Comments by "Peter deWolf" (@StoneShards) on "CNN" channel.

  1. "If the nesting doll fits..."! hahaha These political marketing people are INSANELY clever, aren't they! I think they like to hear themselves talk...
    57
  2. Finally, Graham gets called out on his caricature of hawkishness. Paul got it right.
    9
  3. Phil's full of Mudd, isn't he! Why so violent! Logic flees such an inhospitable environment, which is the idea. Mudd cannot argue logically because his position is not reasoned, not amenable to logic. The moderator is either ignorant or lying about the nature/value of clearances--and unaware in either case.
    6
  4. Cuomo: clueless, incompetent, tool. His bias distorts his perception into a bizarre leftist narrative. Trump is a leader; he does what he sees to do. Do you want a leader or a puppet of political forces?! If you want someone who bends to every political breeze, then elect one; if you can't then at least be an American, and express a little unity. There are other interpretations of this information possible; but you wouldn't know it listening to such poisonous opinions as Cuomo's, here. The MSM is so incurious! I guess they figure they already know it all: hubris. But most of all, the inability/unwillingness to penetrate the rationale of political intercourse dooms us all perpetually to their blustering, incompetent opinion/analysis. Reporters used to spend most of their time asking questions; now, they spend most of their time giving answers. Has the mission of journalism changed? I say, "yes". Journalism and propaganda have always been bedfellows. Traditionally, recognition of this fact has been deliberate; a conscious caution. Now it appears to me, they believe their new mission is to provide a uniform truth news--which is the definition of propaganda (if you think about it)--without realizing that they must become fake news in the pursuit of this impossible mission BECAUSE the mission is impossible.
    4
  5. You're trying to tug at my heartstrings by showing me pathetic crying children? I've seen worse bring less condemnation. Every parent has an especially informed perspective: kids learn to cry well, since they start out life unable to speak coherently. Viola! No heartstring tug. Sor-ry.
    2
  6. But it IS everyday that the NYT/ CNN channels its inner National Enquirer.
    2
  7. Children are "ripped from their mothers' arms"...RIPPED, mind you, not taken, not separated, but ripped and torn, of course. Because it sounds worse when you say it that way, and that's what they want: to foster a false appearance that they think furthers their cause, by denigrating and disparaging the "other side".
    2
  8. How do they let Bash spew such nonsense: she says oh we have to verify the translation, etc.--ok, so do it BEFORE reporting it! Her speech is practically an unbroken string of logical fallacies. Her behavior is utterly journalistically irresponsible!
    2
  9. They're not afraid of Trump--they despise him. What do they have to fear from Trump? Does Trump know they're "afraid" of him? Then he should be able to get them to do whatever he says. I call BS. They just naturally shy away from the light of day.
    2
  10. Poor old farts, they just can't adjust to reality. I've seen it numerous times, personally. It's like they know instinctively that, in order to accommodate reality they would have to break their minds quite a bit; so they fall back on the old world order style of effete politics: ineffectual, pompous, all appearance and no substance. The US's meddling in elections/governments around the world has been ongoing for decades! Get real! Everybody does it and it doesn't matter in developed countries, where the only influence possible is through messaging/advertising/propagandizing; in underdeveloped countries meddling could extend to actual vote counting/reporting. So the fuck what! If you want reliable elections, then secure your voting hardware/software. Everything else is free speech: attempts at persuasion cannot be considered meddling/interference! According the US law, people from any country have a right to persuade Americans in their opinions at any time through speech/text.
    2
  11. Carl Bernstein is obviously clueless. No details, just generalities...he could still be talking about Watergate. "The warrant was legitimate because it was signed by a judge." Oh, really? And if that judge only signed because he was deceived? Is it still a legitimate warrant? Bernstein doesn't seem to care about the details.
    1
  12. Whose fault? Reps or dems? She says it's absolutely the Reps fault, offering no support for that opinion of any kind. There is no reason we have to schlep around at this level of discourse, where one side asserts on thing, the other side asserts its opposite, then...nothing about WHY one side is right vs the other. There's no effort to understand through discussion. Just one opinion asserted after the other without end. And these assertions are extremely poorly articulated! It's more of a rant-fest.
    1
  13. Boo-hoo, if you're tired little jimmy take a nap. Stop your whining...you look like you're going to wet yourself. Did anybody beat you bloody, like they do Trump supporters? Anybody follow you home, or threaten your children? You're a pampered George Clooney lookalike...without an original thought in your head.
    1
  14. Wolf Blitzer is interviewing HIMSELF!!! And, no, he's not usually better than this, Rand, but your best bet is to say so. Rand Paul, a voice of reason, in this case, describes the proper perspective. Why has CNN become a cheerleader for the intelligence community? Oh, yeah, I remember: the MSM is staffed in significant part by intelligence agents. What is this evidence that Paul mentions? I keep up with this and haven't seen it detailed. The supposed Russian footprint in some malware was a clumsy attempt to cast aspersions, as such "identifications" are subject to dispute, as this one was, successfully. But it gets out there and into people's heads and doesn't get out, so that, eventually, these people get to thinking that Putin is some kind of satanic maniac who will stop at nothing to accumulate more wealth and power. You don't get elected three times because you're robbing the country blind! Russia's people have listened to Putin's words and intuited his character, in much the same way as we've done with Trump. People who spend their lives in close proximity to daily reality develop a heightened sense of people's true intentions. They may not realize it but find themselves avoiding people they unconsciously distrust.
    1
  15. The rank idiocy of requiring the revelation of confidential discussions between world leaders can accomplish only one thing: the disappearance from practical political consideration of ALL private meetings which might conceivably be required to be revealed. World leaders recognize the inadvisability of speaking frankly in public--that's why they talk and talk and say nothing; they're being so careful of the potential for criticism that what comes out of their mouths is so vague as to be virtually meaningless--but safe. No private meetings means a significant decrease in the overall quality and value of communications IN GENERAL! These congressional meatheads are incompetent in the extreme for pursuing their partisan agenda without due regard for the wider consequences of the disingenuity they employ in that pursuit.
    1
  16. herman miller/// Irrelevant response: failure to address.
    1
  17. Cuomo lets her talk as long as she's saying what he wants to hear. Interrupting with facts? That's intellectually dishonest: interrupting with irrelevant facts is a juvenile tactic for obstructing the speaker and diverting the discussion. And you know he thinks he's so clever in doing so...jeez...Dunning-Kruger...
    1
  18. CNN is hilarious!!! Joseph Goebbles would be envious! But the MSM is getting a little...obvious in their prejudice. They'd be well-advised to avoid becoming caricatures of themselves--but that advise won't come from me: I wanna watch the comedic carnage unfold!
    1
  19. I dare like this: love is the law; love under will. Emotion is great, but it must be under the control of intelligence/will. Otherwise, you must lead a life of absolute sacrifice, and that's not a proper way to live life for the vast majority of people. If reason doesn't reign supreme in the final analysis, it doesn't reign at all.
    1
  20. It looks like "hope", and smells like "fear". The only "alarm bells" were the ones raised at CNN.
    1
  21. "Might makes right" is the attitude behind the calls to "be tough on Russia'; now you say it's a wrong attitude to have! Who is Cuomo trying to fool by contradicting himself?! YOU!
    1
  22. She's not "cleaning up" for Trump, you fabulous twit. Her job is to explain what Trump says to the lower IQ listeners. Trump's not on the defensive at all; in fact, he's milking the "fake news" angle for a bit of political currency. It seems all the recent studies show extreme media bias in news reporting. Would either of these talking heads like to weigh-in on the objective evidence of rampant media bias? I thought not.
    1
  23. What inane questions! "...while the president rips up the iran deal..."...Not even the pretense of objectivity. Lazy and incompetent reporters don't serve us well.
    1
  24. Putin's right: the US, and I'd say the UK as well, doesn't play by the internationally-prepared rules/treaties; the US just blusters, makes belligerent noises, instead of utilizing the mechanisms established for such interactions. The US extracts special treatment based on its status and bluster, and, traditionally, uses it to bully other nations.
    1
  25. Lemon says, "Appearing on CNN is a privilege, not a right." So, basically, "Tow the line, back our spin, or maybe you won't be back on CNN."
    1
  26. The "press" has a curious penchant for putting words in the mouths of those they interview: "will you say xxx"; "why won't you say xxx". It's as if their vocabulary is too limited to understand the meaning of sentences not constructed using their preferred terminology. But, of course, that's not it. What it is is "weaponized terminology": they've determined that certain terminology furthers their agenda better than other terminology. So, as much as possible, they tout their buzzwords. The press has a purpose and a function; but it shouldn't have an agenda. They use their positions to fool their viewers into accepting their opinions as "news". Deplorable.
    1
  27. Why is Jolly going left with this? He mentions cases of right abusing left, without balancing with cases of left abusing right. What's his payoff for putting his brain in neutral?
    1
  28. Excellent hearing, and I hear the same thing. The important thing about that upward inflection you mentioned is that it indicates a query; it's a questioning tone. Trump is anticipating Cohen's advice--not giving Cohen directives. When Cohen says "no, no, no", Trump says, "check", again with a hint of upward inflection. I'm not finding the CNN forensic guy very insightful.
    1
  29. Tapper says US and Russia "not on same moral plane"...jeez...Feel superior much? What does that even MEAN! Go ahead! Tell me what a "moral plane" is! I know what a "moral" is; I know what a "plane" is. But combining the terms yields a senseless meaning--except as a mechanism of expression of his opinion of American superiority. The arrogance is so unseemly.
    1
  30. This woman has no clue about the logistics of detention. Ignorance can be remedied. The problem is, of course, Dunning-Kruger: she's too clueless to understand how clueless she is. So she rambles on as if she's smart, while, at the same time, showcasing her ignorance. This must be, like, ironic squared, or something. The relative mediocrity of her intelligence prevents her from recognizing her ignorance. And this is happening all the time, everywhere, and causes confusion of basic communication between individuals, only one of whom will be capable of recognizing that the communication is faulty. From this point, miscommunication escalates to disagreement (was there actually disagreement? we don't know until you fix the communication), and then to anger, at which point "discussion" ceases to resemble the rational, even in form...jeez
    1
  31. All I see here is strident tones in the service of political advantage. Is no one thoughtful allowed to speak?!
    1
  32. His own intelligence agencies are dedicated to his destruction, aren't they? And he should TRUST them?! The is still the same old world advice: play the game. It's a mindset, a worldview that is foreign to Trump. The intelligence agencies have proven to be incompetent and untrustworthy.
    1
  33. "This means...", and, "the question is...", indicates pure speculation on the way. These pundits try to frame information to support a certain, I'd say outdated, cold war styled worldview: world leaders are delicate personalities which must be coddled as a political expedient; otherwise, an insulted leader with nukes will simply fire them off out of anger, causing WWIII. Idiots!
    1
  34. Only if you're too stupid yourself to understand the value of "truth" in the global political context. "Lies" are the currency of political activity: if you use the objective, balanced truth, you get nowhere. And if you expect the day-to-day political activities to be immediately sensible, logical, and truthful you are cluelessly naïve.
    1
  35. Trump is drawing Cohen out, because Trump is a little impatient, so he guesses in anticipation, "pay in cash"; then Cohen, "no, no, no"; then Trump says "check" just before the end of the tape. Maybe he goes on to say more that someone doesn't want us to hear. But it's legitimate to talk about the method of payment because it's not a standard business transaction. There are legitimate reasons why the person getting the payment would prefer a more intimate payment than a check, something less real-world noisy. Cuomo gives raucous lip-service to trying to be fair, then fails in execution.
    1
  36. Cuomo's a bully, but his new makeup job is a HIT! He doesn't look nearly so...trollish, anymore. I wouldn't have thought it possible, since the troll look is heavily dependent on skin folds. Maybe botox, eh? Idk, but somehow, somebody, filled in the wrinkles. If only he'd stop turning the corners of his mouth down when he's not speaking, he'd have the beginnings of a passable tv anchor persona...in case he wants to change jobs. hehehe
    1
  37. Hmmm...a judge that lacks legal standing. That just doesn't sound right.
    1
  38. Funny is funny. Personally, the only humor I find impossible to laugh at: gay jokes, fart jokes, and personal attacks--the "humor" is just lost on me, it doesn't make "humorous" sense.
    1
  39. Yeah? But he knows how NATO DOESN'T work.
    1
  40. Hire a small army to take custody of the children and move them around the country, visiting USA's most beautiful natural scenery, visiting great cities; take 'em to museums and restaurants--show 'em a good time---THEN deport 'em! hehehe
    1
  41. Lemon interrupted a sensible response because he didn't like it. He accuses his interviewee of giving out dis/misinformation on his show, and apparently he feels a responsibility to not allow what he thinks to be dis/misinformation to be spoken by his "guest"!!!!! That's obvious, active censorship. Even the other guest insists on reframing and reshaping the one guest's position and its descriptive expression!!! This is a ham-fisted attempt to marginalize "the other side". Simply by showing disrespect they imply that disrespect is deserved...constant repetition of displays of this disrespect does the rest over time.
    1
  42. These commentator personalities are so clueless! The stuff they talk about is part of their worldview: The obvious is True. They're all armchair presidents! But they don't penetrate much beyond words: "oh, this is what he said...he shouldn't have said that...he shouldn't ever use those kinds of words...he should raise the conversation"; who's screwing who; who's "lying" (that's a big one); and who are the good people and countries. They're just doing their jobs: ginning up mindless excitement, to sell their worldview.
    1
  43. "Rules-based international order", is that what he said?! That's an awfully general term, subject as such terms are to a wide array of possible interpretations, it becomes a meaningless term. The fear-mongering is so old-school! Instead of fear, try on understanding and compassion for size. The US is too big for this to be a real problem. She just wants to continue marginalizing and isolating NK. Remember: "competition is the only sin".
    1
  44. "Spinning wheel got to go 'round"..."ride the painted pony let the spinnin' wheel spin"...What's funny is you wear your offendedness with pride instead of, the more appropriate, shame.
    1
  45. Lemon's a tool. His perpetual parade of logical fallacies is entertaining for a few minutes, until a sense of tragedy kicks in: his distortions inflame the imagination rather than convey information meaningfully. The irresponsibility of this sort of use of language cannot be understated. It's like: "Have you stopped beating (certain other participles are even more imaginarily abusive) your mother? Answer yes or no." The strained comparisons, magnified way beyond their value, fuel their frequent launches into hyperbolic space. They are making caricatures of themselves--but you can hardly tell!
    1
  46. I agree with your analysis, Mogz. However, I still think it's possible that this aggravated deviciveness is an illusion of high profile. IOW, it only seems that this situation is pervasive, when actually that pervasiveness is an illusion fostered by the opinion-makers (whomever they think they may be). We're being very aggressively and binarily propagandized to maintain a powerful polarization of opinion, an emotional stake. Without a strong emotional component, discourse can rise to the level of intelligent, measured, balanced, logical. Unfortunately, for a lot of people this would be just plain boring; they'd rather be excited than sane.
    1
  47. Trump doesn't say the press is the enemy; he says the fake news media is the enemy. The distortion of his meaning is the only way the fake press can defend its perfidy. What ever happened to reporting the facts and leaving the opinion out? I'll tell you: greed. Boring = bad ratings = no money. So they spiced it up! MSM is now tabloid press--and apparently proud of it. The job of the press isn't "to ask tough questions"; it's to present the facts in a balanced manner that accurately illustrates the truth. And they're lying down on that job.
    1
  48. "Don't you think the American people have a right to know?", asks Costas. Sanders tells him in so many words, "Go be a journalist: research the subject, find the facts, report results." Bingo!
    1
  49. You've never understood the term "deep state"?! You're either an idiot or a liar.
    1
  50. Hmmm, a defense attorney seeking discovery...since when is that a problem?! You gotta love these professional personalities ending their little subsegments with total BS, like, they're thinking, "hey, everything I've said up to now was pretty straight and level, so this BS should fly!"
    1
  51. Lemon, the cupcake bully, has donned eyeglasses, presumably, though possibly just glass. Now he LOOKS so much smarter.
    1
  52. Now that's a remarkable piece of editorial clap-trap. Besides forgetting that correlation is NOT causation, this doltish neb leads us on a micro-adventure of tortured logic and intellectually dishonest and severely prejudiced redefinitions of general terminology designed to prevent his "logic" from screaming as it is tortured (it didn't work, though) while fulfilling the required steps of his perverted "logical" "argument". This guy's gotta be 2-digit IQ! I'd be rather disillusioned in reality itself if I was to be persuaded otherwise; if Cuomo was almost smart.
    1
  53. "Criticism" does not adequately describe the activity of accusing someone of a capital crime (treason). But it is convenient for the MSM narrative to so soft-pedal Brennan's admitted intention to destroy Trump's presidency: it makes Trump look like the bad guy, trying to censor his innocent "critic". The MSM looks like a bunch of trash-talkers--what happened to "journalism"?
    1
  54. Trump clearly doesn't SHARE Kerry's "understanding of America". STFW! Again, we have to buy into some grand idea of Kerry's greatness in order to even stand listening to him--and I DON'T buy it. Kerry's a corrupt shmuck; somebody met his price, so he comes out of the woodword, er, I mean woodwork, to prostitute his reputation. Kerry represents the old guard politician who strives to maintain the status quo in fear of the smallest disruption in global politeness triggering the end of the world. After decades of keeping the lid on, the pot's ready to boil over; the status quo can only be kept for so long. The methodology used to maintain the status quo marginalizes marginalizable issues that eventually become important. The same mentality that produced the problem is incapable of solving it.
    1
  55. Surrender? What was surrendered? Dignity? Eventually, your hyperbolic phraseology will lose its shock value, all you armchair presidents.
    1
  56. Cuomo should know that correlation is not causation, so talking like he doesn't know this is disingenuous at best, more likely manipulative--doing the bidding of his CIA handlers in pushing the deep state narrative.
    1
  57. "Trump Surrendered"! Hahahaha, BS. Anything to lay claim to even a shred of victory over the evil usurper of democracy. Hahahaha...pathetic. How does it appear when a journalist sells his soul? You're lookin' at it in this vid.
    1
  58. Cortez: "He passed it and rammed it through". Redundancy in the service of excitement is a juvenile tactic, and has the attention-getting power of a crying baby that has some people running to help and others running AWAY!
    1
  59. It's a logical error to consider a person's reputation in the evaluation of that person's argument. Cuomo says he "measures veracity by reaction", which is a clear verification that he is intellectually lazy; his efforts lack rigor, not vigor. Cuomo's, "Why do we allow protest in America", disingenuously ignores context...lot of that going around these days. Cuomo is logically discombobulated by his predilection for emotional language expression: if he'd listen more and interrupt less he'd find less need for interruption.
    1
  60. They think everybody's a sucker for crocodile tears. I'm a parent: a crying child doesn't indicate a child "suffering" actual pain, necessarily. And so what? Get used to it! We all did--or do you still cry when you scrape your knee? It is the parents of these children who have decided to inflict this torturous experience upon them! Let them bear the responsibility they've taken upon themselves by becoming criminals with children. No normal-IQ parent who truly cared about his children would subject them to this hardship. CHOOSING to enter illegally made them unfit parents, and their children should be removed from their degenerate influence.
    1
  61. "Canada won't be pushed around." Since when?! The boy-king is not convincing--he was almost shaking in his boots as he made this contentious statement, like he's thinking: please, don't call my bluff!
    1
  62. Thin skins and hair triggers...jeez.
    1
  63. Breaking, Chris: the "court of public opinion" is NOT an actual court. Saying something "still has to be tried in the court of public opinion" is saying nothing--and you look right stupid saying it so seriously.
    1
  64. Alitas Jiromato, Watergate bears only a passing resemblance to "this affair", and, relevance anyway? It doesn't matter at all who's funding RT! Not a wit! Who's funding ABC? It doesn't matter; what matters is what YOU do with any given informational presentation! If the only choice that occurs to you when experiencing informational presentation is to "believe it or not", then your critical skills are non-existent, and your opinion, therefore, unimportant, except insofar as it may motivate you to irrational action. Any information/argument should be evaluated on its merits, whether proffered by god or an idiot--that's how logic operates. Funding source knowledge may provide insight into the biases you detect. But if you intend to "believe" based upon the funding source, then "reason" is no concern of yours, is it?
    1
  65. I largely agree, except this "Russian collusion" narrative has not been demonstrated as even likely, to my satisfaction. All I see is a bunch of tough talk and posturing (for the next election, most likely), no evidence. Just the fact that the DNC servers were not confiscated as a matter of national security stinks to high heaven. And Seth Rich? The problem I'm beginning to see depends from the difficulty of holding so many points of interest in awareness together to form a "big picture" overview. The resulting tendency is to focus on higher profile points to the exclusion of other aspects with less immediate interest. As long as the big picture isn't too complicated this isn't usually much of an issue. But this whole situation has expanded/evolved without becoming much more clear. Now we have new Page-Strzok texts implicating the Obama white house! It's very challenging to juggle the known information into an accurate understanding without creating bias against the future integration of as-yet unknown information. And what if what we're actually talking about is the US govt spying on the Republican party and reporting it to the Clinton campaign?? Because that's the image forming in my analysis.
    1
  66. Wackos come in all flavors, democrat and republican. Blaming Trump is so illogical it borders on stupid.
    1
  67. I was anticipating the possibility of discussion, so I tried to fairly explain what I was saying, so that a "discussion" wouldn't be just, "Fake news--no it's not--fake news--no it's not"...ad infinitum. I could easily have said nothing, but then you'd still think you're smart. And what good is thinking you're smart when you're not? But do you appreciate the favor? No. Instead, you berate me for consuming bandwidth, which hasn't been an issue for some 30 years now!...<sigh> That's why I don't often bother with the CNN channel.
    1
  68. A lot of whining and no analysis of the substance of what Tucker said. So, tell me, exactly HOW does "diversity" make America great. Should be easy, right? Tucker is pointing out the downside of "diversity". If these commentators weren't so emotionally trapped, they could recognize the verities of his argument, instead of issuing knee-jerk leftist platitudes. No organized left? So the democrat party is not organized? Logic? Who needs it, when ranting and raving captures their target audience? Balanced analyses are so boring...jeez
    1
  69. The concomitant of warmongering is belligerence. "Everybody knows" is a description of a particular logical fallacy, and Lemon uses it brazenly in the service of narrative construction. "Directing his officials to help" is not an admission of election interference, any more than is a partisan political advertisement. The intellectual dishonesty evident in Lemon's "opinion" is appalling in its scope and pervasiveness! Wake up people! This is not journalism; this is entertainment! The MSM would disappear if it wasn't for advertising revenue. And that revenue is determined by the desirability of a given network/program/timeslot. And that desirability is determined by the size and demographic of that audience. And audience size is a measure of popularity. And popularity is a measure of acceptance/acceptability. For most people that means something like, "I like you because you make me happy"--that's entertainment. Unfortunately for the world, most people lack genuine curiosity, so hearing something unfamiliar will make them (relatively) unhappy--and unentertained. Therefore, to keep your audience, most of what you tell them must be stuff they already know! Without an expansive backdrop of confirmation bias validation, the bulk of your audience drifts away, to something with greater entertainment value: some colorful graphics, pretty people, humor, personality (lots of personality). The MSM is an entertainment product (much like the NFL). A couple decades ago, courts ruled that news programs have no legal responsibility to tell the truth. That's when and where real journalism had to die.
    1
  70. Wow, what a load of hooey up front! Later we hear a more accurate rendition of the headline. They've already got as much docs as they got for the last five nominees put together! All the dems have said they'll vote "no", so what are they stalling for? Optics? Is this woman host an intern?! She seems nervous, unengaged...
    1
  71. April Ryan still has a job!? How does that happen?!
    1
  72. Oh...so the red hen owner essentially accused Sarah Sanders of being dishonest, and/or uncompassionate, and/or uncooperative; this is by the owner's own words--she has "standards", you know! Treating an individual as a member of a class, responsible for the behavior of the class is scape-goating. It is understandable that people without inherent individuality would be unable to conceive the reality of individuality; they can only see themselves as members of a group, having only the individuality necessary for participation in the group. They don't get it. They don't understand why people (who possess individuality) hold the positions they hold. They naturally then feel frustrated by their incompetence, and, depending on circumstances, this frustration may be expressed violently. They're not...completely...human.
    1