Her speech seems pretentious. Very tight, matter of fact, as if she’s talking to a bunch of kids or trying to stress that the actions are legal and justified (Which, given the state of most liberals these days, probably amounts to the same thing), and always seems to give praise that this is all a result of Trump and his hard working team. The praise seems so superfluous. We know who you work for Pam, you’re doing a fine job, stop with the praise already. The fact that it’s superfluous, makes it come off like butt smooching.
So yes, a combination of the praise and the tone it’s delivered in.

I have specifically been avoiding the use of the word ‘worship’. I’m a Christian as well as a good many of our members and although it may have been a quick way to convey my thoughts, I thought it would be in poor taste. I did allude to it in my original post saying ‘giving thanks before a meal’.

Like I said above , it appears that she only strikes me this way. That’s what I was asking, was to find out if she struck anyone else that way. It’s also apparent to me that almost nobody understood the original question, as gauged by the responses.

I’ll add that I never judged Pam’s performance. That is something that others felt I was doing while attributing their own misunderstanding of a question to the rantings of a Goldilocks conservative. That was the only judgement I saw in this thread. I’m sure it was an honest mistake but the reactions were a bit juvenile.
Let’s put this one to rest. No hard feelings but in the end it wasn’t worth the time spent writing it or the ire it stirred up.

Not everyone in America is as astute as you.

A great number of them are appallingly ill informed and unaware of what they don't know about the majority of thing most important in this Republic's status and future.

So, Bondi and others may seem to be pedantic, but they are in fact talking to "children" (minded) masses.

I get what you are saying. I see it, and I see all the complete focus of negativity in any and all news with regard to Trump.

And I see it eroding the stoicism many people, including some members on this forum simply by consumption of the garbage.

To the point that I have to constantly remind myself of the influence and intrusion into my thought processes concerning the State of the Union and the efforts of the present administration.

I can overlook annoyances from those I trust or rely on to do a task, having learned a long time ago, vinegar tastes better on French fries than sugar.

And what "uvahawk" said about "TV Approach" is exactly what I stated earlier.

The tone and presentation is not for those that "believe" in what the administration is doing.

And I am certain the "greater war" is unseen by many.

It is not a free for all of the Right going on, it is a nasty juke-joint brawl.

We could have George Will or Eric Sevareid as spokesman. I know that Sig Monkey is old enough to remember those guys. You needed a dictionary to figure out what they were saying,

Anyone representing President Trump should go to the Tom Homan school of Broadcasting.

I see a good number of ads from Noem praising Trump for securing the border. I only see Bondi on news segments or press conferences.

I think it's also a PR fight to bring the accomplishments of this administration to combat the dems' PR.

I'm tempered towards her as I want to see how she pans out with 2A issues. But on everything else like getting judges aiding and abetting illegals, I say, "You go, girl!"

sigmonkey I don’t consider myself astute. I learn more about people, politics, and hundreds of other topics, just by being on SF for 30 minutes a day, than I care to admit. Hell I had to look up the word astute. Couldn’t quite get it from context.
As for Pam, I never intended for the thread to stir up shit, that’s just how she came off to me.

My post was no insult towards you, but a compliment.

I also understand what you're saying 400m, but monkey pointed out the reasons far more eloquently than I can. She is speaking to ill-informed, borderline retarded children. So distasteful as it may be, and I agree it is somewhat off-putting, remember the audience. The general audience. She is speaking to the lowest common denominator, nothing more or less. At this point results are what matter.

I didn’t take it as an insult sigmonkey. It was kind. Thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by akcopnfbks:

At this point results are what matter.

I agree.
And sigmonkey does have a way with words.

quote:

Like I said above, it appears that she only strikes me this way. That’s what I was asking, was to find out if she struck anyone else that way. It’s also apparent to me that almost nobody understood the original question, as gauged by the responses.

I think it's a fair question. She frequently comes across that way. Cleaning up the DOJ is a HUGE task. It has been politicized against conservatives for a long time. Trump's AG picks during his first term simply weren't up to the task. Maybe we need an AG who is more "out-front" with the media. It's a different approach. But it can come across as simply cheer-leading or grandstanding.

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:
Not only Pam Bondi, but I believe all have a mandate to be visible, dynamic, engaged and on point.

It does come across as "camera whoring" and "roll playing", but we have had so many for so long that dis similar and were simply phony and deceitful.

Not everyone can be please with so many different people in these positions.

But look at what they accomplish and beyond the appearances.

I also think part of this is Trump's "Art of the War", where he is doing things that keep his opposition on their heels.

Ignore ALL the news that is negatively focused and sounds like the GDC's swill. Because most all of it is moral breaking and emotionally driven.

We are in a fight to see the Columbia righted and able to push through this storm, stay the course and don't give in to fear.

It is going to look bad if you focus at flashing lightning, waves over the bow and the unsteady deck.

It took a long time to get to this point, and we've only been in this for 3 months.

^^^All of this. Every bit of this.^^^^

sigmonkey has it absolutely right. President Trump cannot rely on the MSM to report on the progress his administration is making. He has to get his message out, over and over, every day. And keep the Left, media and all, on their heels.


.

quote:

Originally posted by TigerDore:

sigmonkey has it absolutely right. President Trump cannot rely on the MSM to report on the progress his administration is making. He has to get his message out, over and over, every day. And keep the Left, media and all, on their heels.
.

And a recent fox review of all mainstream media says!

The ol' linky thing

ABC, NBC and CBS slap Trump with 92% negative coverage as 100th day of second term approaches, study finds

Trump continues to face ‘relentlessly hostile coverage,’ according to Media Research Center

FIRST ON FOX -- Evening newscasts on ABC, NBC and CBS have slapped President Donald Trump with 92% negative coverage as the 100th day of his second term approaches, according to the Media Research Center (MRC).

The MRC analyzed ABC’s "World News Tonight," "NBC Nightly News" and "CBS Evening News" from Jan. 20 through April 9 and found 899 stories that discussed President Trump or the Trump administration. The media watchdog group found that 92.2% of the coverage was negative compared to only 7.8% positive.

"Just 100 days into President Donald Trump’s second term, the broadcast evening news landscape is even more lopsided than it was eight years ago, when Trump was besieged with relentlessly hostile coverage," researcher Rich Noyes wrote.

Eight years ago, using the identical methodology, we found Trump was blasted with 89% negative coverage at the hands of these networks during the first weeks of his first term," Noyes added.

The study revealed a stark contrast to coverage of former President Joe Biden’s first 100 days in office, which was 59% positive, according to the MRC.

"Yet despite the overwhelming negativity of their coverage, the networks found Trump irresistible as a news subject, at least compared with Biden. From January 20 through April 9, 2017, the networks saturated their newscasts with 1,900 minutes of Trump news; during the same time period this year, we tallied a massive 1,716 minutes of coverage. But in 2021, evening news viewers saw only 726 minutes of Biden coverage during these same weeks, less than half of the airtime devoted to either of the new Trump administrations," Noyes wrote.

The MRC explained that it determined the spin of coverage by tallying "all explicitly evaluative statements" about President Trump from either reporters, anchors or non-partisan sources such as experts or voters. Partisan sources, such as elected officials, were not included.

While Trump’s personal controversies dominated much of the coverage during his first term, the MRC found that coverage of the first 100 days of his second term has been largely spent on policy issues. Tariffs were covered for 361 minutes to lead the way, followed by DOGE receiving 301 minutes of coverage and immigration received 233 minutes of airtime on ABC, NBC and CBS’ evening newscasts, the study found.

"The networks’ spin on Trump’s tariffs faced 93% negative coverage, while the DOGE cutbacks to government were greeted by 97% negative spin," Noyes wrote when detailing the findings.

"Even on immigration, the issue where the public gives the President his highest ratings, the networks’ spin was 93% negative," he continued. "Out of nearly four hours of evening news airtime devoted to immigration, these newscasts spent just 3.5 minutes letting viewers know just how much Trump has reduced border crossings."

Trump’s top associates haven’t exactly received glowing coverage, either.

The study found that HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. faced 89% negative coverage, DOGE’s Elon Musk was hit with 96% negative coverage, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth received a unanimous 100% bad press from ABC, NBC and CBS evening newscasts.

ABC, NBC and CBS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Trump has a significant history with each network. He is currently seeking $20 billion in a lawsuit against CBS, alleging election interference over its handling of a "60 Minutes" interview last year with then-Vice President Kamala Harris.

Last year, Trump settled a defamation suit against ABC for $15 million, and he famously hosted "The Apprentice" on NBC before entering the world of politics.

"The mainstream media continues to portray President Trump’s historic accomplishments negatively, even though 77 million Americans voted for his policies. Americans know the President is doing what is best for the country, which is why the legacy media’s ratings continue to drop and people are finding new ways to consume the news," a White House spokesperson told Fox News Digital.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: HRK,

^^^ Is there a link to that? I'd like to pass it on. Thanks.

^^^ https://www.foxnews.com/media/...proaches-study-finds

Btw, it's the MRC that did the study/review. Fox is simply reporting it.

quote:

Originally posted by 6guns:
^^^ Is there a link to that? I'd like to pass it on. Thanks.

Yes sorry got in a hurry and forgot it, added the link and Q got it anyway...

Thanks, guys!

quote:

Anyone representing President Trump should go to the Tom Homan school of Broadcasting

OR the Ed Orgeron school. They dubbed in slingblades speech to a YouTube video discussing Ole Miss football. He took it in stride.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
We could have George Will or Eric Sevareid as spokesman. I know that Sig Monkey is old enough to remember those guys. You needed a dictionary to figure out what they were saying,

I remember watching This Week with David Brinkley and thought it was the best show on tv at the time.

I remember George and his bow ties and when that hack George Stuffingenvelopes joined the show.