The Media -- Going Forward

Political discussions
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by kalm »

Speaking of who to trust.
People have to figure out who they can trust, and it’s not easy, especially when lots of frauds are trying to pass themselves off as experts, so a lot of arguments between people are about who to trust and what grounds we have for trusting them. In this magazine, I have shown how many highly-credentialed and widely-cited people (psychologists, philosophers, economists, legal scholars, and computer scientists) can make completely bogus arguments that often look superficially reasonable. An “environmentalist” whose book is put out by a major mainstream publisher will turn out to be distorting basic climate science research. A podcaster dubbed “the cool kids’ philosopher” by the respectable New York Times will turn out to be dishonest and ignorant. The respectable New York Times itself will publish totally misleading propaganda and treat undemocratic autocrats as the saviors of democracy. A Nobel Prize-winning president who appears brilliant and inspiring will turn out to be oblivious and vacuous. A smiling, charming vice president will turn out to be a serial liar. Expert pollsters will turn out to be making stuff up as they go along, witty, debonair public intellectuals will turn out to be racists who don’t have a clue what they’re talking about, astute, prize-winning reporters will use utterly distorted facts in support of dubious theses, and professional-looking think tanks will turn out to be completely untrustworthy.


Personally, I am sympathetic to people who end up believing things that are very wrong, because I know how huge a task it is to sift through the barrage of information we receive and pick out what’s right and what’s not. (Worse still, some of the most reliable scholarly material is extremely difficult and expensive to access.) I’m on the left, but I actually get why there are people who trust Donald Trump. Trump lies constantly, but so does Biden. Fox News often pushes dishonest nonsense, but so does the nation’s Paper of Record. Often everybody on either side of a dispute is making claims they can’t support. (Critics of the New York Times’ “1619 Project,” for instance, are frequently wrong (and the project itself is very valuable), but the project’s creators, too, have not been scrupulous. The New York Post’s reporting on Hunter Biden’s emails appears to have been poorly fact-checked, but so were claims that the Post’s reporting is “Russian disinformation.”) Never assume that just because one side of a dispute is wrong, the other side is right. Everyone could be wrong.

This does not mean that some sources are not relatively more reliable. The New York Times is not Natural News. The Wall Street Journal is not InfoWars. It does mean, however, that you can be misled wherever you go, that true words can be spoken on Fox and false ones by winners of the Pulitzer Prize. We can’t be so cynical as to write off “the news” as too biased and untrustworthy to bother trying to parse, because ignorance of the world around us is also not an option. What we have to do is be vigilant and learn critical thinking, to demand that claims be substantiated and examine the evidence and arguments for ourselves. When we see a headline accusing a foreign country of doing something nefarious, we need to think about what it is they’re being accused of doing, who is making the accusation, and whether it holds up. From World War I to the Iraq War, the American public has been led to support horrific foreign policy blunders by treating the words of its government and its newspapers as if they are true, so we have an moral obligation to become “intellectual anarchists”: demand that every authority justify itself before you accept it.
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/11/ ... d7IoJV5C8I
Image
Image
Image
JoltinJoe
Level4
Level4
Posts: 7049
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by JoltinJoe »

kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 7:09 am
JoltinJoe wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 5:36 am

You want to know something? The mass media is a lie machine, far more out of control than Trump.

As a Catholic, I can say with conviction that an incredible amount of things reported about the Catholic Church is highly distorted, or an outright lie.

And the media will lie to protect favored organizations like Planned Parenthood. For example, the media told you for years that the David Daleiden videos were "distorted."

But when PP representatives were finally deposed under oath, sworn to tell the truth, they admitted that PP sold baby parts for profit and only stopped after the Daleiden videos became public.

And yet I can't locate a single mainstream media story that reported this deposition testimony.
Link?

:rofl:
:lol:

Asking for a link when the claim is that the mainstream media is ignoring a story is, well, such a klammy thing to do. :lol:

Here, although you will say, "Well, that's The Federalist."

https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/30/pl ... d-fetuses/
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by AZGrizFan »

JoltinJoe wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:04 am
kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 7:09 am

Link?

:rofl:
:lol:

Asking for a link when the claim is that the mainstream media is ignoring a story is, well, such a klammy thing to do. :lol:

Here, although you will say, "Well, that's The Federalist."

https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/30/pl ... d-fetuses/
That’s “Harvard of the Palouse” level intelligence on display.... :nod: :nod:
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
JoltinJoe
Level4
Level4
Posts: 7049
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by JoltinJoe »

AZGrizFan wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:06 am
JoltinJoe wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:04 am

:lol:

Asking for a link when the claim is that the mainstream media is ignoring a story is, well, such a klammy thing to do. :lol:

Here, although you will say, "Well, that's The Federalist."

https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/30/pl ... d-fetuses/
That’s “Harvard of the Palouse” level intelligence on display.... :nod: :nod:
:lol:

The totally-in-the-bag judge in San Francisco ruled during the trial back in 2019 that these deposition statements offered at that time by the defense were "irrelevant" because "the First Amendment is not a defense in this case." That statement is likely the dumbest thing ever uttered in federal court, in the history of our Republic, and is, in itself, reversible error.

The amazing thing about that San Fran trial is that Judge In-The-Bag so stacked the deck against Daleiden -- and yet the prevailing opinion among those who watched the trial was that Daleiden was still going to win it. Thus, just before the jury started deliberating, Judge In-The-Bag -- having previously sat on the Board of not-for-profit that entered into a strategic alliance with PP -- issued a directed verdict in favor of his friends at PP.

The "judge" told the jury that he had determined that Daleidan was liable to PP, and that the jury should just return a damages amount. Mind you, most legal observers were saying that PP had not proven its case at all.

But Daleiden was free, once the trial was over, to release the deposition testimony. The only major news outlet that reported on the deposition testimony was Fox News.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/daleid ... epositions

Daleiden has now taken the statements made publicly by PP, to the effect that he was a liar who altered the tapes, along with the admissions in the sworn deposition testimony, and filed a complaint for defamation. This is going to be a very tough case for PP to defend, because the organization's public statements are contradicted by what its agents stated under oath.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/daleid ... defamation

PP is counting on its friends in the media to ignore this suit. I bet no one here knew about it.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/daleid ... defamation
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by kalm »

AZGrizFan wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:06 am
JoltinJoe wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:04 am

:lol:

Asking for a link when the claim is that the mainstream media is ignoring a story is, well, such a klammy thing to do. :lol:

Here, although you will say, "Well, that's The Federalist."

https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/30/pl ... d-fetuses/
That’s “Harvard of the Palouse” level intelligence on display.... :nod: :nod:
At least we learned to recognize satire and be skeptical of update articles (The Federalist) who base their content on videos from the disputed and clearly biased original source (CMP), unlike Idablow and Fordhumb grads.

:lol:
Image
Image
Image
JoltinJoe
Level4
Level4
Posts: 7049
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by JoltinJoe »

kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:31 am
AZGrizFan wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:06 am

That’s “Harvard of the Palouse” level intelligence on display.... :nod: :nod:
At least we learned to recognize satire and be skeptical of update articles (The Federalist) who base their content on videos from the original disputed and clearly biased original source (CMP), unlike Idablow and Fordhumb grads.

:lol:
I've been saying for five years that the statements on the videos are not ambiguous. These folks are saying that they know PP has sold baby parts for profit. Those statements are pretty clear.

We thereafter have had a lot of legal-smithing that the tapes contain "no evidence" that baby parts are sold. But the lawyerly-types saying this are using the term "evidence" in its strictest legal form. Yes, to be precise, the statements on the tapes are hearsay and thus not properly admissible as "evidence" in court.

But any good-faith investigator, seeing those videos, should ask the next question, "Ok, how do you know that this happened?"

Good lawyering and investigation involves working through each level of hearsay, until you find the person with personal knowledge.

So I' ve been saying for five years, "Go look at the tapes and tell me that the people on the tape are not acknowledging that they have knowledge that PP has sold baby parts."

You have never done it.

It's fine to be "skeptical." But it's better to have initiative.

And, in the end, this explains why I am always a few blocks ahead of you.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by kalm »

JoltinJoe wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:43 am
kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:31 am

At least we learned to recognize satire and be skeptical of update articles (The Federalist) who base their content on videos from the original disputed and clearly biased original source (CMP), unlike Idablow and Fordhumb grads.

:lol:
I've been saying for five years that the statements on the videos are not ambiguous. These folks are saying that they know PP has sold baby parts for profit. Those statements are pretty clear.

We thereafter have had a lot of legal-smithing that the tapes contain "no evidence" that baby parts are sold. But the lawyerly-types saying this are using the term "evidence" in its strictest legal form. Yes, to be precise, the statements on the tapes are hearsay and thus not properly admissible as "evidence" in court.

But any good-faith investigator, seeing those videos, should ask the next question, "Ok, how do you know that this happened?"

Good lawyering and investigation involves working through each level of hearsay, until you find the person with personal knowledge.

So I' ve been saying for five years, "Go look at the tapes and tell me that the people on the tape are not acknowledging that they have knowledge that PP has sold baby parts."

You have never done it.

It's fine to be "skeptical." But it's better to have initiative.

And, in the end, this explains why I am always a few blocks ahead of you.
We’ve been through this before and I watched the tapes. You are relying upon intentionally misleading videos to begin with. If the videos were damning evidence why doesn’t the Federalist peel back the levels of hearsay as you suggest and come up with their own ultimate proof?

Judges and juries can get it wrong.....and so can lawyers.
Image
Image
Image
JoltinJoe
Level4
Level4
Posts: 7049
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by JoltinJoe »

kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 9:00 am
JoltinJoe wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:43 am

I've been saying for five years that the statements on the videos are not ambiguous. These folks are saying that they know PP has sold baby parts for profit. Those statements are pretty clear.

We thereafter have had a lot of legal-smithing that the tapes contain "no evidence" that baby parts are sold. But the lawyerly-types saying this are using the term "evidence" in its strictest legal form. Yes, to be precise, the statements on the tapes are hearsay and thus not properly admissible as "evidence" in court.

But any good-faith investigator, seeing those videos, should ask the next question, "Ok, how do you know that this happened?"

Good lawyering and investigation involves working through each level of hearsay, until you find the person with personal knowledge.

So I' ve been saying for five years, "Go look at the tapes and tell me that the people on the tape are not acknowledging that they have knowledge that PP has sold baby parts."

You have never done it.

It's fine to be "skeptical." But it's better to have initiative.

And, in the end, this explains why I am always a few blocks ahead of you.
We’ve been through this before and I watched the tapes. You are relying upon intentionally misleading videos to begin with. If the videos were damning evidence why doesn’t the Federalist peel back the levels of hearsay as you suggest and come up with their own ultimate proof?

Judges and juries can get it wrong.....and so can lawyers.
Obviously, you are not aware that the highest court in the land to have reviewed the tapes, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, concluded in 2019 that the tapes were neither doctored, nor edited, nor misleading.

You missed that because the mainstream media did not report it.

There is nothing misleading about the videos. In fact, PP witnesses, when forced to testify under oath, admitted that PP affiliates had sold baby parts for profit.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by kalm »

JoltinJoe wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 9:40 am
kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 9:00 am

We’ve been through this before and I watched the tapes. You are relying upon intentionally misleading videos to begin with. If the videos were damning evidence why doesn’t the Federalist peel back the levels of hearsay as you suggest and come up with their own ultimate proof?

Judges and juries can get it wrong.....and so can lawyers.
Obviously, you are not aware that the highest court in the land to have reviewed the tapes, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, concluded in 2019 that the tapes were neither doctored, nor edited, nor misleading.

You missed that because the mainstream media did not report it.

There is nothing misleading about the videos. In fact, PP witnesses, when forced to testify under oath, admitted that PP affiliates had sold baby parts for profit.
Link?
Image
Image
Image
JoltinJoe
Level4
Level4
Posts: 7049
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by JoltinJoe »

kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 9:50 am
JoltinJoe wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 9:40 am

Obviously, you are not aware that the highest court in the land to have reviewed the tapes, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, concluded in 2019 that the tapes were neither doctored, nor edited, nor misleading.

You missed that because the mainstream media did not report it.

There is nothing misleading about the videos. In fact, PP witnesses, when forced to testify under oath, admitted that PP affiliates had sold baby parts for profit.
Link?
You do realize than when you ask for a link like this, you are actually proving my point that the mainstream media ignored the decision? :rofl:

All I can give you is a copy of the Fifth Circuit decision itself:

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/si ... &utm_term=

In fact, just yesterday, the Fifth Circuit held that states under its jurisdiction could strip PP of Medicaid Funding -- a determination that these states made BECAUSE of the content of the Daleiden videos.

This puts PP on the spot -- because if PP wants to contest yesterday's decision, it must go the Supreme Court and argue that the videos were deceptively edited. That's a discussion that PP does not wish to have in such a public forum. :o
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by kalm »

JoltinJoe wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 10:05 am
kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 9:50 am

Link?
You do realize than when you ask for a link like this, you are actually proving my point that the mainstream media ignored the decision? :rofl:

All I can give you is a copy of the Fifth Circuit decision itself:

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/si ... &utm_term=

In fact, just yesterday, the Fifth Circuit held that states under its jurisdiction could strip PP of Medicaid Funding -- a determination that these states made BECAUSE of the content of the Daleiden videos.

This puts PP on the spot -- because if PP wants to contest yesterday's decision, it must go the Supreme Court and argue that the videos were deceptively edited. That's a discussion that PP does not wish to have in such a public forum. :o
Why do you think I used the rofl emoji when I First asked for a link?

You’ve lost a step, Joe. Sad. :ohno:

I’ll read the 5th Circuit ruling if you read the current affairs article. It will help us both. :thumb:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by AZGrizFan »

kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:31 am
AZGrizFan wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:06 am

That’s “Harvard of the Palouse” level intelligence on display.... :nod: :nod:
At least we learned to recognize satire and be skeptical of update articles (The Federalist) who base their content on videos from the disputed and clearly biased original source (CMP), unlike Idablow and Fordhumb grads.

:lol:
It’s I-da-HO. :kisswink:
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by UNI88 »

kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 7:43 am Speaking of who to trust.
People have to figure out who they can trust, and it’s not easy, especially when lots of frauds are trying to pass themselves off as experts, so a lot of arguments between people are about who to trust and what grounds we have for trusting them. In this magazine, I have shown how many highly-credentialed and widely-cited people (psychologists, philosophers, economists, legal scholars, and computer scientists) can make completely bogus arguments that often look superficially reasonable. An “environmentalist” whose book is put out by a major mainstream publisher will turn out to be distorting basic climate science research. A podcaster dubbed “the cool kids’ philosopher” by the respectable New York Times will turn out to be dishonest and ignorant. The respectable New York Times itself will publish totally misleading propaganda and treat undemocratic autocrats as the saviors of democracy. A Nobel Prize-winning president who appears brilliant and inspiring will turn out to be oblivious and vacuous. A smiling, charming vice president will turn out to be a serial liar. Expert pollsters will turn out to be making stuff up as they go along, witty, debonair public intellectuals will turn out to be racists who don’t have a clue what they’re talking about, astute, prize-winning reporters will use utterly distorted facts in support of dubious theses, and professional-looking think tanks will turn out to be completely untrustworthy.

Personally, I am sympathetic to people who end up believing things that are very wrong, because I know how huge a task it is to sift through the barrage of information we receive and pick out what’s right and what’s not. (Worse still, some of the most reliable scholarly material is extremely difficult and expensive to access.) I’m on the left, but I actually get why there are people who trust Donald Trump. Trump lies constantly, but so does Biden. Fox News often pushes dishonest nonsense, but so does the nation’s Paper of Record. Often everybody on either side of a dispute is making claims they can’t support. (Critics of the New York Times’ “1619 Project,” for instance, are frequently wrong (and the project itself is very valuable), but the project’s creators, too, have not been scrupulous. The New York Post’s reporting on Hunter Biden’s emails appears to have been poorly fact-checked, but so were claims that the Post’s reporting is “Russian disinformation.”) Never assume that just because one side of a dispute is wrong, the other side is right. Everyone could be wrong.

This does not mean that some sources are not relatively more reliable. The New York Times is not Natural News. The Wall Street Journal is not InfoWars. It does mean, however, that you can be misled wherever you go, that true words can be spoken on Fox and false ones by winners of the Pulitzer Prize. We can’t be so cynical as to write off “the news” as too biased and untrustworthy to bother trying to parse, because ignorance of the world around us is also not an option. What we have to do is be vigilant and learn critical thinking, to demand that claims be substantiated and examine the evidence and arguments for ourselves. When we see a headline accusing a foreign country of doing something nefarious, we need to think about what it is they’re being accused of doing, who is making the accusation, and whether it holds up. From World War I to the Iraq War, the American public has been led to support horrific foreign policy blunders by treating the words of its government and its newspapers as if they are true, so we have an moral obligation to become “intellectual anarchists”: demand that every authority justify itself before you accept it.
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/11/ ... d7IoJV5C8I
The author makes some excellent points and arguments. Similar points and arguments can be made about hyperbole/misinformation published by liberal sources. It's unfortunate that people feel the need to exaggerate in order to make their point.

While the data mentioned in "Free the Freelancers" is questionable, the argument that forcing gig economy companies to treat freelancers as employees would hurt jobs and consumers still has merit. It's kind of like the "1619 Project" in that regard, the authors taking liberties with calling opinions facts doesn't mean that the entire argument is worthless.

For "They Say Scandinavia But They Mean Venezuela" the key for me is about who controls the production, pricing, etc. and the author doesn't even mention that aspect much less attempt to debunk it. AOC is an admitted member of the Democratic Socialists of America. Do I think that AOC, Bernie, etc. actually want the economic catastrophe that is Venezuela? No. Do I think they're arrogant enough to think they can do it better? Yes. Do I have any faith in their ability to pull it off? No. Is it intellectually honest for the author to focus on specific programs while ignoring the bigger picture of what proponents of those programs espouse?

Mr. Robinson makes good points but he is also guilty of the mistakes similar to what he criticizes conservative authors for.
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by kalm »

UNI88 wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 2:00 pm
kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 7:43 am Speaking of who to trust.



https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/11/ ... d7IoJV5C8I
The author makes some excellent points and arguments. Similar points and arguments can be made about hyperbole/misinformation published by liberal sources. It's unfortunate that people feel the need to exaggerate in order to make their point.

While the data mentioned in "Free the Freelancers" is questionable, the argument that forcing gig economy companies to treat freelancers as employees would hurt jobs and consumers still has merit. It's kind of like the "1619 Project" in that regard, the authors taking liberties with calling opinions facts doesn't mean that the entire argument is worthless.

For "They Say Scandinavia But They Mean Venezuela" the key for me is about who controls the production, pricing, etc. and the author doesn't even mention that aspect much less attempt to debunk it. AOC is an admitted member of the Democratic Socialists of America. Do I think that AOC, Bernie, etc. actually want the economic catastrophe that is Venezuela? No. Do I think they're arrogant enough to think they can do it better? Yes. Do I have any faith in their ability to pull it off? No. Is it intellectually honest for the author to focus on specific programs while ignoring the bigger picture of what proponents of those programs espouse?

Mr. Robinson makes good points but he is also guilty of the mistakes similar to what he criticizes conservative authors for.
I’m listening to Whole Foods CEO John Mackey on Rogan right now. Aside from being a thinly veiled Ayn Randian prick in sheep’s clothing he’s simply misinformed on a number of topics of which you’d expect someone as smart he is to not be.

But my real point is although despite sharing your fear of socialism he holds up the Scandies as solid and misunderstood examples of righteous capitalism that works.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by UNI88 »

kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 3:31 pm
UNI88 wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 2:00 pm
The author makes some excellent points and arguments. Similar points and arguments can be made about hyperbole/misinformation published by liberal sources. It's unfortunate that people feel the need to exaggerate in order to make their point.

While the data mentioned in "Free the Freelancers" is questionable, the argument that forcing gig economy companies to treat freelancers as employees would hurt jobs and consumers still has merit. It's kind of like the "1619 Project" in that regard, the authors taking liberties with calling opinions facts doesn't mean that the entire argument is worthless.

For "They Say Scandinavia But They Mean Venezuela" the key for me is about who controls the production, pricing, etc. and the author doesn't even mention that aspect much less attempt to debunk it. AOC is an admitted member of the Democratic Socialists of America. Do I think that AOC, Bernie, etc. actually want the economic catastrophe that is Venezuela? No. Do I think they're arrogant enough to think they can do it better? Yes. Do I have any faith in their ability to pull it off? No. Is it intellectually honest for the author to focus on specific programs while ignoring the bigger picture of what proponents of those programs espouse?

Mr. Robinson makes good points but he is also guilty of the mistakes similar to what he criticizes conservative authors for.
I’m listening to Whole Foods CEO John Mackey on Rogan right now. Aside from being a thinly veiled Ayn Randian prick in sheep’s clothing he’s simply misinformed on a number of topics of which you’d expect someone as smart he is to not be.

But my real point is although despite sharing your fear of socialism he holds up the Scandies as solid and misunderstood examples of righteous capitalism that works.
:suspicious: What are you talking about? You asked Joe and others to read that long assed article and then you ignore my few short paragraphs and respond to something that wasn't in my post? I'm not criticizing the Nordic countries, I'm pointing out how the author is guilty of the same things that he criticizes conservative authors for doing (being selective in what information he provides in order to bolster his argument).

If you want to focus on the Venezuela vs Nordic countries argument, check the link to the Democratic Socialists of America. They use nice words but the underlying goal is to initially bring private corporations under greater democratic control and move toward "worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises". The Nordic countries work because of their culture and the reality that they let capitalism and the market flourish and use the funds raised to underwrite their social welfare programs. I don't for a minute believe Bernie, AOC and their friends want to let let capitalism and the market flourish in the long-run.

If Patrice Onwuka, the D’Souzas, etc. have like the creators of the 1619 Project "not always been scrupulous" isn't it also possible that their writings also have value and that their critics are are also "frequently wrong"?

The author is correct to encourage people to be sceptical about the information they take in. The irony is that that scepticism should also apply to his article.

The author leans left so his bias is to believe things that support his liberal views but he seems to think that people who lean right are being duped when they believe things that support their conservative views. What if both sides are being duped? :kisswink:
Last edited by UNI88 on Wed Nov 25, 2020 4:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
JoltinJoe
Level4
Level4
Posts: 7049
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by JoltinJoe »

kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 10:28 am
JoltinJoe wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 10:05 am

You do realize than when you ask for a link like this, you are actually proving my point that the mainstream media ignored the decision? :rofl:

All I can give you is a copy of the Fifth Circuit decision itself:

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/si ... &utm_term=

In fact, just yesterday, the Fifth Circuit held that states under its jurisdiction could strip PP of Medicaid Funding -- a determination that these states made BECAUSE of the content of the Daleiden videos.

This puts PP on the spot -- because if PP wants to contest yesterday's decision, it must go the Supreme Court and argue that the videos were deceptively edited. That's a discussion that PP does not wish to have in such a public forum. :o
Why do you think I used the rofl emoji when I First asked for a link?

You’ve lost a step, Joe. Sad. :ohno:

I’ll read the 5th Circuit ruling if you read the current affairs article. It will help us both. :thumb:
I actually read the Current Affairs article after you posted it. It pretty much says everything I've been saying here for years. All media today need to be scrutinized closely.

But here's something you can take the bank. No organization lies more to the American people than Planned Parenthood and NARAL. As Dr. Bernard Nathanson -- a founder of NARAL -- later admitted, the whole movement was fueled by falsehoods and euphemisms. Lying was institutionalized. All lies were acceptable in furtherance of their goals.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by kalm »

UNI88 wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 4:13 pm
kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 3:31 pm

I’m listening to Whole Foods CEO John Mackey on Rogan right now. Aside from being a thinly veiled Ayn Randian prick in sheep’s clothing he’s simply misinformed on a number of topics of which you’d expect someone as smart he is to not be.

But my real point is although despite sharing your fear of socialism he holds up the Scandies as solid and misunderstood examples of righteous capitalism that works.
:suspicious: What are you talking about? You asked Joe and others to read that long assed article and then you ignore my few short paragraphs and respond to something that wasn't in my post? I'm not criticizing the Nordic countries, I'm pointing out how the author is guilty of the same things that he criticizes conservative authors for doing (being selective in what information he provides in order to bolster his argument).

If you want to focus on the Venezuela vs Nordic countries argument, check the link to the Democratic Socialists of America. They use nice words but the underlying goal is to initially bring private corporations under greater democratic control and move toward "worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises". The Nordic countries work because of their culture and the reality that they let capitalism and the market flourish and use the funds raised to underwrite their social welfare programs. I don't for a minute believe Bernie, AOC and their friends want to let let capitalism and the market flourish in the long-run.

If Patrice Onwuka, the D’Souzas, etc. have like the creators of the 1619 Project "not always been scrupulous" isn't it also possible that their writings also have value and that their critics are are also "frequently wrong"?

The author is correct to encourage people to be sceptical about the information they take in. The irony is that that scepticism should also apply to his article.

The author leans left so his bias is to believe things that support his liberal views but he seems to think that people who lean right are being duped when they believe things that support their conservative views. What if both sides are being duped? :kisswink:
I read the first bit on the DSA site and I’m missing the part about them taking over the means of production toward pure socialism. They do point out the threat undemocratic corporations can control the lives of millions as well.

I don’t read and admitted lefty’s opinion piece expecting to agree with it all or to be even handed in his assessment of right wing reporting. Being independent does not mean both sides do it (or to an equivalent level).

I brought up Mackey because he should seemingly share your views on the Scandies vs. Venezuela but he doesn’t.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by UNI88 »

kalm wrote: Thu Nov 26, 2020 8:15 am
UNI88 wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 4:13 pm
:suspicious: What are you talking about? You asked Joe and others to read that long assed article and then you ignore my few short paragraphs and respond to something that wasn't in my post? I'm not criticizing the Nordic countries, I'm pointing out how the author is guilty of the same things that he criticizes conservative authors for doing (being selective in what information he provides in order to bolster his argument).

If you want to focus on the Venezuela vs Nordic countries argument, check the link to the Democratic Socialists of America. They use nice words but the underlying goal is to initially bring private corporations under greater democratic control and move toward "worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises". The Nordic countries work because of their culture and the reality that they let capitalism and the market flourish and use the funds raised to underwrite their social welfare programs. I don't for a minute believe Bernie, AOC and their friends want to let let capitalism and the market flourish in the long-run.

If Patrice Onwuka, the D’Souzas, etc. have like the creators of the 1619 Project "not always been scrupulous" isn't it also possible that their writings also have value and that their critics are are also "frequently wrong"?

The author is correct to encourage people to be sceptical about the information they take in. The irony is that that scepticism should also apply to his article.

The author leans left so his bias is to believe things that support his liberal views but he seems to think that people who lean right are being duped when they believe things that support their conservative views. What if both sides are being duped? :kisswink:
I read the first bit on the DSA site and I’m missing the part about them taking over the means of production toward pure socialism. They do point out the threat undemocratic corporations can control the lives of millions as well.

I don’t read and admitted lefty’s opinion piece expecting to agree with it all or to be even handed in his assessment of right wing reporting. Being independent does not mean both sides do it (or to an equivalent level).

I brought up Mackey because he should seemingly share your views on the Scandies vs. Venezuela but he doesn’t.
The DSA's first step in bringing "private corporations under greater democratic control" is paraphrased directly from their website and the long-term goal of "worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises" is a direct quote.

I'm not opposed to regulation that helps to protect the environment or limits crony capitalism and protects a competitive marketplace. I am opposed to regulation that intentionally throttles private enterprise which is what I think the ctrl-left really wants.

I don't disagree with Mackey. There is nothing wrong with the Scandies. I don't think Bernie, AOC and the rest of the ctrl-left's long-term goal is a Scandy mix of capitalism and social welfare programs. They are socialists who want to stifle free enterprise and individual initiative and reward. They want equal outcomes not equal opportunities.
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by BDKJMU »

UNI88 wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 4:13 pm
kalm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 3:31 pm

I’m listening to Whole Foods CEO John Mackey on Rogan right now. Aside from being a thinly veiled Ayn Randian prick in sheep’s clothing he’s simply misinformed on a number of topics of which you’d expect someone as smart he is to not be.

But my real point is although despite sharing your fear of socialism he holds up the Scandies as solid and misunderstood examples of righteous capitalism that works.
:suspicious: What are you talking about? You asked Joe and others to read that long assed article and then you ignore my few short paragraphs and respond to something that wasn't in my post? I'm not criticizing the Nordic countries, I'm pointing out how the author is guilty of the same things that he criticizes conservative authors for doing (being selective in what information he provides in order to bolster his argument).

If you want to focus on the Venezuela vs Nordic countries argument, check the link to the Democratic Socialists of America. They use nice words but the underlying goal is to initially bring private corporations under greater democratic control and move toward "worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises". The Nordic countries work because of their culture and the reality that they let capitalism and the market flourish and use the funds raised to underwrite their social welfare programs. I don't for a minute believe Bernie, AOC and their friends want to let let capitalism and the market flourish in the long-run.

If Patrice Onwuka, the D’Souzas, etc. have like the creators of the 1619 Project "not always been scrupulous" isn't it also possible that their writings also have value and that their critics are are also "frequently wrong"?

The author is correct to encourage people to be sceptical about the information they take in. The irony is that that scepticism should also apply to his article.

The author leans left so his bias is to believe things that support his liberal views but he seems to think that people who lean right are being duped when they believe things that support their conservative views. What if both sides are being duped? :kisswink:
They get a big assist in that regard by having a good chunk of their defense provided by someone else, freeing up more $$$ for their social safety nets..
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by kalm »

UNI88 wrote: Thu Nov 26, 2020 10:23 am
kalm wrote: Thu Nov 26, 2020 8:15 am

I read the first bit on the DSA site and I’m missing the part about them taking over the means of production toward pure socialism. They do point out the threat undemocratic corporations can control the lives of millions as well.

I don’t read and admitted lefty’s opinion piece expecting to agree with it all or to be even handed in his assessment of right wing reporting. Being independent does not mean both sides do it (or to an equivalent level).

I brought up Mackey because he should seemingly share your views on the Scandies vs. Venezuela but he doesn’t.
The DSA's first step in bringing "private corporations under greater democratic control" is paraphrased directly from their website and the long-term goal of "worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises" is a direct quote.

I'm not opposed to regulation that helps to protect the environment or limits crony capitalism and protects a competitive marketplace. I am opposed to regulation that intentionally throttles private enterprise which is what I think the ctrl-left really wants.

I don't disagree with Mackey. There is nothing wrong with the Scandies. I don't think Bernie, AOC and the rest of the ctrl-left's long-term goal is a Scandy mix of capitalism and social welfare programs. They are socialists who want to stifle free enterprise and individual initiative and reward. They want equal outcomes not equal opportunities.

Why shouldn’t people be allowed to form worker owned co-ops?

Do publicly owned enterprises not exist in capitalist economies?

I have issues too with over-reaching government monopolies (some personal). Just not as fearful of the slippery slope.

Btw, for better or worse, this pandemic may see a significant increase in the power of government from healthcare to stimulus, to state’s rights. Some of that is due to a failing of the “free market”.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by UNI88 »

kalm wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 9:48 am
UNI88 wrote: Thu Nov 26, 2020 10:23 am
The DSA's first step in bringing "private corporations under greater democratic control" is paraphrased directly from their website and the long-term goal of "worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises" is a direct quote.

I'm not opposed to regulation that helps to protect the environment or limits crony capitalism and protects a competitive marketplace. I am opposed to regulation that intentionally throttles private enterprise which is what I think the ctrl-left really wants.

I don't disagree with Mackey. There is nothing wrong with the Scandies. I don't think Bernie, AOC and the rest of the ctrl-left's long-term goal is a Scandy mix of capitalism and social welfare programs. They are socialists who want to stifle free enterprise and individual initiative and reward. They want equal outcomes not equal opportunities.

Why shouldn’t people be allowed to form worker owned co-ops?

Do publicly owned enterprises not exist in capitalist economies?

I have issues too with over-reaching government monopolies (some personal). Just not as fearful of the slippery slope.

Btw, for better or worse, this pandemic may see a significant increase in the power of government from healthcare to stimulus, to state’s rights. Some of that is due to a failing of the “free market”.
Yes, people should "be allowed to form worker owned co-ops" and publicly owned enterprises exist in capitalist economies. The problem is in having a goal of replacing private enterprise with those entities.

You support greater government involvement/control and use the failings of the "free market" as a justification, what about the failings of the government? What about the failure to provide national coordination? What about the failure of putting sick people in nursing homes? What about the failure of shutting down small retail operations while allowing the large corporate operations to stay open? Those are government failures.

Unfortunately, I fear you are correct about the government seeing "a significant increase in the power of government from healthcare to stimulus, to state’s rights."
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by AZGrizFan »

BDKJMU wrote: Thu Nov 26, 2020 12:28 pm
UNI88 wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 4:13 pm

:suspicious: What are you talking about? You asked Joe and others to read that long assed article and then you ignore my few short paragraphs and respond to something that wasn't in my post? I'm not criticizing the Nordic countries, I'm pointing out how the author is guilty of the same things that he criticizes conservative authors for doing (being selective in what information he provides in order to bolster his argument).

If you want to focus on the Venezuela vs Nordic countries argument, check the link to the Democratic Socialists of America. They use nice words but the underlying goal is to initially bring private corporations under greater democratic control and move toward "worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises". The Nordic countries work because of their culture and the reality that they let capitalism and the market flourish and use the funds raised to underwrite their social welfare programs. I don't for a minute believe Bernie, AOC and their friends want to let let capitalism and the market flourish in the long-run.

If Patrice Onwuka, the D’Souzas, etc. have like the creators of the 1619 Project "not always been scrupulous" isn't it also possible that their writings also have value and that their critics are are also "frequently wrong"?

The author is correct to encourage people to be sceptical about the information they take in. The irony is that that scepticism should also apply to his article.

The author leans left so his bias is to believe things that support his liberal views but he seems to think that people who lean right are being duped when they believe things that support their conservative views. What if both sides are being duped? :kisswink:
They get a big assist in that regard by having a good chunk of their defense provided by someone else, freeing up more $$$ for their social safety nets..
Maybe we could just outsource our defense to China. JohnStWrong has assured us that China is benevolent in that regard.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by AZGrizFan »

kalm wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 9:48 am
UNI88 wrote: Thu Nov 26, 2020 10:23 am

The DSA's first step in bringing "private corporations under greater democratic control" is paraphrased directly from their website and the long-term goal of "worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises" is a direct quote.

I'm not opposed to regulation that helps to protect the environment or limits crony capitalism and protects a competitive marketplace. I am opposed to regulation that intentionally throttles private enterprise which is what I think the ctrl-left really wants.

I don't disagree with Mackey. There is nothing wrong with the Scandies. I don't think Bernie, AOC and the rest of the ctrl-left's long-term goal is a Scandy mix of capitalism and social welfare programs. They are socialists who want to stifle free enterprise and individual initiative and reward. They want equal outcomes not equal opportunities.

Why shouldn’t people be allowed to form worker owned co-ops?

Do publicly owned enterprises not exist in capitalist economies?

I have issues too with over-reaching government monopolies (some personal). Just not as fearful of the slippery slope.

Btw, for better or worse, this pandemic may see a significant increase in the power of government from healthcare to stimulus, to state’s rights. Some of that is due to a failing of the “free market”.
Really? You view those as “free market” failures? A gigantic power grab is going on in the name of “safety” and “fairness”, and/all dissenters are screamed at and shouted down (and if necessary, their businesses destroyed), and yet that’s somehow the fault of “the free market”?

I’ve said on here many, many times over the years that the quickest way for a politician to lose me and my vote is to claim somehow that if HE/SHE is elected, they’ll “keep Americans safe”. Fuck THAT. You want my vote? Enact policies that make it easier for me to live my life, be successful, and provide for my family. I’ll handle my own safety. And yet, we now have a majority of the people in this country who are standing idly by, willfully allowing (née, BEGGING) the government to swoop in in some misguided belief that the government will “save” them, the government will “keep them safe”, that Trump fucked up with this pandemic, but that someone ELSE in government will “do it right” this time (kind of like Socialism, huh? :roll: ).

Here’s a newsflash: The ONLY thing the government is good at is retaining and gaining power. Everything else it touches turns to shit.
Another newsflash: At some point (and I’m not saying it’s imminent), as this hell-bent ride towards socialism and overwhelming government control of and intrusion into our lives continues, freedom-loving Americans are going to reach their boiling point. Better hope you’re on the correct side when that happens.

The Pope (idiot that he is) was right about one thing; Some people DO view “Freedom” as an ideology. It’s what this country was founded and built on. And there are still a lot of people who aren’t willing to just sit idly by and watch it be snatched away in the name of “fairness” and “equality of result” as defined by a government entity.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by UNI88 »

AZGrizFan wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 10:41 am
BDKJMU wrote: Thu Nov 26, 2020 12:28 pm
They get a big assist in that regard by having a good chunk of their defense provided by someone else, freeing up more $$$ for their social safety nets..
Maybe we could just outsource our defense to China. JohnStWrong has assured us that China is benevolent in that regard.
Why waste money paying China for our defense? Let's just defund the military along with the police. We live in a peaceful and benevolent world.
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: The Media -- Going Forward

Post by kalm »

AZGrizFan wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 10:50 am
kalm wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 9:48 am

Why shouldn’t people be allowed to form worker owned co-ops?

Do publicly owned enterprises not exist in capitalist economies?

I have issues too with over-reaching government monopolies (some personal). Just not as fearful of the slippery slope.

Btw, for better or worse, this pandemic may see a significant increase in the power of government from healthcare to stimulus, to state’s rights. Some of that is due to a failing of the “free market”.
Really? You view those as “free market” failures? A gigantic power grab is going on in the name of “safety” and “fairness”, and/all dissenters are screamed at and shouted down (and if necessary, their businesses destroyed), and yet that’s somehow the fault of “the free market”?

I’ve said on here many, many times over the years that the quickest way for a politician to lose me and my vote is to claim somehow that if HE/SHE is elected, they’ll “keep Americans safe”. Fuck THAT. You want my vote? Enact policies that make it easier for me to live my life, be successful, and provide for my family. I’ll handle my own safety. And yet, we now have a majority of the people in this country who are standing idly by, willfully allowing (née, BEGGING) the government to swoop in in some misguided belief that the government will “save” them, the government will “keep them safe”, that Trump fucked up with this pandemic, but that someone ELSE in government will “do it right” this time (kind of like Socialism, huh? :roll: ).

Here’s a newsflash: The ONLY thing the government is good at is retaining and gaining power. Everything else it touches turns to shit.
Another newsflash: At some point (and I’m not saying it’s imminent), as this hell-bent ride towards socialism and overwhelming government control of and intrusion into our lives continues, freedom-loving Americans are going to reach their boiling point. Better hope you’re on the correct side when that happens.

The Pope (idiot that he is) was right about one thing; Some people DO view “Freedom” as an ideology. It’s what this country was founded and built on. And there are still a lot of people who aren’t willing to just sit idly by and watch it be snatched away in the name of “fairness” and “equality of result” as defined by a government entity.
Here’s a hint...the market isn’t free. The market doesn’t give a shit about your freedoms or ability to keep yourself free. Neither does a virus.
Image
Image
Image
Post Reply