RE: Freaking Orwellian

RE: Freaking Orwellian (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BamaD -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/25/2014 9:19:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The main point is they didn't want to admit his role. Can't you see that. No. I see that your bias is at work. You've already admitted that the stories you read did include the fact that he did stop the shooter. If he was not shooting at the moment that he was apprehended does not prove he wasn't going to shoot anyone else. Again my main point was that the last thing most of the media wanted to see was a shooter apprehended by an armed teacher, it was exactly opposite of what they chose to believe. Armed teachers 1-0 Unarmed teachers 1-20 or so. That doesn't fit right thinking. I do not care where the kid was it was an armed teacher who stopped him and the media did not want us to know that.

BamaD -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/25/2014 9:21:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The main point is they didn't want to admit his role. Can't you see that. No. I see that your bias is at work. You've already admitted that the stories you read did include the fact that he did stop the shooter. So does this mean that you don't think there is bias in the news media? That there is no problem so nothing to fix. Or that you want the government to control the news.

DomKen -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 3:01:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The main point is they didn't want to admit his role. Can't you see that. No. I see that your bias is at work. You've already admitted that the stories you read did include the fact that he did stop the shooter. So does this mean that you don't think there is bias in the news media? That there is no problem so nothing to fix. Or that you want the government to control the news. I never wrote either. I am simply trying to make a point to you. The point is that you set out to believe that the press wasn't going to tell you the truth when the press actually did tell you the truth.

Politesub53 -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 6:18:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD As for politesub, who cares Yep, no need to worry about me for pointing out you had your facts wrong, yet again....... [8\|] Edited for typo.

cloudboy -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 11:43:47 AM)
Republicans don't believe in truth -- as JeffBC would say -- its all GoT to them -- i.e. us v. everyone else against us. Partisanship is a total way of life and outlook.

BamaD -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 8:12:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The main point is they didn't want to admit his role. Can't you see that. No. I see that your bias is at work. You've already admitted that the stories you read did include the fact that he did stop the shooter. So does this mean that you don't think there is bias in the news media? That there is no problem so nothing to fix. Or that you want the government to control the news. I never wrote either. I am simply trying to make a point to you. The point is that you set out to believe that the press wasn't going to tell you the truth when the press actually did tell you the truth. You did post a link to prove this study wasn't overstepping in which to commissioners said they did exactly that.

TheHeretic -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 8:26:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy Republicans don't believe in truth -- as JeffBC would say -- its all GoT to them -- i.e. us v. everyone else against us. Partisanship is a total way of life and outlook. Now there is a true Obamabot sort of statement. No memory of what was believed yesterday, no inkling that there might be a tomorrow where the comment will bite them in the ass, only the cheap shot of the moment. No conception that the first sentence only reflects a spotlight on the hypocritical core of the second. No reason. No thought. Just a bleating sheep straight out of Animal Farm. "Baa-aaad."

BamaD -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 8:32:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy Republicans don't believe in truth -- as JeffBC would say -- its all GoT to them -- i.e. us v. everyone else against us. Partisanship is a total way of life and outlook. Now there is a true Obamabot sort of statement. No memory of what was believed yesterday, no inkling that there might be a tomorrow where the comment will bite them in the ass, only the cheap shot of the moment. No conception that the first sentence only reflects a spotlight on the hypocritical core of the second. No reason. No thought. Just a bleating sheep straight out of Animal Farm. "Baa-aaad." And we are back to Orwell

TheHeretic -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 8:36:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD And we are back to Orwell Back??? The sheep have never stopped bleating, and Squealer has never stopped spouting that these are facts, comrade.

BamaD -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 8:43:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD And we are back to Orwell Back??? The sheep have never stopped bleating, and Squealer has never stopped spouting that these are facts, comrade. That is true. Lots of doublespeak hear.

DomKen -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 8:56:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The main point is they didn't want to admit his role. Can't you see that. No. I see that your bias is at work. You've already admitted that the stories you read did include the fact that he did stop the shooter. So does this mean that you don't think there is bias in the news media? That there is no problem so nothing to fix. Or that you want the government to control the news. I never wrote either. I am simply trying to make a point to you. The point is that you set out to believe that the press wasn't going to tell you the truth when the press actually did tell you the truth. You did post a link to prove this study wasn't overstepping in which to commissioners said they did exactly that. The FCC commissioned a study and the right wingers freaked out. It is impossible to predict what completely innocuous things the right wing will freak out about so when they do freak out it is easier to let them have the minor stuff so we can fight the important stuff like maintaining Brown v Board against asshole bigots in Arizona and who knows where else. But if it makes you feel better go ahead and pat your self on the back, you kept the feds from helping independent news operations open up.

BamaD -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 9:12:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The main point is they didn't want to admit his role. Can't you see that. No. I see that your bias is at work. You've already admitted that the stories you read did include the fact that he did stop the shooter. So does this mean that you don't think there is bias in the news media? That there is no problem so nothing to fix. Or that you want the government to control the news. I never wrote either. I am simply trying to make a point to you. The point is that you set out to believe that the press wasn't going to tell you the truth when the press actually did tell you the truth. You did post a link to prove this study wasn't overstepping in which to commissioners said they did exactly that. The FCC commissioned a study and the right wingers freaked out. It is impossible to predict what completely innocuous things the right wing will freak out about so when they do freak out it is easier to let them have the minor stuff so we can fight the important stuff like maintaining Brown v Board against asshole bigots in Arizona and who knows where else. But if it makes you feel better go ahead and pat your self on the back, you kept the feds from helping independent news operations open up. The sad thing is I am convinced you believe every word of that.

TheHeretic -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 9:31:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The sad thing is I am convinced you believe every word of that. Yeah, but they'll believe every word of something else tomorrow, and likely something completely contradictory by the following Tuesday.

BamaD -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 9:35:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The sad thing is I am convinced you believe every word of that. Yeah, but they'll believe every word of something else tomorrow, and likely something completely contradictory by the following Tuesday. You've read 1984 haven't you.

BamaD -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 9:36:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The sad thing is I am convinced you believe every word of that. Yeah, but they'll believe every word of something else tomorrow, and likely something completely contradictory by the following Tuesday. Double post

TheHeretic -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 10:08:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD You've read 1984 haven't you. Yeah, and I was WAY too young when I did. I think Animal Farm is better for the purposes of this conversation, though.

BamaD -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 10:09:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD You've read 1984 haven't you. Yeah, and I was WAY too young when I did. I think Animal Farm is better for the purposes of this conversation, though. Yes easier to understand.

TheHeretic -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 10:25:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Yes easier to understand. The allegorical style does do that, but Animal Farm is a beginning, a new thing. It goes from hopeful change, through denial, and ends in despair, while 1984 begins with desperation, goes through hope and into understanding, and then wraps up with acceptance of despair. Squealer had to be charming and quick. The Ministry of Truth had no need to bother.

BamaD -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 10:31:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Yes easier to understand. The allegorical style does do that, but Animal Farm is a beginning, a new thing. It goes from hopeful change, through denial, and ends in despair, while 1984 begins with desperation, goes through hope and into understanding, and then wraps up with acceptance of despair. Squealer had to be charming and quick. The Ministry of Truth had no need to bother. true 1984 shows where they got to , animal farm shows how they got there. Animal farm also has more humor making it easier to digest It is not as relentlessly depressing

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Freaking Orwellian (2/26/2014 11:35:56 PM)
I believe it was the good doctor who said that if you tell a big enough lie and tell it often enough, people will come to believe it. He also said that if you mixed a modicum of truth with a whole lot of lies, ore vice versa, people would come to believe that you told nothing BUT the trurh. Maybe your republicans have been taking lessons from him ? I know OUR politicians have.

Page: << < prev 9 10 11 [12] 13 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875