energy exporter lie

the Apple investment lie, etc.

[Bick]

"Correct directionally" sounds like what Steven Colbert calls "truthiness"...

Okay, let's take them one at a time -

1. "we enacted the biggest tax cuts and reforms in American history"

A blatant, easily disprovable lie. The cold hard numbers are out there and have been widely reported. He could have easily said "one of the biggest", but he chose to lie instead. Why? I guess that's not really important.

Here's your chance to explain how he was "directionally correct" and why that's okay for the president when he's speaking to the American people and the world.

I don't know what he was referring to, or what source he was referencing when he made those remarks. Might they be the biggest $$ tax cuts and reforms combined? The biggest v. "one of the biggest"...I agree w/ you - unqualified remarks should be be accurate. But to answer your question directly, biggest and one of the biggest would be what I consider directionally consistent.

The definition of a lie is to willfully deceive. I don't know what his intent was, any more than I knew what Obama's was when he said you could keep your doctor or the cost of insurance would fall as a result of ACA. I don't think Obama necessarily lied, but neither applied to me. In this case, the results we NOT directionally consistent. My premiums nearly doubled, and he said they'd go down.

Same with Trump's claim of being the most watched SOTU in history. IDK what the hell he was thinking when he wrote that.

Fair enough?

[Omar Bongo]

Let's keep the focus on Trump, shall we?

That's just one of many, many lies he told in the speech...how about the others?

The definition of a lie is to willfully deceive. I don't know what his intent was

Well, I think his intent is obvious. Not based on this one lie, but on a pattern I've seen for at least the last two years now. He repeatedly makes untrue statements in forums where no one has the chance to immediately rebut the inaccuracies, they hang out there and they eventually stick. We saw it at his rallies and during the debates. The postgame fact-checkers tried but they never had a chance..."a lie can travel around the world and back again while the truth is lacing up its boots". This is pretty obviously why he loves twitter so much.

He says things that are untrue, they go unchallenged and they then become true enough, or "truthy", or as you put it "correct directionally". This is Madison Avenue 101. Remember the days when the lies in advertising were subliminal? Now it's okay to lie right to someone's face as long as it's in the directional ballpark.

You mentioned intent? Here's Trump's "intent" in a nutshell:

1. Tell a lie with great confidence and let it soak in with no rebuttal and your followers will believe it...hopefully it will create enough fog to sow doubt among some undecideds, too

2. Rinse and repeat, and never admit the lie...if fact, double down on lies by attacking the fact-checkers as liars themselves

3. Make truth itself relative by implying that all your critics are politically motivated or cravenly duplicitous...destroy the integrity any institution that stands in your way

This morally bankrupt little man saw a target audience with legitimate concerns and devised a way to manipulate them like the steak-selling con artist he is...the really sad part of this is all the people who realize this but continue to defend him for political reasons...

[Bick]

Let's keep the focus on Trump, shall we?

You asked me to explain what I meant by "directionally", so I used the last guy as an example.

Back to the tax cut being the biggest - While not the biggest tax cut in history, White House staff argues that the tax cuts together with the tax reforms make it the most significant tax policy bill in the history of the United States.

Assuming he was wrong about it being the biggest tax CUT in history, but correct it about it, together with the tax reforms, being the most significant tax POLICY bill in history...that still makes him a liar in your book? If so, fine. But for integrity's sake, apply that same standard to all politicians on both sides of the aisle.

Are you happy with your increased take-home pay?

[Vilepagan]

Back to the tax cut being the biggest - While not the biggest tax cut in history, White House staff argues....

Is this the same WH that argued that the crowd at trumps inauguration was the "biggest in history", and suggested that they had "alternative facts"?

[not4u13]

I know a lot of people who are hung up on all the "lies" Trump tells as though anyone really cares. The majority of the general public really doesn't care if the tax cut was "the biggest" or "one of the biggest" or if the crowds who came to his inauguration were huge or small. The difference is not material to the point. They know that what he says is always a bit of a fish tail and just like they're willing to give the neighbor a pass on the fact that the fish he caught 5 years ago from the local lake keeps getting bigger, they're willing to give Trump that same pass. When the media goes after what is viewed as a nuanced difference, it further galvanizes the "Fake News" mantra. What is being reported, while true, isn't really news. Because anyone in their "right" mind knows that Trump embellishes and don't believe him "absolutely" in the first place. Even if they do, the difference is unimportant. It's a tax cut they haven't had in many years and they love it.

Until those of us opposed to Trump get over nit-picking at his "lies" there will never be any credibility.

The stock market took it's biggest dip since 2016. Why? Because of a strong jobs report that increased the interest rate. The economy is improving, people have more money in their pockets and they "feel" safer because Trump is "getting tough". That's all that matters. Not the size of his "hands".

[MDDad]

(1) "Biggest" can mean many things. One of them is that the new tax law impacts the most people in American history. With a constantly growing population, that's probably accurate...but it's not what most people think of when they hear "biggest".

(2) I've known people who were pathological liars (or embellishers), and they often get to the point where lying becomes the norm without a second thought or any remorse. "Embellish" is a whitewashing of the problem. There is no impact if that neighbor embellishes the size of the fish that got away, but embellishing the threat of a nuclear North Korea could lead to millions killed in an unnecessary exchange.

[Fordama]

Maybe he meant "biggest" as the "fattest." There's always an ample supply of pot bellies at any Trump rally.

[Bick]

I know a lot of people who are hung up on all the "lies" Trump tells as though anyone really cares. The majority of the general public really doesn't care if the tax cut was "the biggest" or "one of the biggest" or if the crowds who came to his inauguration were huge or small. The difference is not material to the point. They know that what he says is always a bit of a fish tail and just like they're willing to give the neighbor a pass on the fact that the fish he caught 5 years ago from the local lake keeps getting bigger, they're willing to give Trump that same pass. When the media goes after what is viewed as a nuanced difference, it further galvanizes the "Fake News" mantra. What is being reported, while true, isn't really news. Because anyone in their "right" mind knows that Trump embellishes and don't believe him "absolutely" in the first place. Even if they do, the difference is unimportant. It's a tax cut they haven't had in many years and they love it.

Until those of us opposed to Trump get over nit-picking at his "lies" there will never be any credibility.

Dilly Dilly!

For 8 years with Obama, factions from the right cried wolf so many times credibility from both sides went out the window. After year 1 of Trump, it's clear the left will be in full attack mode for the next 3-7 years. How wonderful.

[Vilepagan]

Until those of us opposed to Trump get over nit-picking at his "lies" there will never be any credibility.

Normally I can agree with what you write Not4u, but here I think you're mistaken. If there's a problem with the truth then the person stating the falsehood is at fault not the one who points out the lie. In this case the main reason I'm "opposed" to trump is his constant lying about everything. I'm also unsure how silence about lies lends any credibility to either side.

[Professor Fate]

Because anyone in their "right" mind knows that Trump embellishes and don't believe him "absolutely" in the first place.

The best line in an excellent post.

Kudos Not4u13.

[Parrotpaul]

Red...you wouldn't understand success if it smacked you in the ass...if we learned one thing from the speech...he can read. His personal non-investment in that speech is about on par with his other read speeches.