| Author | Message | ||
     Fb1 |
There is an organized effort to smear Megyn Kelly... Source? ...and Amazon is doing the right thing in trying to scrub the fake reviews that they can identify. Possible. Do you know who owns Amazon? Do you know he's a huge never-Trump'er? This is common knowledge amongst legions of Trump fans. There's also no love lost for Kelly among some/many/most Trump fans. (Lust? You'll have to take that up with Macbuell and Crusty...) So I suppose it's possible that some of the reviews of her book aren't actual reviews of her book, but rather a chance to lash out against Kelly and Bezos. That said, I'm wondering if you have a source for your comment that it's a smear campaign, or whether it's an educated hunch. Best, FB | ||
| Natexlh1000 |
It's pretty easy really. All they have to do is throw out all of the reviewers that haven't bought the book from them. I'm not saying I will ever read the silly thing but the reviews started pouring in on the first day. I doubt that this is an organized smear campaign but probably a mob of vigilantes. | ||
| Fb1 |
Reading through some of the comments from supposed "verified purchasers," per Amazon, has been, um, interesting.
| ||
| Hootowl |
"Until she check's that privilege" Someone saying "check your privilege" makes me want to punch that someone in the face. Put down the "poor me" sign and pick up a hard sciences book, and perhaps your life will mean something after you graduate. /rant | ||
| Aesquire |
So..... Is the Trump Presidency going to be the ego driven monstrosity that the Obama Regime is, except the Press is going to unleash all their hate? I don't give a darn about most reporters. I did buy the book by the brave female reporter who was/is attacked & hacked by the Obama Regime. For real. Being picked on in your Amazon review isn't the same league as losing your job and being hounded to stop reporting that the President and the Attorney General ran a gun running program to Mexican drug gangs for the purpose of making an Obama Lie "true" and taking away your rights. Of course the fact that I canceled cable years ago might have something to do with my lack of interest in a moderately hot blonde on TV. Being force fed Rachel Maddow's blend of snark, lies and propaganda ( not always the same thing ) for a week 2 weeks ago pretty much reinforces my decision to not watch network anything except a few sitcoms. ( which I can watch online the next day ) | ||
| Fb1 |
Something I just found on the 'net. The following comments were written by "Peter," allegedly the same Peter in the screen grab below.
 Image source: https://twitter.com/DrhjohnPhd/status/799023726381 637632/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw | ||
| Sifo |
There is an organized effort to smear Megyn Kelly... Source? No source. If you put that back into it's context, you will see I'm simply offering the simplest explanation for what is going on. Perhaps the word "organized" could be taken out of it though. Interesting that some of the "reviews" you posted are blaming Trump supporters. That was NOT where my gut would tell me this stuff would come from. Perhaps some of it does though. I found this one interesting though...
Megyn Kelly didn't make her name during this election. She was in a position to ask Trump difficult questions because she had already make a name for herself. I'll admit, I've liked her reporting for a number of years now. I'm glad that she has risen to the position that she has in fact earned. Is her book any good? I haven't got a clue. Honestly, if these fake reviews are coming from Trump supporters, I'm disappointed in them. It would be very hypocritical of me to expect hard questions to be asked of candidates I don't like, but expect a pass to be given to a candidate I do like. Over the years, Trump has made statements about many people, and groups of people. A good deal of that has been aimed at women, and his statements were not flattering. Trump owns that. Honestly, it's best to get it out in the open early, and address it head on. That shouldn't mean attacking the person asking the question. Address the issue at hand. He tried to make the issue at hand a woman reporter, not his somewhat frequent attacks on women. Now I recognize that Trump making frequent attacks on women doesn't necessarily make him a misogynist. Trump makes frequent attacks on people of all stripes. It's part of who he is. Not one of his better parts BTW. Fortunately, it's only a part of who he is. It is a part of him that will not serve him well in politics though. Hopefully he has begun to understand this. I have high hopes for him as President. I will also hold his feet to the fire with high expectations. He's certainly no idiot, but he is a bit of a rookie in politics. On the woman thing, it's worth noting that his campaign manager happens to now be the first woman in the history of our country to manage a winning Presidential campaign. Trump should get credit for that. I don't think she was picked as a PR stunt either. She was highly qualified for the position, and Trump had to listen to her advice to make it work. That right there speaks volumes toward what I see as a fact, that Trump is a bit of a loudmouth blowhard who doesn't worry about offending someone. I personally like that to a point. Too much of that will destroy a politician though. He's playing a new ballgame now, and has jumped right into the big leagues. I hope he can adjust fast enough. | ||
| Hootowl |
His frequent attacks on people, some of whom happen to be women, would be more accurate. The left attacks people all the time. They finally found a target that fights back, instead of tucking tail. It enrages them. It's not what they have been conditioned to expect. They are not in their comfort zone, and it scares the s**t out of them. If Trump does nothing other than turn the left on its head for the next four years, it will have been worth it. | ||
| Fb1 |
Sifo, thanks for the post. I don't get my news from the TV. I admire Kelly's quickness on her feet, and give her all due props for reaching the big leagues, but I have little opinion on her worth as a truth-telling journalist. I try to vet everything I hear or read, and as a general rule distrust ANY mainstream media talking head. Re: Trump: Unlike our outgoing pResident, Trump is, literally, the smartest man in the room. He's got this.  (Message edited by fb1 on November 17, 2016) | ||
| Sifo |
Something I just found on the 'net. The following comments were written by "Peter," allegedly the same Peter in the screen grab below. And is Peter's "review" of her book about her book, or a matter of his view of her as a journalist? Frankly, if I take him at his word, that he hasn't seen her work since she had the audacity to question Trump, he really doesn't know much of what he's talking about. Now I'll ask you... Is a person who refuses to watch Megyn Kelly on TV likely to spend money and time to actually read her autobiography? Perhaps it's possible, but it's not likely. I wonder how Amazon verifies purchases. Regardless, his rant was off topic from the book, and deserved to be removed from a list of reviews of that book. | ||
| Sifo |
He's got this. I sure hope your right. Given the binary choice we had at the end, he was certainly the right choice in my mind. | ||
| Ratbuell |
Not only that, but he has brought forth a legion of people who will also not tuck tail. To the comment about "Megyn Kelly has written a book promoting herself"...well no shit. Why else would one write a book like this? It's not fiction. It's not a story book. It's not a comic book. Duh. | ||
| Fb1 |
And is Peter's "review" of her book about her book, or a matter of his view of her as a journalist? Frankly, if I take him at his word, that he hasn't seen her work since she had the audacity to question Trump, he really doesn't know much of what he's talking about. Now I'll ask you... Is a person who refuses to watch Megyn Kelly on TV likely to spend money and time to actually read her autobiography? Perhaps it's possible, but it's not likely. Regardless, his rant was off topic from the book, and deserved to be removed from a list of reviews of that book. All valid points. I didn't post it up as an "endorsement" or citation, just adding to the conversation. I wonder how Amazon verifies purchases. Don't know, but I have noticed that in many of the reviews that show as verified purchases it's obvious that the reviewer hasn't actually read the book. | ||
| Fb1 |
Lou Dobbs seems to be a trustworthy journalist among the Trump faithful: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AE0S4BkhL6k | ||
| Reepicheep |
They probably deleted your review of the book because it was more a criticism and attack on the author than a review of the book. Which is probably not what the typical amazon customer is looking for when deciding to buy the book or not. It would be like a review of Harley Davidson which is a screed against noise pollution and global warming. Sure, it may be relevant to the thing, but it's not what readers of the review are looking for. | ||
| Ducbsa |
These heartbroken folks do live in a bubble where "everyone" is grieving. https://youtu.be/UtJvYdX4GKM | ||
| Fb1 |
 Image link: https://i1.wp.com/i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/11/ 16/15/3A7280E400000578-3942274-image-a-10_14793118 36301.jpg  Image link: https://i2.wp.com/i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/11/ 16/15/3A72809600000578-3942274-image-a-9_147931182 4907.jpg Pulitzer Prize in 3... 2... 1... | ||
| Macbuell |
For someone that wants to be considered a serious journalist, she sure does a lot of provocative photo shoots. I'm not sure that helps her cause. | ||
| Macbuell |
I was one of those reluctant Trump voters. There were things about him that made me uncomfortable. But, the people that I think were sending this country down the wrong path hated him. So, the enemy of my enemy is my So I voted for him. That said, now all of us, FB1 included, need to look at him with a critical eye and make sure he is doing what he was elected to do. I'm liking a lot of what I am hearing but do not understand the Bannon appointment. Trump supporters are being called racist and sexist at every turn. Why appoint someone that gives voice to that concern. I don't get it and optically it just look bad. | ||
| Sifo |
I think the whole racist thing with Bannon, is just a guilt by association thing, with very vague suggestions of what associates are supposed to be guilty. It's going to be very difficult to find candidates that can withstand that sort of silliness. Frankly, I'm sick and tired of the last 8 years of people crying racism a the drop of a hat. It's gotten stupid. | ||
| Fb1 |
That said, now all of us, FB1 included, need to look at him with a critical eye and make sure he is doing what he was elected to do. Speaking only for myself: I'm one of the most critical people you'll ever meet. Sure, I've posted up a lot of pro-Trump stuff, for at least several reasons, mostly to combat the constant lies and propaganda from the left about Trump in the last year and a half. But: Find me something I've posted-up that wasn't true and fact-checkable. I'm not grinding this stuff out as a fan boy. I did what I could to help him get elected, and I'm doing what I can to help ease his transition into the White House. If Trump turns out to be a traitor, and has lied to us to get elected, I'll be all over him like stink on shite. I've done a lot of homework, amigo. He ain't a perfect human - none of us are - but he's the PERFECT weapon at the PERFECT time to take this country back from the traitors who are trying to fundamentally change this nation into something other than the Founders intended. My faith in Trump isn't blind. If my posts in the past year and a half have done nothing else, they should at LEAST show I'm not blind when it comes to politics. All that said: Yes, we should absolutely hold him to the highest standards. In this regard I couldn't agree with you more. I'm liking a lot of what I am hearing but do not understand the Bannon appointment. Trump supporters are being called racist and sexist at every turn. Why appoint someone that gives voice to that concern. I don't get it and optically it just look bad. Every frikkin' thing the media is tossing out about Trump, including the gang rape that's presently taking place on Bannon, is lies! It's pure propaganda, gaslighting, and psy-ops!! Can you cite for us even ONE credible, verifiable source demonstrating PROOF that Bannon is _________ (fill in the blank). The MSM is making up crap, again, and if you take even a cursory look around the MSM you see that it's all fully coordinated. All the talking points, the sound bites, the "expert" commentators, they're all the same! Shun the mainstream media, amigo. Classic psy-ops. Have you done any actual homework on Steve Bannon? I think it's fascinating that he's part of Trump's upper echelon. What does it ultimately mean for America? I think I know at least one major reason, but I'm going to withhold speculation for now. Best, FB | ||
| Reepicheep |
I resisted the temptation to say that because most mass shooters are registered Democrats, that Democrats are in favor of mass shooters. First, because it doesn't help anything. But secondly, because I don't want to sound like an idiot incapable of applying anything above third grade logic. The arguments I am seeing from the left are really stupid. If this guy is bad (I have no idea), he must not be that bad, because 1000 liberal attackers don't seem to have many coherent points. | ||
| Fb1 |
PS to Macbuell: Why appoint someone that gives voice to that concern. I don't get it and optically it just look bad. The MSM (at the behest of the left) will excoriate ANYONE related to Trump, if and when their current goals dictate. The volume level of that excoriation is directly proportional to the danger that person poses to the left. Why is Bannon so prominently in the news and taking so much flak? Because he's Directly. Over. Target. Soon it will be someone else...and someone else...and someone else...and someone else... (Message edited by fb1 on November 17, 2016) | ||
| Fb1 |
Here's a video from March 1st, 2012 (early in the lead-up to the last presidential election), the day that Andrew Breitbart died, that features Steve Bannon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrJ-dXz8TAI | ||
| Fb1 |
How do you know you're directly over target? When the NY Times, Ben Shapiro, the ADL, CAIR, the SPLC and Harry Reid are all trying in earnest to shoot you out of the sky. From Wikipedia:
Source, more, including multiple citations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Bannon | ||
| Fb1 |
Steve Bannon talks about Biosphere 2, beginning at about 0:20: https://youtu.be/l_gkBPlLcfQ | ||
| Aesquire |
Is it just me or did they create the "alt-right" thing just a few months ago to avoid actually confronting the real issues? I'm sure you can find in a nation of over 200 million citizens and more than 50 million criminal trespassers, a few dozen total racist jerks. And some of them won't be registered Democrat, because the Dems lie about how racist their basic strategy has been for over a century. Like Bill Clinton said about his good friend, the grand Klegal of the Klu Klux Klan, being a Klan member is what gets a Democrat elected. Denying any empathy for your own views is what you say after you're in power. | ||
| Fb1 |
This video from the inaugural Liberty Restoration Foundation meeting on October 25th, 2011 will give you an idea of Bannon's mental horsepower, and his ability to put thought into word. It will also illustrate Bannon's involvement with and support of the early Tea Party movement: https://youtu.be/0BSrJv0IpHY | ||
| Macbuell |
He said himself in an interview with MotherJones about Breitbart ... " we're the platform for the Alt-Right". And there are too many negatives tied to the "Alt Right". I firmly believe most Trump voters are not racist or sexist. Why put someone in your cabinet, rightly or wrongly, that casts doubt on that statement. My point is, like was said numerous times during the campaign itself ... why give the opposition free ammunition? Bannon will be a distraction. Plain and simple. End of story as he will be the story as opposed to the things Trump is trying to do. For that reason alone, it is a bad decision, IMO. | ||
| Fb1 |
ANYONE will be a distraction, if the left so decrees. Are you suggesting that since the MSM is excoriating Bannon that Trump should dump him? Following that logic, Trump would have rescinded his bid for the presidency within 24 hours of his initial announcement in June of 2015 - the reaction from the MSM was swift and brutal. Trump has called out the presstitutes at every opportunity in the last year and a half. He needed to demonstrate to them - and to US - that he understands 1) they're the enemy, and 2) that he's not afraid of them. Trump didn't get to be where he is - president-elect, in this case - by kowtowing to the MSM and their masters. So, give me a solid reason NOT to like Bannon, and "distraction" doesn't count. |
