|
Levantine posted:It's like when you hear these GOPshitthatdidnthappen.txt stories and confront it with facts or disprove whatever, the response is always "Well it was just a nice story" or something similar. "That wasn't intended to be a factual statement"
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 21:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:17 |
|
|
Levantine posted:
It's actually worse. When something is disproved, the one I hear most often is "Yeah, but you can bet they do stuff like that all of the time". It shift the burden of proof entirely. Now you have to prove that those drat liberals/hispanics/immigrants/african-americans never did anything in bad faith.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
RetroHelix posted:In the least surprising development in the history of the universe, Sarah Palin didn't read the GQ interview she defended:
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
I don't think it's exactly sexist to say Sarah spends a lot of time in hair and makeup, TV people just do that. And I mean have you seen her hair? Those blowouts don't happen instantaneously. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 21:39
|
|
|
Lycus posted:It's a frickin' article. It takes like a couple minutes to read. That's too much trouble, you'd rather make an rear end out of yourself again?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 21:52
|
|
|
TASTE THE PAIN!! posted:I don't think it's exactly sexist to say Sarah spends a lot of time in hair and makeup, TV people just do that. And I mean have you seen her hair? Those blowouts don't happen instantaneously. I think it's entirely irrelevant how long she spends on her hair or makeup. TV people may do it, but nobody's brought up how long O'Reilly or whomever spent on his hair or makeup. It is in fact sexist to bring up the hair and makeup of a woman as some sort of teardown when you could alternatively focus on poo poo that matters (like her being an evil shill for a world perspective that seeks to destroy anything outside its narrow bounds)
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 21:52
|
|
|
TASTE THE PAIN!! posted:I don't think it's exactly sexist to say Sarah spends a lot of time in hair and makeup, TV people just do that. And I mean have you seen her hair? Those blowouts don't happen instantaneously. She only reads memos written directly onto her hand.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 21:54
|
|
|
I'm shocked at how many people here assumed she reads any of the articles she defends, someone just asked her about it this time. I mean have you seen the non ghost written poo poo she posts? Ever seen her take on a question that has any sort of substance at all live? I don't really blame her, she knows exactly what the people giving her money want and it doesn't require you to know much at all. Intel&Sebastian fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Dec 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 21:57
|
|
|
Levantine posted:That's the thing - there is no shame in being wrong for these people. What matters is she took a swing for her team and win or lose, she's a good guy. It's pandering to idiots, for idiots. There are no consequences for what the Right does. Credibility does not matter to them and it's maddening. Sephyr posted:It's actually worse. When something is disproved, the one I hear most often is "Yeah, but you can bet they do stuff like that all of the time". It shift the burden of proof entirely. Now you have to prove that those drat liberals/hispanics/immigrants/african-americans never did anything in bad faith. This is why we have such a hard time arguing with these people. People who post on D&D are used to debating in good faith using logic, facts, and figures while trying to avoid outright hypocrisy at all costs, because in our minds you win an argument by building an airtight case and boxing them in until they can't logically argue their way out of it. On the other hand, right-wingers seem to think that the argument is won when you get the last word in and the other guy throws his hands up in exasperation. A point I heard some blogger (might have been Digby) mention on a recent podcast is that the right has basically retired the concept of hypocrisy, and using it against them is pointless. They absolutely don't care whether they're being hypocritical, logically inconsistent, or flat-out factually wrong when they're arguing with you. It's like trying to play a chess game with somebody while they're kicking you in the shins under the table. Eventually you'll say "gently caress this" and leave, and they chalk it up as a win by forfeit. Edit: This sort of explains why Palin thinks it's OK to tweet nonstop and go on TV interviews discussing a magazine article that she couldn't even be bothered to read. What's the point of reading it? You're on Fox News, which is friendly territory where nobody actually cares if you're factually correct or not as long as you're telling the viewers what they want to hear. Being called out as factually lazy by liberals has absolutely no real-world consequences for her.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 22:08
|
|
|
It's still pretty annoying. She spends the better part of a week defending a guy that said homosexuality is akin to bestiality and that as a rich white man in the south he has the authority to say black people were happier before the civil rights movement to get her persecuted conservative points. Then when it becomes clear that she is on the wrong side of this (and on the side of bigots and white supremacists) she just has to say she didn't know what he was actually saying and no one will call her on it outside of liberal blogs and such. You have a side that straight up admits it has no idea what it is talking about and being willfully disingenuous and it doesn't matter, that voice is just as valid as someone that has spend years studying a topic. It's serioulsy wrong and I think it's a huge problem that is going to bite us in the rear end even more since I don't see how to stop it. How do you run a country when one side is living is a literal fantasy land and gets incredibly angry and vindictive when that illusion is questioned?
Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 22:15 on Dec 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 22:11
|
|
|
I used to think Palin was intellectually challenged, but it appears she's actually just deliberately slothful. How much bloody effort does it take to read a 3-4 paragraph news article, especially when you're gonna go out as a public figure and make statements about it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 22:14
|
|
|
I think that's she's just a huge piece of poo poo grifter that would ally with the KKK or neo nazis if she thought she could make a dime off it. The only thing stopping her now is she can still make bucks just skirting that line.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:I used to think Palin was intellectually challenged, but it appears she's actually just deliberately slothful. How much bloody effort does it take to read a 3-4 paragraph news article, especially when you're gonna go out as a public figure and make statements about it? Why read it? Why even pretend to read it? If "I didn't read it" gets you out of hard questions and still lets you score points with your political base by defending a guy, why bother being prepared to handle details about the thing discussed?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 22:17
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:I used to think Palin was intellectually challenged, but it appears she's actually just deliberately slothful. What do you mean "just"? She's both.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 22:20
|
|
|
Grondoth posted:Why read it? Why even pretend to read it? If "I didn't read it" gets you out of hard questions and still lets you score points with your political base by defending a guy, why bother being prepared to handle details about the thing discussed? Exactly. She could come out tomorrow and claim Mussolini was correct and maligned by history then in a week just say she thought he was just the good train guy oopsie! and it wouldn't even be a blip on the news. Being stupid and/or intellectually lazy is now a valid defense of any horrible opinion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 22:22
|
|
|
Hearing how somebody feels about Sarah Palin is pretty much the fastest and most effective way to determine how little regard you should have for their opinion on anything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
The Far-Right believes that there's a worldwide war going on against whites. I'm just letting you all know. http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/2013/12/home-invasion-gone-wrong-in-suburban.html quote:"Home Invasion Gone Wrong" in Suburban Indianapolis: Black Male a "Person of Interest" in Murder of White Mother and Daughter in 90 percent white Westfield
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 23:16
|
|
|
Race Realists posted:The Far-Right believes that there's a worldwide war going on against whites. Black people kill white people: RACE WAR URBAN FERAL VIOLENCE  White people kill black people: Self defense 
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 23:33
|
|
|
One thing I can say about the Far Right is that they're quick to throw crime statistics (usually categorized by race) in their opponent's face. And if THAT doesn't work, childish insults (if you're a white girl, they automatically assume you must have sex with alot of black men... Yeah..) I honestly feel that more and people like this are popping up at an alarming rate, and there's nothing we can do about it  BornAPoorBlkChild fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Dec 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 23:38
|
|
|
quiggy stardust posted:Black people kill white people: RACE WAR URBAN FERAL VIOLENCE A lot of this has to come from tribalism. If people who look the same and think differently (liberals, gays, what-have-you) are part of a different tribe and therefore the enemy, then people who actually look different might as well be Pod People.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 23:55
|
|
|
Solution? Kill all the blacks
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 00:04
|
|
|
Race Realists posted:I honestly feel that more and people like this are popping up at an alarming rate, and there's nothing we can do about it They're not, the Internet is just giving them a platform to express their hate speech. The next generation is already becoming less bigoted, less homophobic, etc. These attitudes and opinions are dying out, we're just witnessing the last gasps of it. For example, it's hard to convince a 6 year old gays are evil when their friend has two dads.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 00:11
|
|
|
It's not the number of hateful racist dirtbags you should be worried about, it's the intensity of their anger. It only took a few hateful shitheads to basically destroy the progressive movement of the 1960's (via assassinations).
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 00:20
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:They're not, the Internet is just giving them a platform to express their hate speech. The next generation is already becoming less bigoted, less homophobic, etc. These attitudes and opinions are dying out, we're just witnessing the last gasps of it. That kind of (oh god gonna bust out the two-bit words) generational triumphalism has been a problem for the left for god knows how long now. It's not a good idea to embrace it--whether or not the facts that it draws from are correct. And those six-year-olds aren't going to have their world-views really solidified until 10-14 years from now. It's what they say then that's important.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 00:23
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:They're not, the Internet is just giving them a platform to express their hate speech. The next generation is already becoming less bigoted, less homophobic, etc. These attitudes and opinions are dying out, we're just witnessing the last gasps of it. The truly weird thing about them is the bizarre cognitive dissonance they all seem to share about their world view take for instance some of the comments related to this article from American Renaissance: http://www.amren.com/features/2013/11/a-black-mans-path-to-race-realism/ Question Diversity posted:
WR_the_realist posted:Black race realists can't be "us" but I don't see why they can't be our friends. Unlike some of the white nationalists in this forum, I see nothing wicked with having friends of other races, including intelligent black people. Certainly I have more agreement with Larry Murdock than I have with any number of white college professors and congressmen. Our biggest enemies are of our own race. John R posted:But, you might be able to CONVERT a White liberal over to our way of thinking. You cannot "convert" a black person into a White person. This is about White race survival. Blood is thicker than water. KingKenton posted:Then why are you here? You can't have it both ways. Extend common courtesy to a black you encounter in public? Yes. Be civil? Yes. Just ignore them? OK. Befriend them? No. Have we not learned anything? One little article from a Black race realist and all the sudden we're ready to have them be our friends, move into our neighborhoods, and invite them over for a BBQ? Perhaps I have misunderstood what you meant by your usage of "friend". If so, my apologies. WR_the_realist posted:If it was my goal to hate every single black (and every single Jew) I'd be posting on Stormfront, not Amren. The black average is unimpressive, to be sure. But that's not a reason I can't find common ground with a highly intelligent black man who is clearly dedicated to the truth, whatever it is. That is my goal too. KingKenton posted:
BornAPoorBlkChild fucked around with this message at 01:21 on Dec 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 00:23
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:That kind of (oh god gonna bust out the two-bit words) generational triumphalism has been a problem for the left for god knows how long now. It's not a good idea to embrace it--whether or not the facts that it draws from are correct. And those six-year-olds aren't going to have their world-views really solidified until 10-14 years from now. It's what they say then that's important. Don't try it. I made that point a while ago and got dogpiled because "This time it's different! Look at the demographics!" And I'm enough of an essentialist to be sympathetic to the idea that demography=destiny.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 01:55
|
|
|
Partly yes, the internet has replaced pamphlets at the gun show so we're seeing more stuff. But don't forget reasons one through a hundred billion for increased right-wing rage, right here: People just can't avoid letting it all hang out when President *BONG* is on TV.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:I used to think Palin was intellectually challenged, but it appears she's actually just deliberately slothful. How much bloody effort does it take to read a 3-4 paragraph news article, especially when you're gonna go out as a public figure and make statements about it? i hate to back track but I couldn't let it go by without pointing out the most offensive part of Palin admitting she didn't read the article. In that interview, she also said "In response, he was quoting the Gospel," she told Van Susteren. "So people who are so insulted and offended by what he said evidently are offended by what he was quoting in the Gospel." I don't care what definition a person uses but, "the Gospel" is a narrative covering the life of Jesus and the good news he brought to men. Jesus never said one thing about homosexuality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 05:26
|
|
|
Just curious, would Paul's letters count as part of the Gospels? I tend to think of the Gospels as being synonymous with the NT but I'm also not a Christian so . . .
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 05:36
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Just curious, would Paul's letters count as part of the Gospels? I tend to think of the Gospels as being synonymous with the NT but I'm also not a Christian so . . . A "Gospel" literally means an account of the life of Jesus. That's all. There are the four canonical gospels but there are also gnostic gospels, etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Just curious, would Paul's letters count as part of the Gospels? I tend to think of the Gospels as being synonymous with the NT but I'm also not a Christian so . . . "The Gospel" usually just refers to the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 05:41
|
|
|
radical meme posted:I don't care what definition a person uses but, "the Gospel" is a narrative covering the life of Jesus and the good news he brought to men. Jesus never said one thing about homosexuality. This. He also may or may not have helped a homosexual roman soldier and his partner. Apparently called the Roman Soldier a "man of great faith" if memory serves correctly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 05:41
|
|
|
jonjonaug posted:"The Gospel" usually just refers to the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Which are probably more things that Palin has never read.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 05:44
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Just curious, would Paul's letters count as part of the Gospels? I tend to think of the Gospels as being synonymous with the NT but I'm also not a Christian so . . . The Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, (Hebrews), the Pauline Epistles, the Petrine Epistles, Revelation
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 06:06
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:"That wasn't intended to be a factual statement" Ugh where did this come from again, which candidate beatlegs posted:I used to think Palin was intellectually challenged, but it appears she's actually just deliberately slothful. Why can't it be both? (I see I was beaten to this.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 06:15
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:Ugh where did this come from again, which candidate
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:14
|
|
|
So i don't watch conservative media of any kind, and I don't go to church or have many conservative friends: What kind of bullshit am I going to have to dismantle during Christmas dinner?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:32
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:Why can't it be both? (I see I was beaten to this.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:36
|
|
|
Happy_Misanthrope posted:Arizona Senator Jon Kyl, when he stated "90% of Planned Parenthood's activity is devoted to performing abortion". It reminds me of this: Rick Santorum makes up lies about old people in The Netherlands having to wear bracelets saying "PLEASE DON'T EUTHANIZE ME" because, you know, socialized medicine and death panels: quote:Rick Santorum grossly mischaracterized euthanasia practices in the Netherlands during an appearance at a faith conference. He overstated the rate of euthanasia and falsely claimed that the elderly are being killed against their will and wear “do not euthanize me” bracelets: The best part is that there was press from the Netherlands there when he said it. They immediately grabbed his PR lady and asked him what in the gently caress he thought he was talking about : quote:Erik Mouthaan, the US correspondent for the Dutch RTL Evening News, confronted Rick Santorum spokesperson Alice Stewart and peppered her with questions over the Republican hopeful’s controversial remarks about how the Dutch “involuntarily” euthanized senior citizens who were “older and sick,” BuzzFeed’s Andrew Kaczynski reports. These people astound me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:17 |
|
|
Dude, it is a well known fact that if Stephen hawking had grown up in a country like England he would havebeen denied care and that would have deprived the world of his genius.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:42
|
|