The book

[Mark]

trumpbook.jpg

You're accusing the man of being illiterate?

[GFB]

Like they say..a lie goes around the world before the truth gets it’s pants on.

Especially when you have the entire media ready to spread the bs.

[ralph]

trumpbook.jpg

You're accusing the man of being illiterate?

-------------------------------- lots do , 'TDS' is rampant and is seen in news rooms , message boards and all over the place Mark .

[ralph]

and Now they pay money and clutch for a book and author that admits he is 'fos' but will whisper in their ears .

[rusty]

The reason liberals are buying the book is because they can actually read. Republicans could only use it to help prop up the short leg of their card table.

[Mark]

Michael Wolff: "I am FOS."

http://www.businessinsider.com/michael- ... rue-2018-1

[Sangersteve]

The reason liberals are buying the book is because they can actually read. Republicans could only use it to help prop up the short leg of their card table.

Now that there is a knee slapper. Wait I can't read.

[Sangersteve]

Well it is a work of fiction.

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/ti ... ing-quotes

[rusty]

There are none so blind....

[planosteve]

The only thing worse than being illiterate because you can't read is being illiterate because you don't read.

[LibraryLady2]

The only thing worse than being illiterate because you can't read is being illiterate because you don't read.

IMO, being illiterate because you won't read is worse--but that is just my opinion.

[Sangersteve]

The only thing worse than being illiterate because you can't read is being illiterate because you don't read.

IMO, being illiterate because you won't read is worse--but that is just my opinion.

So can I extrapolate from that, that if someone chooses to read a book that the author himself admits it may not be true, and accepts the book on it's contents, is more literate than the person that chooses not to read the book based on the authors statement that it may be fiction, or worse just a vehicle to dupe the readers?

[mayhem]

and the author says.

Mr. Wolff himself admitted to as much in the introduction to “Fire and Fury.”

“Many of the accounts of what has happened in the Trump White House are in conflict with one another; many, in Trumpian fashion, are baldly untrue,” he wrote. “Those conflicts, and that looseness with the truth, if not with reality itself, are an elemental thread of the book. Sometimes I have let the players offer their versions, in turn allowing the reader to judge them. In other instances I have, through a consistency in accounts and through sources I have come to trust, settled on a version of events I believe to be true.”

In other words "I made most of it up"

Yeah, we'll see.

[LibraryLady2]

The only thing worse than being illiterate because you can't read is being illiterate because you don't read.

IMO, being illiterate because you won't read is worse--but that is just my opinion.

So can I extrapolate from that, that if someone chooses to read a book that the author himself admits it may not be true, and accepts the book on it's contents, is more literate than the person that chooses not to read the book based on the authors statement that it may be fiction, or worse just a vehicle to dupe the readers?

You took a turn there to mean something 100% different from what I meant.

I don't care if anyone reads this book or not.
I am speaking of someone/anyone who knows how to read, but refuses to read any information that would increase that person's understanding of the world he/she lives in.

If a person does not have the ability to read, that person is limited in the knowledge/understanding about the world (social/science/geographical/political). If a person does have that ability, but refuses to read and therefore expand one's knowledge/understanding--then that person is less than the one who lacks the ability.

[GFB]

IMO, being illiterate because you won't read is worse--but that is just my opinion.

So can I extrapolate from that, that if someone chooses to read a book that the author himself admits it may not be true, and accepts the book on it's contents, is more literate than the person that chooses not to read the book based on the authors statement that it may be fiction, or worse just a vehicle to dupe the readers?

You took a turn there to mean something 100% different from what I meant.

I don't care if anyone reads this book or not.
I am speaking of someone/anyone who knows how to read, but refuses to read any information that would increase that person's understanding of the world he/she lives in.

If a person does not have the ability to read, that person is limited in the knowledge/understanding about the world (social/science/geographical/political). If a person does have that ability, but refuses to read and therefore expand one's knowledge/understanding--then that person is less than the one who lacks the ability.

But if someone doesn't read as much as you say they should, still proves themself to be smarter than everyone around them..succeeding in a number of careers, becoming fabulously wealthy in doing so, and eventually shows that they can lead the whole country and make it a much more successful, safe, and great nation...

You might be not just missing something..you might be getting stuck on a bizarre and worthless concept that we can all see each and every day..is not worth a thought.

[Mark]

IMO, being illiterate because you won't read is worse--but that is just my opinion.

So can I extrapolate from that, that if someone chooses to read a book that the author himself admits it may not be true, and accepts the book on it's contents, is more literate than the person that chooses not to read the book based on the authors statement that it may be fiction, or worse just a vehicle to dupe the readers?

You took a turn there to mean something 100% different from what I meant.

I don't care if anyone reads this book or not.
I am speaking of someone/anyone who knows how to read, but refuses to read any information that would increase that person's understanding of the world he/she lives in.

If a person does not have the ability to read, that person is limited in the knowledge/understanding about the world (social/science/geographical/political). If a person does have that ability, but refuses to read and therefore expand one's knowledge/understanding--then that person is less than the one who lacks the ability.

More important than the ability or the willingness to read is the ability to discern BS from fact. Lefties prove time and time again that they do not have that ability.

[ralph]

Mark writes , More important than the ability or the willingness to read is the ability to discern BS from fact. Lefties prove time and time again that they do not have that ability.
------------------------------------------------ think thats called COMMON SENSE and i think that libs , dems lack 'COMMON SENSE' or just have an America destroying agenda and plan . One example is when i or others say that some 'illegals vote' illegally in US elections all the libs do is cry , where is the PROOF as they work to hide the PROOF . Plus of course , i think that libs and dems are liars and they lie quite often .