CNN LOVES TO SPECULATE ABOUT MELANIA’S HEALTH, BUT DOESN’T BRING UP HILLARY CLINTON [VIDEO]

[jg121783 3,915]

http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/04/cnn-loves-to-speculate-about-melanias-health-but-dont-bring-up-hillary-clinton-video/

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Thats because she is irrelevant. How dare you bring her up 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

 

  Daily caller know's what CNN is talking about? How about that? Fake news is watching fake news. Technology is awesome.

[bcking 3,157]

42 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Thats because she is irrelevant. How dare you bring her up 

One is the First Lady, the other holds no political position.

 

So yes one is slightly more relevant for current events. Clinton's health was certainly relevant when she was running for office, and will be again if she bothers to try again.

 

EDIT: I do think it's strange how absent Melania has been after that procedure. From the very beginning her admission to hospital, and her stay (Several days I believe?) seemed unusual for the procedure they were describing. Do I really care though? It's not like the President getting a procedure and then going MIA. She is the First Lady. She has some "causes" that she works on but the government functions just fine without her. 

Edited June 5, 2018 by bcking

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

17 minutes ago, bcking said:

One is the First Lady, the other holds no political position.

 

So yes one is slightly more relevant for current events. Clinton's health was certainly relevant when she was running for office, and will be again if she bothers to try again.

 

EDIT: I do think it's strange how absent Melania has been after that procedure. From the very beginning her admission to hospital, and her stay (Several days I believe?) seemed unusual for the procedure they were describing. Do I really care though? It's not like the President getting a procedure and then going MIA. She is the First Lady. She has some "causes" that she works on but the government functions just fine without her. 

The first lady is not a political position and Hillary is very active in today's politics.  

[bcking 3,157]

9 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

The first lady is not a political position and Hillary is very active in today's politics.  

I agree with the first part, though I think the media attention stems more from the fact that she is a public figure, and less from being a political figure.  As I said before I don't really care much about her health (outside of the baseline caring I would have for any human), though the details surrounding this procedure were a little strange and there was probably more done that they aren't talking about. But as you said, she isn't a political figure so do I really care that much if her health is declining in some way? I doubt it would impact Trump's ability to do his job. Though it sounds cruel, he can always find a 4th wife.

 

What exactly is Hillary active in? She wrote a book, anything else? Maybe I haven't been paying close enough attention. 

Edited June 5, 2018 by bcking

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

2 minutes ago, bcking said:

I agree with the first part, though I think the media attention stems more from the fact that she is a public figure, and less from being a political figure.  As I said before I don't really care much about her health (outside of the baseline caring I would have for any human), though the details surrounding this procedure were a little strange and there was probably more done that they aren't talking about. But as you said, she isn't a political figure so do I really care that much if her health is declining in some way? I doubt it would impact Trump's ability to do his job. Though it sounds cruel, he can always find a 4th wife.

 

What exactly is Hillary active in? She wrote a book, anything else? Maybe I haven't been paying close enough attention. 

You cant be serious. She is in the news every day, unfortunately  

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

You cant be serious. She is in the news every day, unfortunately  

Being in the news doesn't make her active in "today's politics".

 

People may still think she is relevant, but what is she actually doing right now that is relevant? She's already made a comment that she won't seek office again. She continues to make speeches, but that doesn't really influence politics. What actual political power does she have? 

 

She is essentially just a "public figure" just like Melania at this point. She is well known, she has a history of political influence, so she can at times become "news worthy". The question is who is a more "news worthy" public figure - The current First Lady, or a prior Presidential Candidate that isn't planning to run for office again but still writes books and, I'm guessing, occasionally tweets on various subjects (though perhaps not enough, if the last election is any indication).

 

I'd say the current First Lady, though I don't care much about the health of either one the wife of the current President slightly edges ahead. Mostly because of the potential impact her health status would have on her husband. It would be a bigger issue if they were a pair that I believed cared deeply about each other. If Melania was seriously ill sadly I just don't see the President being impacted that much. Maybe I'm being callous. 

Edited June 5, 2018 by bcking

[Steeleballz 7,550]

 

   I noticed CNN doesn't talk much about Rosalyn Carter, Laura Bush or Michelle Obama either. I'm sure there's a common denominator in there. If we could only find our way past the misleading articles, perhaps it would all become apparent.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

When Michelle Obama makes her run for president in 2020, you will hear plenty about her.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

39 minutes ago, bcking said:

Being in the news doesn't make her active in "today's politics".

 

People may still think she is relevant, but what is she actually doing right now that is relevant? She's already made a comment that she won't seek office again. She continues to make speeches, but that doesn't really influence politics. What actual political power does she have? 

 

She is essentially just a "public figure" just like Melania at this point. She is well known, she has a history of political influence, so she can at times become "news worthy". The question is who is a more "news worthy" public figure - The current First Lady, or a prior Presidential Candidate that isn't planning to run for office again but still writes books and, I'm guessing, occasionally tweets on various subjects (though perhaps not enough, if the last election is any indication).

 

I'd say the current First Lady, though I don't care much about the health of either one the wife of the current President slightly edges ahead. Mostly because of the potential impact her health status would have on her husband. It would be a bigger issue if they were a pair that I believed cared deeply about each other. If Melania was seriously ill sadly I just don't see the President being impacted that much. Maybe I'm being callous. 

not active in today's politics. LMAO

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

20 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   I noticed CNN doesn't talk much about Rosalyn Carter, Laura Bush or Michelle Obama either. I'm sure there's a common denominator in there. If we could only find our way past the misleading articles, perhaps it would all become apparent.

i guess the common denominator is none of the were secretary of state or ran for President. Just a hunch 

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

not active in today's politics. LMAO

What has she been doing over the past, say, 1 year that is significantly contributing to our politics.

 

Not how much she is in the media. Not what book she is writing. Not who interviews her. Not what she "tweets" or "comments" on intermittently.

 

Those things don't actually mean squat. I'm talking about concrete things. I honestly can't think of anything. As I said she holds no office, I haven't even really seen her out supporting Democratic Candidates. Though perhaps as we get closer to midterm elections that may change. Honestly outside of these forums I don't follow politics that much so if I'm wrong just list the things that she is actively doing right now. From my perspective she has kind of fallen off the politically relevant cliff after her loss. 

Edited June 5, 2018 by bcking

[jg121783 3,915]

The article is comparing coverage of Hillary's health in 2016 versus coverage of the first lady today. Not Hillary today versus the first lady today. It is irrelevant how politically active Hillary is today because she was running for president during the time being talked about which arguably makes coverage of her health in 2016 more relevant then the first lady's health today. Lets use a little common sense here when making comparisons.

[bcking 3,157]

21 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

The article is comparing coverage of Hillary's health in 2016 versus coverage of the first lady today. Not Hillary today versus the first lady today. It is irrelevant how politically active Hillary is today because she was running for president during the time being talked about which arguably makes coverage of her health in 2016 more relevant then the first lady's health today. Lets use a little common sense here when making comparisons.

Well in my non-defense I didn't actually read the article...

 

I haven't really seen much about Melania's health before this "kidney procedure" business. I remember at least a few occasions of Hillary's health being mentioned in 2016.

 

I'll go back and actually read the article. Novel idea I know