White House revokes Jim Acosta's press pass

[TitanTiger 20,482]

Just now, NolaAuTiger said:

I concede nothing. You’re welcome.

It's Debate 101, Nola.  You know this.  You make an assertion, it's on you to offer supporting examples.  Just making blanket statements doesn't cut it.  You said there was a pattern of behavior here that had built resulting in his press credentials being revoked.  I asked for some examples establishing this pattern and you've balked.  It doesn't matter than it's a somewhat subjective thing, show me examples that *you* believe establish this pattern and we can discuss.  But if you can't or won't support your arguments, then your argument fails by default. 

[TitanTiger 20,482]

2 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

I don't have all those press conferences recorded. or would be happy to provide them. You just have your  heels dug in and won't accept reality.

Nope.  I just expect people who make claims to be able to support them.  I'm sure there are transcripts available.  Google 'em.  Otherwise, no one has to take the assertion seriously.

[japantiger 4,051]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

Nothing about our system of government works right without a basic undergirding principle that our leaders are accountable to us for the things they do and say, and that one is the chief mechanisms for holding them accountable is a free press asking them tough questions. To start getting pedantic about the constitutionality of refusing to answer questions and revoking the credentials of press members when they ask one’s you don’t like misses the point entirely. 

And one way to test your argument on this is to ask yourself how you would have truly responded if a Fox News reporter had asked Obama a few pointed questions and Obama had tried to yank his or her mic and then revoked their credentials over he whole thing. I know my reaction would be exactly the same. Obama would deserve to be called out for it. 

You could probably pull up the video of when Obama did just that....how did you guys react?

[TitanTiger 20,482]

1 minute ago, japantiger said:

You could probably pull up the video of when Obama did just that....how did you guys react?

I'm all ears.  Show me an example.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

7 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I'm all ears.  Show me an example.

Here is just one example of Acosta's aggressive/rude behavior in an exchange with Sarah Huckabee where he wants to go on and on with question until cut off. You probably don't agree but so be it.  It is an example of what some of us believe to be rude whether you agree or not. He could certainly be more diplomatic with her since she is just doing her job, a tough one at that.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/10/29/cnn_acosta_vs_huckabee_sanders_shouldnt_you_have_the_guts_to_name_which_journalists_are_the_enemy_of_the_people.html

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

16 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

It's Debate 101, Nola.  You know this.  You make an assertion, it's on you to offer supporting examples.  Just making blanket statements doesn't cut it.  You said there was a pattern of behavior here that had built resulting in his press credentials being revoked.  I asked for some examples establishing this pattern and you've balked.  It doesn't matter than it's a somewhat subjective thing, show me examples that *you* believe establish this pattern and we can discuss.  But if you can't or won't support your arguments, then your argument fails by default. 

You don’t think there is a pattern. And sadly, you assert no condemnation of him for physically preventing the intern from doing her job. Why in the hell should I appease your fancy? Again, I could care less if my argument fails for you. If you think I’m going to drag up old Acosta moments (one from last summer comes to mind), and hash them out with you, you’re sadly mistaken.

The accumulation of his behavior bit him in the ass. How’s that?

I’m sorry if you feel that you’re not getting your way 😂

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Even a former CNN producer has called out Acosta for his behavior.

https://www.waynedupree.com/former-cnn-producer-blisters-jim-acosta/

[TitanTiger 20,482]

9 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Here is just one example of Acosta's aggressive/rude behavior in an exchange with Sarah Huckabee where he wants to go on and on with question until cut off. You probably don't agree but so be it.  It is an example of what some of us believe to be rude whether you agree or not. He could certainly be more diplomatic with her since she is just doing her job, a tough one at that.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/10/29/cnn_acosta_vs_huckabee_sanders_shouldnt_you_have_the_guts_to_name_which_journalists_are_the_enemy_of_the_people.html

So to be clear, Acosta asked a question, asked permission to ask a follow up, and when she continued to be vague asked her again for specifics.

Is it your contention that asking more than one question is something that is uncommon or unwarranted when a vague answer is given?  Would you want a Fox News reporter to stop at one question when a prominent Democrat gives a vague or evasive answer?

Also, while I appreciate you linking to this, one clip doesn't establish a pattern.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

13 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

You don’t think there is a pattern.

No.  I've not said whether there is or not.  I have said you don't get to assert there is a pattern then balk at providing evidence for your claim.  The burden of proof in a debate rests on the person making a positive claim.  That person in this debate is you.  If you won't provide supporting evidence then you concede the point by default.

 

Quote

And sadly, you assert no condemnation from physically preventing the intern from doing her job.

Well, because he has a job to do too. I don't think saying "Pardon me, ma'am" and brushing her hand away is exactly a massive offense here.

 

Quote

Why in the hell should I appease your fancy? Again, I could care less if my argument fails for you. If you think I’m going to drag up old Acosta moments (one from last summer comes to mind), and hash them out with you, you’re sadly mistaken.

The accumulation of his behavior bit him in the ass. How’s that?

I’m sorry if you feel that you’re not getting your way 😂

It's not appeasing my fancy, it's providing evidence for your claims.  Your argument doesn't fail "for me."  It fails for lack of supporting evidence.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

21 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Even a former CNN producer has called out Acosta for his behavior.

https://www.waynedupree.com/former-cnn-producer-blisters-jim-acosta/

"He’s fortunate the Clinton News Network is entirely Fake News..."

Get better sources, PT.  Just because it's the smack forum doesn't mean all expectations of credibility are out the window.  Sheesh.

Edited to add:  I mistook who was the CNN producer criticizing Acosta here.  Krakauer's is a credible person.  Wayne Dupree is not.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

8 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

The burden of proof in a debate rests on the person making a positive claim.  That person in this debate is you.  If you won't provide supporting evidence then you concede the point by default.

The difference in this “debate” is that the sufficiency of “supporting evidence” is entirely arbitrary 😂😂😂

You don’t fool me old man. I win.

 

 

[AUDub 11,148]

3 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

The difference in this “debate” is that the sufficiency of “supporting evidence” is entirely arbitrary 😂😂😂

You don’t fool me old man. I win. 

  

  

Christ you can be such an annoying little choad.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

3 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

The difference in this “debate” is that the sufficiency of “supporting evidence” is entirely arbitrary 😂😂😂

You don’t fool me old man. I win.

It's not arbitrary.  Show me examples of what *you* believe shows this pattern.  Otherwise, shut up and quit wasting bandwidth.  Even PT managed to do more than you've done in 2 pages worth of your evasiveness.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

2 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Christ you can be such an annoying little choad.

I don’t force your fingers to type, nor your eyes to read.

play with the bull, get the horns.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

Just now, NolaAuTiger said:

I don’t force your fingers to type, nor your eyes to read.

play with the bull, get the horns.

Or in this case, play with the pig, get covered in s***.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

The Acosta apologists are triggered!

[AUDub 11,148]

Just now, NolaAuTiger said:

The Acosta apologists are triggered!

Titan's patience with you is more than you deserve.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

4 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

It's not arbitrary.  Show me examples of what *you* believe shows this pattern.  Otherwise, shut up and quit wasting bandwidth.  Even PT managed to do more than you've done in 2 pages worth of your evasiveness.

Why do you need examples? My purpose is not to “win you over” on my position. I just did a google search and found examples quite easily. You can do the same.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

2 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

The Acosta apologists are triggered!

Actually, I meant what I said literally.  Either you can provide supporting evidence for your claim, or you will be moving on to other discussions.  I'm done putting up with your immaturity.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

Just now, NolaAuTiger said:

Why do you need examples? My purpose is not to “win you over” on my position. I just did a google search and found examples quite easily. You can do the same.

Because you made the claim and I'm not here for your laziness.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

3 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Because you made the claim and I'm not here for your laziness.

There are many claims made here that you don't argue against with so much energy. Why this one? It is clear that some people think Acosta is a rude, attention seeking, jerk. Do they all have to justify that position with you?

[TitanTiger 20,482]

8 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

There are many claims made here that you don't argue against with so much energy. Why this one? It is clear that some people think Acosta is a rude, attention seeking, jerk. Do they all have to justify that position with you?

Well first of all, I don't see all the claims made here, but less have them addressed to me.

It was a simple and reasonable expectation that could have easily been dispensed with his very next post.  I'm not the one who chose to drag it out by being obstinate.  But I am tired of people throwing out arguments around here then expecting others to disprove it rather than the proper way such claims are to be handled:  the person making them has the burden to offer supporting evidence.  It's just a tactic to bog others down doing your homework and I'm over it.

Again, thank you for at least taking a swipe at offering an example.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

Also, for the record, saying "my opinion" does not inoculate one from having to provide supporting evidence.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Also, for the record, saying "my opinion" does not inoculate one from having to provide supporting evidence.

Only by your "rules". That is certainly not the norm in the real world. Geez a big % of posts made here are opinions without "supporting evidence."

[TitanTiger 20,482]

3 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Only by your "rules". That is certainly not the norm in the real world. Geez a big % of posts made here are opinions without "supporting evidence."

No, not only by my rules.  When you give a concrete reason that something has happened, even if it's your opinion, then if someone asks you for some examples to support that opinion, then you don't just get to say "my opinion."  I know that's long been one of your favorite fallbacks, but it's not magical fairy dust to save you from having to support your argument, nor do you get to then tell the other person to go find examples.  Just not that way it works.  Anywhere.

Now, if you wish to provide some further evidence that bolsters the "opinion" or claim that Acosta's suspension was due to a pattern of behavior, I welcome it.  Otherwise, move on.