LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Cultural appropriation springs to mind
Happy No Collusion Day Everyone
- Thread starter Hotdog
- Start date
I’ve only skimmed the last few pages and can’t keep up with everything here, but wanted to go ahead and post this here to have it time stamped and figured this was as good a place as any:
I believe Trump in 2020 presents a legitimate narrative challenge to his opposition. Russia has been the default to fall back on for rationalizing what was perceived to be an impossible win. The self-reflection of realizing that they got some (many) things very, very wrong, and being able to interject a variable like Russia proves more palatable, yet blinds from conscious awareness issues that remain unaddressed.
What I believe this “exoneration” will facilitate is a new narrative, which is essentially a continuation of the old narrative, in the event of a Trump win in 2020. Post hoc analysis will point to a “premature” exoneration (Mueller) that dropped America’s guard on the existential threat of Russian interference, which facilitated an unfettered Russian campaign of misinformation that propels a 2020 Trump victory. That’s the narrative to watch for that will be easier to swallow than “we ****ed this thing up again — hard — after doubling down on what got us into this mess.”
I believe Trump in 2020 presents a legitimate narrative challenge to his opposition. Russia has been the default to fall back on for rationalizing what was perceived to be an impossible win. The self-reflection of realizing that they got some (many) things very, very wrong, and being able to interject a variable like Russia proves more palatable, yet blinds from conscious awareness issues that remain unaddressed.
What I believe this “exoneration” will facilitate is a new narrative, which is essentially a continuation of the old narrative, in the event of a Trump win in 2020. Post hoc analysis will point to a “premature” exoneration (Mueller) that dropped America’s guard on the existential threat of Russian interference, which facilitated an unfettered Russian campaign of misinformation that propels a 2020 Trump victory. That’s the narrative to watch for that will be easier to swallow than “we ****ed this thing up again — hard — after doubling down on what got us into this mess.”
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the links. Interesting that they didn't utilize photographic evidence from the Bush years to lambaste him. And your right that I wasn't bringing up children in cages during the Obama years. Just as in the Trump years, I recognize that border security is being put into an impossible situation. I appreciate that they are doing the best that they can, and I am in favor of giving them the additional support that they request.
Is it your position that the pictures misrepresented the situation on the ground in some way? That the pictures they used for Obama were not sufficiently condemnatory? Did they have access for current pictures? Do you think the nature of Trump's rhetoric toward immigrants, compared with Obama's rhetoric, may have colored the coverage?
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
I think it matters, a lot, that the media told people that the pictures and videos were of "atrocities" that Trump was committing, and that they were actually taken during the Obama era. If you can't figure out why that makes a difference, and you can't understand what is wrong with this sort of reporting, then I guess I can't help you. I bet you would figure out what is wrong with this sort of reporting really quick if the media was handling a story critical of a liberal politician in the same way.
Do we agree that the pictures and videos were representative of the conditions that Trump was overseeing, and that Trump increased the scale? Do we agree that journalists had not been permitted to modern pictures?
I agree that the media should have clearly labeled any such picture with the time it was taken, so as to avoid confusion. If they did not do that, they failed. Otherwise, using dramatic, illustrative pictures is a way to bring in more viewers, readers, etc., adn bump up ad revenues. Don't you believe in capitalism?
They do handle stores of liberal politicians this way. You didn't know?
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Go ahead and show me your proof that they accurately labeled the pictures. Go ahead and show me your evidence that they weren't able to take "modern pictures." Go ahead and explain to me why you believe that lying is some sort of foundation or exclusive realm to capitalism. And finally, go ahead and post your links of a liberal politician being handled in this way.
Red
Well-Known Member
These photos are current. About 1% of the entire population of Guatemala and Honduras are expected to be apprehended at the border this fiscal year:
https://www.latimes.com/world/mexic...migrants-el-paso-camp-20190329-htmlstory.html
Some background on the refugee exodus from the Northern Triangle:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/29/us-mexico-border-immigration-chaos
"Violence perpetrated by drug traffickers, street gangs and state security forces have made this region, known as the Northern Triangle, the most dangerous place in the world outside an official war zone."
And the US role in helping to create the crisis in Central America:
https://medium.com/s/story/timeline-us-intervention-central-america-a9bea9ebc148
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qvnyzq/central-america-atrocities-caused-immigration-crisis
https://www.latimes.com/world/mexic...migrants-el-paso-camp-20190329-htmlstory.html
Some background on the refugee exodus from the Northern Triangle:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/29/us-mexico-border-immigration-chaos
"Violence perpetrated by drug traffickers, street gangs and state security forces have made this region, known as the Northern Triangle, the most dangerous place in the world outside an official war zone."
And the US role in helping to create the crisis in Central America:
https://medium.com/s/story/timeline-us-intervention-central-america-a9bea9ebc148
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qvnyzq/central-america-atrocities-caused-immigration-crisis
I think it's unfortunate that you automatically assume I am holding some position without reading my posts. I said, "I agree that the media should have clearly labeled any such picture with the time it was taken, so as to avoid confusion. If they did not do that, they failed." That has a strong implication that I have no reason to think they did such labeling.
I was well aware at the time that journalists were trying, and failing, to get access to record the conditions in the compounds. If you were not, too bad for you. I feel no need to convince you.
If people can get more money by lying, a lot of them will lie. I don't see how that is a "foundation" or "exclusive realm" to capitalism, but it is an expected feature.
Why? What do I get out of it?
Red
Well-Known Member
A google search of "reporters not allowed to take photos of caged children" will yield many articles from the period in question explaining that authorities would not allow photojournalists to take photos inside the detention facilities.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
You get to prove that you're not just making this stuff up.
Based on previous experience, providing such proof will make no difference to you. It won't make any difference in my life, either. I'll go play EuroRails instead.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
In other words you just made it up. Got it.
Stars Fan
Well-Known Member
I feel a rant coming on.
The Republican party is just a barrel of flying monkeys.
I feel like we are like Dorothy and her friends standing in front of the Wizard of Flaws. We have been hearing for two years now, "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain". It's fake news! It's a witch hunt! Every time someone tries to pull the curtain back another Republican swoops in to snatch Toto up and keep the curtain closed.
Mueller takes two years to investigate the Russian interference in our election. Barr releases a 3 page summary of a 300 report and says "pay no attention". Now he promises to release a redacted version to the Congress by mid April. By then, the steady beat of propaganda will have desensitized us to the outrage we should feel at the level of partisan editing taking place. That will be followed by another round of demands from the House that the complete report be released to select committees in congress. Which will be rebuffed by another flying monkey.
The House has called for the release of the report by Tuesday. The Senate has had a similar call defeated by Mitch, then Lindsey, then Rand. Flying monkeys all. If the report is the total vindication it is being touted as, then why the obstructionism? Because the Wizard is not who he says he is, and because the flying monkeys have sold their integrity for some rotten bananas.
Let's pull back the curtain and see what there is to see.
Oh, and don't vote for any more flying monkeys.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using JazzFanz mobile app
The Republican party is just a barrel of flying monkeys.
I feel like we are like Dorothy and her friends standing in front of the Wizard of Flaws. We have been hearing for two years now, "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain". It's fake news! It's a witch hunt! Every time someone tries to pull the curtain back another Republican swoops in to snatch Toto up and keep the curtain closed.
Mueller takes two years to investigate the Russian interference in our election. Barr releases a 3 page summary of a 300 report and says "pay no attention". Now he promises to release a redacted version to the Congress by mid April. By then, the steady beat of propaganda will have desensitized us to the outrage we should feel at the level of partisan editing taking place. That will be followed by another round of demands from the House that the complete report be released to select committees in congress. Which will be rebuffed by another flying monkey.
The House has called for the release of the report by Tuesday. The Senate has had a similar call defeated by Mitch, then Lindsey, then Rand. Flying monkeys all. If the report is the total vindication it is being touted as, then why the obstructionism? Because the Wizard is not who he says he is, and because the flying monkeys have sold their integrity for some rotten bananas.
Let's pull back the curtain and see what there is to see.
Oh, and don't vote for any more flying monkeys.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using JazzFanz mobile app
Last edited:
Bold words, coming from a person who writes posts to deny what people say, and then looks it up, finds out they were right, and deletes the post before anyone replies.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Huh? Are you wishing you had deleted your post that claims you can show examples of liberal politicians being purposely misrepresented the way that conservative ones are? I can give you scores of examples of the media misrepresenting stories, and presenting incomplete or untruthful information that seems designed to harm the right. Where are your examples of the left?
I like the way Stossel deals with these issues. I could poke a few holes in his presentation of "facts" but he certainly deals with facts in a way I enjoy and respect.
I’m sorry but that video is pure ********. I watched it live and he was absolutely mocking that reporter for his disability. Was a scumbag move. Stop defending stupid, ignorant ****.
No, I'm talking about the latest thread where we discussed global warming. I saw a response you made to post I made on the connection between global warming and the polar vortex, spent a few minutes gathering websites to explain it further, hit the reply button, and it turned out you had deleted that post.
So now I know that even if you see evidence you were wrong, you won't bother to acknowledge nor adjust your position. Information has no impact on your views. Hence, I am adjusting how I respond to you accordingly. I am aware that should I provide 50 articles of liberals being misrepresented in the media, you will find a way to dismiss, ignore, or spin that information. That means neither of us benefits. So, why would I bother?