|
He means ICE as in "internal combustion engines" but you are right, they both suck
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 06:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 00:25 |
|
|
Chuds threaten reporters daily but AOC is now only going to get negative articles from the Wapo and NYT gormless libs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 23:42
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Chuds threaten reporters daily but AOC is now only going to get negative articles from the Wapo and NYT gormless libs. these loving losers would 100% rather have chuds shout antisemitic poo poo and death threats at them and be invited to the party than be told 'actually this is a private town hall'
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 23:47
|
|
|
Not gonna lie, the press trying to draw equivalence between AOC having one closed door event and Donald Trump calling them enemies of the people are making it really hard for me to care when Trump vilifies them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 23:50
|
|
|
How the the gently caress did Joe Manchin get my email address?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 01:20
|
|
|
Dmitri-9 posted:How the the gently caress did Joe Manchin get my email address? It was me. I have a side project that involves signing up anyone that has ever complained about Joe Manchin.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 01:52
|
|
|
Radish posted:Not gonna lie, the press trying to draw equivalence between AOC having one closed door event and Donald Trump calling them enemies of the people are making it really hard for me to care when Trump vilifies them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 03:35
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:They absolutely loving are enemies of the people. Struggle Sessions for CNN people when?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 03:36
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Struggle Sessions for CNN people when? Except Wolf Blitzer. His brain should be studied to determine how one becomes the dumbest man alive. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 06:03
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:That's a little too theatrical for my taste. Just shoot them in the face and dump the bodies in a ditch. Gonna assume you meant Chris Cillizza because as dumb and credulous as Blitzer is, Cillizza is somehow worse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Gonna assume you meant Chris Cillizza because as dumb and credulous as Blitzer is, Cillizza is somehow worse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 23:50
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Gonna assume you meant Chris Cillizza because as dumb and credulous as Blitzer is, Cillizza is somehow worse. Did you guys forget the President exists?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 03:29
|
|
|
 https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/1031192720277221376
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 18:01
|
|
|
Media is scared as gently caress of AOC. They couldn't care less about fascism but one person starts running on cheaper healthcare and suddenly she gets more scrutiny than the entire GOP combined. "Fact checkers" from both Wapo and CNN just regurgitating the industry line as fact while allowing Ryan to just make up poo poo and maintain his WONK title. If she hadn't called out Crowley this is about the point he'd be jumping back in to say he needs to run in order to save the election. I'm hoping this obvious organized hit job backfires on them hard but they REALLY want to see her lose that election. Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Aug 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
Remember, WaPo is the Good Liberal Newspaper now, at least according to the subset of liberals who post in places like D&D. NYTimes' direct fascist apologia is apparently too much, but they don't mind if the newspaper just sticks to slandering the left.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
"Fact checking" is also incredibly loaded. Like write a story about how you think AOC is wrong and cite your bullshit Koch study. However when you preface it with Fact Checking it gives the illusion that this is the objective truth that can't be argued. As that twitter discussion proves these fact checkers need fact checking as they are taking leaps of logic, taking comments out of context, or straight up making things up themselves (while hiding behind cited studies they know are bullshit). Fact checking like that is basically writing your OPED but at the front saying "this is all true you can't dispute it, that's not allowed." I'm loving the liberals that always say she needs more experience when it's clear the media is holding her to an absurd standard they dont even hold the President of the United States to while also ignoring their heroes like Pelosi and Schumer that are constantly getting caught saying stupid things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 19:03
|
|
|
Radish posted:"Fact checking" is also incredibly loaded. Like write a story about how you think AOC is wrong and cite your bullshit Koch study. However when you preface it with Fact Checking it gives the illusion that this is the objective truth that can't be argued. As that twitter discussion proves these fact checkers need fact checking as they are taking leaps of logic, taking comments out of context, or straight up making things up themselves (while hiding behind cited studies they know are bullshit). Fact checking like that is basically writing your OPED but at the front saying "this is all true you can't dispute it, that's not allowed." One of the biggest problems with liberals is that they care about "objectivity and facts" as a sort of faith, but aren't actually smart enough to understand how those things work. So in effect they end up just being blind to the bias of sources they falsely perceive as "objective" (usually due to their tone/reputation - for example NPR or newspapers like WaPo). edit: It's really not all that different from conservatives and Fox News/talk radio; it's just that liberals value things like "a 'professional' tone and demeanor" in the same way conservatives value a bunch of tacky Americans flags and troop worship. In both cases there's blind trust based on cultural signifiers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 19:11
|
|
|
Speaking of WaPo https://twitter.com/KrangTNelson/status/1031240255754522624
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
Paper owned by literal billionaire relentlessly hostile towards socialism, news at eleven.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 19:50
|
|
|
WAPO is really jealous of the NYT it seems.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
It was fun to watch the Trump thread completely fail the paradox of tolerance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 07:54
|
|
|
why were people probated for discussing fascism? seems p on topic for the trump thread
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 09:49
|
|
|
Condiv posted:why were people probated for discussing fascism? seems p on topic for the trump thread because mods is fascist
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 16:39
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:It was fun to watch the Trump thread completely fail the paradox of tolerance. What are you referring to here? I find it impossible to keep track of that thread, due to how fast it moves.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:What are you referring to here? I find it impossible to keep track of that thread, due to how fast it moves. There was a "Are nazis humans?" derail a few days ago, and then someone restarted the derail by going back a hundred pages and quoting a post. So you had goons going "hate the nazis but they're still people" arguing in circles with "hate the nazis who are subhuman scum" people. EDIT: Everyone involved ate a sixer for copy and pasting their same posts from a week ago.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 16:57
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:What are you referring to here? I find it impossible to keep track of that thread, due to how fast it moves. Basically someone said "Um, sure guys, gently caress Nazis and all but please don't dehumanize them or else we're just as bad as the Nazis" and the thread exploded in dumb back and forths about how much one should be allowed to hate Nazis. It's the paradox of tolerance: quote:Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We do not have to tolerate the intolerant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Basically someone said "Um, sure guys, gently caress Nazis and all but please don't dehumanize them or else we're just as bad as the Nazis" and the thread exploded in dumb back and forths about how much one should be allowed to hate Nazis. The derail was way dumber than that. Everyone agreed Nazis should not be tolerated. The "debate" was one group claiming that "toleration" = "humanization" and another group arguing the converse, that "humanization" != "toleration."
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 17:04
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The derail was way dumber than that. Everyone agreed Nazis should not be tolerated. The "debate" was one group claiming that "toleration" = "humanization" and another group arguing the converse, that "humanization" != "toleration." Yea it devolved very quickly into dumb semantic slap fights about what exactly "dehumanizing" means.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
It is one among many reasons that thread is a bizzare. There are regular rather extreme positions taken against fascism at least superficially, but whenever the subject comes up about how to actually change anything realistically in the US the usual response is "just keep voting Democrat." So, we shouldn't tolerate the existence of Nazis, but we should absolutely tolerate if not encourage the system that seems to be producing them in even greater numbers. It is "the outcome is bad, but the causes are very good" pretty much taken forward.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 18:22
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:It is one among many reasons that thread is a bizzare. There are regular rather extreme positions taken against fascism at least superficially, but whenever the subject comes up about how to actually change anything realistically in the US the usual response is "just keep voting Democrat." well, and they also aren't at all pissed when the very dems they urge people to support, who are supposed to fix the problem, support fascism quite directly
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 18:44
|
|
|
Condiv posted:why were people probated for discussing fascism? seems p on topic for the trump thread
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 20:30
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:Because it's slightly off-topic which is penalized relentlessly in that thread unless it's a food derail or discussion about whether cats are better than dogs. I remain somewhat of an apologist for this, in the sense that it's okay for there to be one thread in D&D where most of the mainstream liberal chat is "quarantined."
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I remain somewhat of an apologist for this, in the sense that it's okay for there to be one thread in D&D where most of the mainstream liberal chat is "quarantined." I mean I joked about arguing whether cats are better than dogs, and now that is literally the derail that is literally happening, and that's way more off-topic than whether and by how much it's okay to hate Nazis.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
Its only off topic if it makes me feel bad. If it is about hecka cute puppers or tasty noms its OK.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 02:09
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Remember, WaPo is the Good Liberal Newspaper now, at least according to the subset of liberals who post in places like D&D. NYTimes' direct fascist apologia is apparently too much, but they don't mind if the newspaper just sticks to slandering the left. I don't read the WaPo, but from a distance it seems like they have less of that thing the NYT has going on where despite actually being centrist or center-right they consider themselves progressive, and thus need to attack/discredit anyone on the left who calls them out on this, and also probably is what causes them to do stuff like whitewash Nazis in some sort of galaxy-brain 11th dimensional chess way. WaPo seems to me like an openly center-right paper that is comfortable in that identity icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 09:37 on Aug 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 05:07
|
|
|
are there any actual left-wing newspapers in the USA? They all seem various kinds of awful.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 08:44
|
|
|
double nine posted:are there any actual left-wing newspapers in the USA? They all seem various kinds of awful. In terms of old-school large-circulation printed broadsheets, no not really. The left exists in magazines and online. I don't think it's as bad as Britain though, where the newspapers seem to be 100% openly far-right except for the Guardian (and the New Statesman?) which are somehow even more pathologically liberal than the NYT or any media outlet in the US icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 09:41 on Aug 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 09:33
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:In terms of old-school large-circulation printed broadsheets, no not really. The left exists in magazines and online. I don't think it's as bad as Britain though, where the newspapers seem to be 100% openly far-right except for the Guardian (and the New Statesman?) which are somehow even more pathologically liberal than the NYT or any media outlet in the US The Guardian honestly has trended pretty far to the right as well. Honestly, there is very little differentiation in the Anglosphere at this point. Btw, WaPo was traditionally to the right of the NYT, and made its transition to pretty much being a center-right/right paperback in the 2000s. The NYT's "transition" is much more recent, and it is still a bit awkward.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 12:31
|
|
|
The New York Times conspired with Cheney to get us into Iraq it's not that recent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 12:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 00:25 |
|
|
Radish posted:The New York Times conspired with Cheney to get us into Iraq it's not that recent. I guess I should say they tried to keep the facade up longer than the WaPo. That said, as with most mainstream outlets, they obviously pretty much gave up in 2016. Also, the NYT has always had a bias regarding Palestine, but their recent reporting has been a shift from that position to pretty much full apologism. It is pretty telling the hottest thing about left-wing media at this point is podcasts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 13:39
|
|