What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Jen Psaki appreciation thread (2 Viewers)

During her press conferences, I like  to count how many times she pushes back her hair.

An interesting nervous habit of hers.

She's up to 27 times in the one she's conducting right now.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
identikit said:
During her press conferences, I like  to count how many times she pushes back her hair.

An interesting nervous habit of hers.

She's up to 27 times in the one she's conducting right now.
Click to expand...


Lolz, came here to post just that.  I recently noticed it too, has it gotten worse lately or something?

 
Soonerman said:
Pretty poor job addressing the comments from Susan Wild.
Click to expand...


VIDEO: Q: Isn't VP Harris supposed to be fixing the border crisis? Psaki: "Absolutely and she has been..." Sep 20, 2021

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLBj9VRSwD8

******

There are people in media optics who subscribe to chromotherapy. It's the idea that colors impact moods and can shape reactions.

Psaki was picked on a demographic/aesthetics level to appeal to upper middle class white suburban women. Now that's going to operate as a tax for the Biden Administration moving forward. People react less about what you are doing versus what you are doing that makes them feel about themselves one way compared to another way.

Every time Psaki lies and comes up with an even more ridiculous deflection, it urges guilt in the target audience she was supposed to mirror. The ideal state in an engaged viewing audience is a sense of partnership, not one of complicity.

The color white indicates purity, thus you can't sell policy failures that have real human impact and send the message that what happened is pure. The color black is a mystery color, the hope is it lends the impression that there is a greater overall plan yet to be revealed. Would I buy that as an average viewer? No, but this is completely and totally incompetent media optics team. I'm not a believer in light therapy concepts, you can't cheat code the indefensible. You can deflect out the indefensible, the trick to it is you need to openly state it's indefensible first then spiral into a compound narrative.

What makes Psaki appealing in front of a camera is now costing establishment Democrats votes when the coin flips to the other side. That's how toxic this administration has been.

 
JIslander said:
You guys have done yeoman's work here.    Great job.
Click to expand...


VIDEO: "You guys didn't kill people who went after our troops, you killed 10 civilians incl 7 children..." Sep 20, 2021

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kQYuhs7gLk

*******

At the 1:45 mark, Psaki flared her expression. While she consistently condescends to Doocy, he can't be broken.

Biological imperative and instinctive human behavior. Psaki is responding naturally to an aggressor in her social dynamic. Long story short - Women in general, in most contexts, like disagreeable men. Disagreeableness is a sign of elevated social proof.

Here is where Psaki is again incompetent. She operates in tone as if Doocy refuses to go for the "killshot" question because he doesn't want to break her. She doesn't see Doocy has no choice, he'd certainly do so against a male Press Secretary, but the potential fallout to do it against her could backfire badly.

My observation in this kind of dynamic is Psaki is simply not used to hearing "No". Hence constant engagement/reinforcement of this type never lets one develop conflict resolution skills. Hence more pathway to why she's incompetent.

 
When I saw this bump, I thought for sure it was going to be her comments about not checking vaccination status at the southern border because those people "won't stay long".

 
VIDEO: White House Responds To Images Showing Use Of Whips By Border Patrol On Haitian Migrants Sep 20, 2021

Jen Psaki comments on images show Border Patrol Agents using whips on Haitians who have crossed into Del Rio.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWbwCv5bZ90

*****

If Psaki has no "new information", she should end the press conference. Repeating that she doesn't know is actually bad media strategy. It self creates a headline to be used against her.

 
GordonGekko said:
VIDEO: White House Responds To Images Showing Use Of Whips By Border Patrol On Haitian Migrants Sep 20, 2021

Jen Psaki comments on images show Border Patrol Agents using whips on Haitians who have crossed into Del Rio.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWbwCv5bZ90

*****

If Psaki has no "new information", she should end the press conference. Repeating that she doesn't know is actually bad media strategy. It self creates a headline to be used against her.
Click to expand...
How did they all get to Mexico?   Where did they fly into?

Who is paying the bill?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
quick-hands said:
How did they all get to Mexico?   Where did they fly into?

Who is paying the bill?
Click to expand...
They come from Chili and Venezuela. They paid themselves, they live good but, want even a better life if Joe is just going to leave the border open.  

Joe has on his hands the biggest mass deportation in US history now. That's wasn't the plan.   :lol: . And they really dont want to go back to Haiti. That would be bad.  More unintended consequences for Joe, hes a real life 80 year old Charlie Brown.  :lmao: 0

 
VIDEO: Peter Doocy asks Psaki about White House refusal to give migrant numbers Sep 22, 2021

Fox News White House correspondent questions Jen Psaki on the immigration process

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwsYjV7AM3w

******

Things have gotten so bad that Psaki literally yielded the floor to let Doocy create his own headlines. He simply wore her down.

If you notice, Psaki tilts her head and exposes her neckline to Doocy often when he uses his successive question volleys at her. She's taking the submissive role in the dynamic. She can't actually do that and hold the position of Press Secretary.

Maybe she's into someone telling her she's wrong all the time. This has shifted from incompetent to actually bizarre.

 
VIDEO: Psaki Admits to Kicking Out ALL The Press Because They Were About to Ask NOT Pre-Approved Questions Sep 22, 2021

Yesterday, Biden's handlers interrupted Boris Johnson mid-sentence and kicked out all the U.S. and UK press from the conference. Today, Psaki admits it was because Boris call his press corps which were about to ask unscripted questions and we know Biden is allergic to those.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-DQVf3cEBo

******

Psaki (if she could tell the truth and showed some shred of actual competence at her job) - I can't handle the basic logistics of shielding my primary, so I'll blame Boris Johnson for it, sparking unneeded foreign relations outrage with one of American's most needed allies.

Part of effective media optics is understanding how to set your presentation. Psaki could literally hire the most green foolhardy studio director in some back hills podunk TV station anywhere in America to get some of this right. These are entry level mistakes.

I guess being secretly in love with Peter Doocy has apparently clouded her mind.

 
GordonGekko said:
VIDEO: Peter Doocy asks Psaki about White House refusal to give migrant numbers Sep 22, 2021

Fox News White House correspondent questions Jen Psaki on the immigration process

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwsYjV7AM3w

******

Things have gotten so bad that Psaki literally yielded the floor to let Doocy create his own headlines. He simply wore her down.

If you notice, Psaki tilts her head and exposes her neckline to Doocy often when he uses his successive question volleys at her. She's taking the submissive role in the dynamic. She can't actually do that and hold the position of Press Secretary.

Maybe she's into someone telling her she's wrong all the time. This has shifted from incompetent to actually bizarre.
Click to expand...
I thought I was the only one who noticed that. I was blown away when she actually offered him the stage and said "tell me why you're asking this question".  

Maybe you are on to something.  There might be some strange sexual tension brewing here. :)

 
VIDEO:  Biden in 1994: "If Haiti just quietly sunk.. or rose up 300 feet.. it wouldn't matter a whole lot." Sep 23, 2021

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m20ZRf7sX2U

VIDEO: White House responds to resignation of Haiti envoy Sep 23, 2021

The White House is pushing back against its former special envoy to Haiti, Daniel Foote, who resigned in protest of what he called "inhumane" expulsions of Haitian migrants to their homeland. Foote complained his policy proposals were ignored. (Sept. 23)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DTst2R_cKk

Resignation letter from U.S. special envoy for Haiti, Daniel Foote

Updated Sep 23, 2021 at 7:07 AM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/read-resignation-letter-from-u-s-special-envoy-for-haiti-daniel-foote/3136ae0e-96e5-448e-9d12-0e0cabfb3c0b/

VIDEO: Psaki Rebukes U.S. Envoy to Haiti Who Resigned Over Migrant Treatment Sep 23, 2021

The U.S. envoy for Haiti resigned over President Joe Biden’s treatment of Haitian migrants along the border with Mexico, drawing an unusually stern rebuttal from the White House and State Department. Special Envoy Daniel Foote, a career diplomat appointed to the job in July, resigned in a letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Wednesday. He called the Biden administration’s decision to send Haitian migrants back to their own country “inhumane” and said his recommendations for how to address the issue “have been ignored and dismissed.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfNroU3RscM

*****

Foote saw the writing on the wall. The Biden Administration needed someone to blame and they were going to throw him on his sword anyway.  He exits no matter what. He can exit while being railroaded trying to save his job, or he can exit, as he did, doing his job.

This kind of behavior is why the Obama/Biden/Harris/Rice regime can't find any actual talent in high level positions. No one with real options is going to take a paycheck from someone they know will gut them on the first whiff of trouble. You can only drive a knife into so many backs before no one ever lets you get behind them ever again.

 
 
VIDEO: Psaki snaps at reporter, refuses to say if Hunter Biden has divested from Chinese business dealings. Oct 4, 2021

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYZp3FGut-I

********

Here's where things get really ugly.

The job of Press Secretary is supposed to open a massive number of doors for you after you leave the job.

But there is actually value to the Biden Administration to force Psaki to stay. If you get the same person lying to you day in and day out, you become desensitized to it. It's not like a new person is going to make anything Biden and Harris does or has done in this term as defensible.

If Psaki leaves at the end of the year as she's stated before, her future career is tanked. Which is pretty rare for a former Press Secretary. It's not like she'll end up homeless, but she'll have to take a job with an Obama/Biden/Harris/Rice loyalist somewhere.

She's been exposed as fundamentally incompetent.

If she stays on, at least she'll keep drawing a paycheck, however her future career prospects are obliterated.

Which goes back to what I've said before, the Obama "political tree" has a hard time attracting real talent. This would be like being a hot GM candidate in the NFL and being offered a job by Daniel Snyder. ( For the record, I actually like Ron Rivera and have nothing against Chase Young and appreciate what Alex Smith did for this team.)

If everyone who works for you or your loyalists end up getting hosed, you become a place where careers go to die.

No real legitimate talent is going to take this job willingly. This is going to be like when Al Davis had to dig deep to find a head coach because he pissed off so many people and stiffed paying them or when no one wanted the Browns job.

Interesting to note the radical leftists have given up on this thread. Usually orbital bombardment tends to have that effect.

 
Stealthycat said:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1445103495800049672
Click to expand...


And https://www.nationalreview.com/news/psaki-dem-lawmakers-claim-3-5-trillion-reconciliation-package-will-cost-zero-dollars/

When she reiterates what President Biden says about the $3.5 trillion bill will cost zero dollars", does she truly think the public is that stupid? 

It feels like it's just an arrogant power play on the "These people are such idiots, it doesn't matter the words we're saying are ridiculous. Just say it and they'll lap it up."

At least when President Trump claimed he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and nobody would care he was acknowledging the blind loyalty where he could do something so horrible and get away with it.

Psaki seems to be taking it a step further and thinking the people are so stupid, they may not even realize what's being said is ridiculous.

Even Nancy Pelosi couldn't go there. She at least acknowledged reality with, "In the Senate and the House, those who are not in full agreement with the president . . . let’s not talk about numbers and dollars, let’s talk about values,” Pelosi said."

Which is a much more normal way to discuss it. 

I, along with a ton of people I know, voted for President Biden to get back to normalcy. Psaki and $3.5 Trillion actually doesn't cost anything" is miles from that. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And to be clear, I don't know the details but I'm in favor of corporations paying their fair share and all that.

But when she acts as if that money or those taxes have zero cost, it sets off every red flag possible. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
And to be clear, I don't know the details but I'm in favor of corporations paying their fair share and all that.

But when she acts as if that money or those taxes have zero cost, it sets off every red flag possible. 
Click to expand...


I would LOVE to ask Psaki this question

" In 2018, the top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97.1 percent of all individual income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.9 percent. The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (40.1 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (28.6 percent). Knowing this, can this administration define fair share "

any guesses what her answer would be ?

I have an idea - give away free Footballguys newsletters to 10,000 people. To compensate for the cost, simply raise the prices of all the people who subscribe. There - its free

Right ?

 
Stealthycat said:
I would LOVE to ask Psaki this question

" In 2018, the top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97.1 percent of all individual income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.9 percent. The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (40.1 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (28.6 percent). Knowing this, can this administration define fair share "

any guesses what her answer would be ?

I have an idea - give away free Footballguys newsletters to 10,000 people. To compensate for the cost, simply raise the prices of all the people who subscribe. There - its free

Right ?
Click to expand...


I think I understand the way she's thinking of this and yes, she would call that zero cost. 

I have lots of friends who work for the government and this mindset is prevalent. If it's "in the budget", then it's free. You better spend all the money each year as "it really doesn't cost anything" and if you don't spend it, you may not get it again next year. 

It's a 180 degree opposite mindset from an entrepreneur. And truth be told, lots of big, complacent bloated businesses operate this way too. It's not just government. It's any organization where the people in charge don't care how the money is spent as long as they get theirs. 

 
And this kind of head in the clouds mindset regarding taxes in my opinion is why so many people are opposed to higher taxes.

It's incredibly wasteful. 

They simply don't trust people who'd put someone like Jen Psaki out there as a spokesperson. Clearly, she doesn't get it. And no reasonable person has any reason to think her bosses get it. 

So while at best, she may think her "3.5 Trillion is actually no cost" might be cute. In reality, it scares any reasonable person to death that's ever had to balance a checkbook or make a payroll. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think mostly, I'm just sad to see them bungle this so badly with arrogance.

I could imagine a Buttigieg administration doing a reasonable and sincere, "Let's be real 3.5 TRILLION is a lot of money. Here's how we're going to come up with that money and here's how most people making under __________ a year aren't going to directly feel that tax increase. And here's what we're going to do with that tax revenue and why it'll be worth it."

Now to be fair, I barely follow this stuff at all. Likely 1% as closely as most of y'all do. And maybe they already are making those cases. But it's not getting through to me. All I see is the Psaki ridiculousness and my take away is she thinks I'm too stupid to know anything better.

 
Joe Bryant said:
I think mostly, I'm just sad to see them bungle this so badly with arrogance.

I could imagine a Buttigieg administration doing a reasonable and sincere, "Let's be real 3.5 TRILLION is a lot of money. Here's how we're going to come up with that money and here's how most people making under __________ a year aren't going to directly feel that tax increase. And here's what we're going to do with that tax revenue and why it'll be worth it."

Now to be fair, I barely follow this stuff at all. Likely 1% as closely as most of y'all do. And maybe they already are making those cases. But it's not getting through to me. All I see is the Psaki ridiculousness and my take away is she thinks I'm too stupid to know anything better.
Click to expand...


Answer: They aren't coming up with the money.  They are debt financing most of it.  $6T budget with a $2.5-3T deficit.  Someone, somewhere down the line will be responsible for paying for it.  But I guess a Buttigieg-type explanation would placate most of the masses.  

 
Snotbubbles said:
Answer: They aren't coming up with the money.  They are debt financing most of it.  $6T budget with a $2.5-3T deficit.  Someone, somewhere down the line will be responsible for paying for it.  But I guess a Buttigieg-type explanation would placate most of the masses.  
Click to expand...


I don't think it's about "placating the masses". It's way more about don't think I'm so stupid that I'll lap up whatever you say. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joe Bryant said:
So while at best, she may think her "3.5 Trillion is actually no cost" might be cute. In reality, it scares any reasonable person to death that's ever had to balance a checkbook or make a payroll. 
Click to expand...


The federal government hasn't balanced their check book in a very long time.   We all know this 3.5T isn't zero cost and it is insulting to her say it,  just like it was when Steven Mnuchin was telling us the Trump tax cut was going to pay for itself.

Democrats don't give a bleep about deficits and in reality neither do Republicans (until there is a Democrat in the White House).

It is shocking our federal government has been fiscally irresponsible for so long but they continually are.

 
Snotbubbles said:
Someone, somewhere down the line will be responsible for paying for it.
Click to expand...


its been that for 20 years now - incredibly gross spending

Trump actually didn't do too bad until 2020 and covid year - I posted those percentages before

what Biden is doing .... he's going to take us to 35-40 trillion in debt - he and the Democrats and that's all free and like Joe said, I'm too stupid to understand it  

 
And to be clear, I said "balance a checkbook" as a reference to mean a regular person. I'm under no illusion we'll ever see a balanced budget.

What I mean is "Stop living in fantasy land where you think 3.5 Trillion dollar things don't cost anything". 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joe Bryant said:
And to be clear, I said "balance a checkbook" as a reference to mean a regular person. I'm under no illusion we'll ever see a balanced budget.

What I mean is "Stop living in fantasy land where you think 3.5 Trillion dollar things don't cost anything". 
Click to expand...
Fair enough and I agree but I think the federal government should be striving for it, instead we have been going the wrong way.

Now this $3.5 Trillion increase in spending is taking it to a whole other level.  If we're going to live in fantasy land then just pass a 3.5 quintrillion bill and make everyone millionaires and eliminate taxes altogether!

 
Joe Bryant said:
I don't think it's about "placating the masses". It's way more about don't think I'm so stupid that I'll lap up whatever you say. 
Click to expand...


When I write placating the masses, what I mean is, you're more concerned with how the message is presented than the actual content of the message.  

Case 1: We are going to spend $6T on the budget.  But it's going to be zero cost.  JB response: I'm not an idiot.  You're going to tax the hell out of me.

Case 2: We are going to spend $6T on the budget.  We're going to tax the hell out you to pay for it.  JB response: Oh well.  At least they're honest about it.

 
Plus the $3.5 trillion will be much more due to various accounting shenanigans over the 10-year budget horizon. WSJ estimates $5+ trillion.

This includes clauses that gradually shift more and more costs to the states, as well as "shortening" some programs. But of course we all know once they are started and in the budget most will never be repealed.

Straight from AOC's mouth:

“I think that one of the ideas that is out there is fully fund what we can fully fund, but maybe instead of doing it for 10 years, you fully fund it for five years.”

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Snotbubbles said:
When I write placating the masses, what I mean is, you're more concerned with how the message is presented than the actual content of the message.  

Case 1: We are going to spend $6T on the budget.  But it's going to be zero cost.  JB response: I'm not an idiot.  You're going to tax the hell out of me.

Case 2: We are going to spend $6T on the budget.  We're going to tax the hell out you to pay for it.  JB response: Oh well.  At least they're honest about it.
Click to expand...


Thank you. That's 100% what I mean. I can handle bad news. I just want people to be honest with me. 

 
Godsbrother said:
Fair enough and I agree but I think the federal government should be striving for it, instead we have been going the wrong way.

Now this $3.5 Trillion increase in spending is taking it to a whole other level.  If we're going to live in fantasy land then just pass a 3.5 quintrillion bill and make everyone millionaires and eliminate taxes altogether!
Click to expand...


Agreed. And I do think there's a pretty big misunderstanding with how people understand the differences between millions/billions/trillions.

 
Stoneworker said:
Plus the $3.5 trillion will be much more due to various accounting shenanigans over the 10-year budget horizon. WSJ estimates $5+ trillion.

This includes clauses that gradually shift more and more costs to the states, as well as "shortening" some programs. But of course we all know once they are started and in the budget most will never be repealed.

Straight from AOC's mouth:

“I think that one of the ideas that is out there is fully fund what we can fully fund, but maybe instead of doing it for 10 years, you fully fund it for five years.”
Click to expand...
I saw an interview with Rep Clyburn the other day saying similar things.  That's the next step, reducing the cost of the package by simply shaving years off the funding.  Fully knowing that when you create an entitlement, it's here to stay.  Rep. Ro Khanna basically said so in his Sunday interview, that these programs might have to be negotiated down somewhat today but could grow down the road.

 
Shula-holic said:
I saw an interview with Rep Clyburn the other day saying similar things.  That's the next step, reducing the cost of the package by simply shaving years off the funding.  Fully knowing that when you create an entitlement, it's here to stay.  Rep. Ro Khanna basically said so in his Sunday interview, that these programs might have to be negotiated down somewhat today but could grow down the road.
Click to expand...


I think this is true for some of the infrastructure bill but there are other things in it that I wouldn't categorize as entitlements.  I could see those be phased out over time.

That said the whole thing is too expensive and the tax increases that supposedly will pay for it won't even come close.

 
Not sure I would elevate the mouthpiece of any politician to a higher status.

It would be unwise to trust the words of any politician, let alone their bullhorn.

 
“Certainly we all want to keep gasoline prices low, but the threat of the climate crisis certainly can’t wait any longer.”
Click to expand...
We're not going to change our behaviors, just charge people more for gas and call that fighting climate change. 

 
Max Power said:
We're not going to change our behaviors, just charge people more for gas and call that fighting climate change. 
Click to expand...


Can we agree that this course of action, policies that result in higher energy prices, negatively (and disproportionately) hurt the lower class while enriching the wealthy?

 
Sparky Big Time said:
Can we agree that this course of action, policies that result in higher energy prices, negatively (and disproportionately) hurt the lower class while enriching the wealthy?
Click to expand...
There is no doubt about that.  I think telling people we can beat climate change with money is foolish.  It is becoming more obvious this administration thinks people aren't smart enough to see past their BS. 

Gas is 3.19 at my corner shop.  I can't remember the last time it was this high.  We were hanging around 2.75-2.85 for a long time. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Biden Violates Own "Disrespect" Edict By Refusing To Fire WHPS Psaki (4/18/22 18:29PST)
Replies
14
Views
597
JIslander
J
GordonGekko
The Official Katie Porter (HOR/D-CA45) And Her "Whiteboard Of Justice" Appreciation Thread (10/24/22 17:34 PST)
Replies
2
Views
317
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
Axios: Democrats Fear MAGA Republican Kari Lake Could Be Arizona's Next Governor (10/21/22 01:52 PST)
Replies
18
Views
780
Snotbubbles
Snotbubbles

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top