gianmarco
Footballguy
It all started with Sarah Palin
New documentary that traces why Trump may be so successful avoiding the truth.
New documentary that traces why Trump may be so successful avoiding the truth.
I feel like this is looking at the first time a tree bore fruit as the start of the story.It all started with Sarah Palin
New documentary that traces why Trump may be so successful avoiding the truth.
It's deeper than that, my friend, yet i truly don't know what it is.I feel like this is looking at the first time a tree bore fruit as the start of the story.
But Rush, Beck, Jones and Hannity planted the seed and watered that tree for DECADES before Palin came along. There's a vast right-wing bull#### machine that made Palin and Trump possible.
Agree with this too. Maybe someday, just before I kick it, I'll post my manifesto. IMO all of politics is ultimately about the tension between fairness or the "good" and security (physical, material and psychological), and how power is used to resolve that tension in a particular time and place.It's deeper than that, my friend, yet i truly don't know what it is.
You truly have a gift with language.It's deeper than that, my friend, yet i truly don't know what it is.
I honestly don't get why people so lucky as to be living in the world's most prosperous area during the world's most prosperous era can be so blasted miserable. I have had tremendous good luck and tremendous bad luck in my life but have managed to maintain a relatively even keel, even though diagnosed as substantially bi-polar, simply by power of my gratitude to be who i am on this day. I've never felt compelled to prove myself anymore than to get enough value out of what i offer to carve out my own corner. I've never felt an obligation to be anything more than ready for what next comes along. I've never converted my circumstances or perverted my tastes into an engine of putting myself forward or getting myself off. My victories do not require foes or ruination or trophies, even celebration, for that matter. Clearly, I'm an alien.
We seethe, we primp, we conspire, we covet and, more than anything, we hold everything against everyone. We take life personally, a hopelessly ridiculous thing for a lucky person to do. I understand why we do this more than any 1000 people combined because i've made doing so my avocation, yet i am ever amazed how oblivious we are to what we've become.
Somehow, i knew after the presidential campaign of 2008 that something powerful was happening, because i told everyone that i knew - even before Obama went so quickly to pot - that Palin '12 was coming. There was an irreality in the air which told me that all the personal fascisms of the selfish hordes around me were about to go public in grand fashion. I was wrong about Palin '12 because i had no idea a public figure could be as lazy about their legacy as the Alaska gov, but the snowball just rolled down the hill for four years til it collected a topping of orange hay and became Trump '16. It's the payoff of liberty for all - that it, and the collapse of corrupt regulating codes which kept the general peace, created cupidity & rapacity & subversity & perversity where equanimity & community should have gone and resulted in us putting forth not a paragon of virtue but an "id"agon of greed. The most selfish person won America's crown, and his enemies are possibly happier for the chance to fume & spew against him than they would be to support a hero of their own. There is much, much, much more ugliness to come on this path we've trampled thru progress.
Absolutely. I can remember when I first heard his show. My older brothers were drawn to him like a moth to a flame. It baffled me because he spouted mostly pure BS, anecdotal “evidence”, urban legends, and flat out lies. But people bought it. This was probably 1992-ish.I feel like this is looking at the first time a tree bore fruit as the start of the story.
But Rush...
Pretty ridiculous. These type of 'stories' are a type of misinformation that is eaten up by leftists. Just say 'death panels' and you got a boatload of them hook, line and sinker. Controlling the media a d what information is reported and the spin around it has been going on for centuries.Oh, wow. This is a self-serving thread.
So lying only started with Sara Palin? Got it. If people only listened to Democrats then they wouldn't be lied to at all. Good Grief. Do you guys even hear yourselves?
Does anyone remember the Clintons? Anyone? Bueller?
The documentary linked in the OP does not posit lying started with Sarah Palin.Oh, wow. This is a self-serving thread.
So lying only started with Sara Palin? Got it. If people only listened to Democrats then they wouldn't be lied to at all. Good Grief. Do you guys even hear yourselves?
Does anyone remember the Clintons? Anyone? Bueller?
So typically self-serving of you to actually consider the truth...The documentary linked in the OP does not posit lying started with Sarah Palin.
There were six replies to the OP before yours. Four of them suggested timelines pre-Palin. Of the two that didn't, one was a compliment to another poster that offered no specific commentary to the Palin doc, and the other discussed what other elements needed to exist to allow post-truth to happen.
So the entire premise of your post is a lie. You are making accusations about other users here that directly contradict what is actually being said in the thread.
Yes. It was incredible. The entire heartland of America would listen to AM radio all day while they worked. Rush's impact was huge and planted the seeds for so many things.Absolutely. I can remember when I first heard his show. My older brothers were drawn to him like a moth to a flame. It baffled me because he spouted mostly pure BS, anecdotal “evidence”, urban legends, and flat out lies. But people bought it. This was probably 1992-ish.
“Horrible spin loaded with hyperbole” is so close to a lie that I’m not sure there’s a practical difference.Sure is it horrible spin loaded with hyperbole
Mirrors my experience as well. Timestamp seems right, too. “Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot” by Al Franken was early 1996 and Rush was a well-established brand by then.Absolutely. I can remember when I first heard his show. My older brothers were drawn to him like a moth to a flame. It baffled me because he spouted mostly pure BS, anecdotal “evidence”, urban legends, and flat out lies. But people bought it. This was probably 1992-ish.
Because there is truth to it. It is like if you called GW Bush a war criminal. Technically you could make the case, but it is a bit ridiculous.“Horrible spin loaded with hyperbole” is so close to a lie that I’m not sure there’s a practical difference.
You haven’t even watched the show. Not a single minute. But you are able to make this determination?Oh, wow. This is a self-serving thread.
So lying only started with Sara Palin? Got it. If people only listened to Democrats then they wouldn't be lied to at all. Good Grief. Do you guys even hear yourselves?
Does anyone remember the Clintons? Anyone? Bueller?
Perhaps "obliviously furied polemics" is closer to your liking“Horrible spin loaded with hyperbole” is so close to a lie that I’m not sure there’s a practical difference.
Is called alternative facts these days“Horrible spin loaded with hyperbole”
Then I would suggest you haven't been watching. Or you have been watching and buying into it all so it's not propaganda because you believe it. For those of us on the right, it's as plain as day.While conservatives are convinced that the radical left controls the mainstream media as a conservative who once listened to some of Rush L and later on Fox News opinion shows the propaganda attempts of Fox for Trump eventually fell far short of anything credible. I haven't seen the same unbelievable propaganda attempts made by even the liberal left biased CNNs and MSNBCs. While the bias is there I don't see the lame excuses and coverup attempts that occur with Fox and Trump's most obnoxious Republican Congressmen
The mainstrea media is dominated by establishment liberalism and it has been since the late 60's. MSNBC is at least as bad as Fox News. CNN is trying to catch up. If you fail to see MSNBC as a completely biased one-sided source which they even advertise as, I am not sure what to tell you.While conservatives are convinced that the radical left controls the mainstream media as a conservative who once listened to some of Rush L and later on Fox News opinion shows the propaganda attempts of Fox for Trump eventually fell far short of anything credible. I haven't seen the same unbelievable propaganda attempts made by even the liberal left biased CNNs and MSNBCs. While the bias is there I don't see the lame excuses and coverup attempts that occur with Fox and Trump's most obnoxious Republican Congressmen
Yeah, I think not. I appreciate your response, though!The documentary linked in the OP does not posit lying started with Sarah Palin.
There were six replies to the OP before yours. Four of them suggested timelines pre-Palin. Of the two that didn't, one was a compliment to another poster that offered no specific commentary to the Palin doc, and the other discussed what other elements needed to exist to allow post-truth to happen.
So the entire premise of your post is a lie. You are making accusations about other users here that directly contradict what is actually being said in the thread.
Actually, I have been watching and too much of it. The whataboutism from those House Republicans with all the Biden talk and demands to hear from the whistleblower who had no information different from what witnesses testified to was so lame, I mean really, really, lame.Then I would suggest you haven't been watching. Or you have been watching and buying into it all so it's not propaganda because you believe it. For those of us on the right, it's as plain as day.
Those who have been served and served well by the liberal bias for the last 30 or 40 years or more are going to OF COURSE deny that it exists at all and it's "That durned FOX NEWS and Sarah Palin!".
Right. Like everyone else, he heard from someone who heard from someone who heard it from someone else who assumed this is what it must be.Actually, I have been watching and too much of it. The whataboutism from those House Republicans with all the Biden talk and demands to hear from the whistleblower who had no information different from what witnesses testified to was so lame, I mean really, really, lame.
Ah yes yet another lie that the testimony was second and third hand that became another lame talking point.Right. Like everyone else, he heard from someone who heard from someone who heard it from someone else who assumed this is what it must be.
I don't want to rehash it here in this thread so I'll leave it at that.
I'm not going to call you a liar. Maybe a bit misinformed.Ah yes yet another lie that the testimony was second and third hand that became another lame talking point.
So you know your first post in this thread is dishonest and you knew it was when you typed it up. The rest is just noise.BladeRunner said:Yeah, I think not. I appreciate your response, though!
The suggestions "pre-palin" are from other posters that agree with you, so of course you're going to posit them as being factual and truthful. I disagree vehemently with how that was portrayed. Rush came about because of the inundation of the liberal bias/propaganda and one half of the country was not being served with the truth, but only liberal agendas. Bias and propaganda that (based on your post) has served your side oh so well.
One of the biggest faults of whataboutism is that it fails to take into account two things: numbers & severity.BladeRunner said:Oh, wow. This is a self-serving thread.
So lying only started with Sara Palin? Got it. If people only listened to Democrats then they wouldn't be lied to at all. Good Grief. Do you guys even hear yourselves?
Does anyone remember the Clintons? Anyone? Bueller?
Glad that you admit Fox News is bad. Which sources do you see as “good” or “unbiased”?jon_mx said:The mainstrea media is dominated by establishment liberalism and it has been since the late 60's. MSNBC is at least as bad as Fox News. CNN is trying to catch up. If you fail to see MSNBC as a completely biased one-sided source which they even advertise as, I am not sure what to tell you.
Around Junior High and High School when I determined the severity of bias in reporting. I could see Reagan was a very well informed extremely articulate man who genuinely cared for people and was very much in charge. Meanwhile when I listened to reporters and the Sunday talk shows, I would constantly hear what a war-mongering manic he was, how he was some B-rate actor who was just a puppet, and how he wanted retirees to eat dog food. They pretended much better to be unbiased back then, but it was always crystal clear.I think the first time I really paid attention to whether the media was biased was when O’Reilly had the “No Spin Zone”. I’m not even saying he was biased (or that he wasn’t) - it just struck me that if a news program has to tell me they aren’t spinning things then there’s a good chance they and others are.
I don't trust any one sourse as unbiased. When I see a story which appears too one-sided, I seek other sources to verify those facts and fill in the blanks. I can count on with near certainty, when a story is seems one-sided there are always mitigating facts which are being hidden.Glad that you admit Fox News is bad. Which sources do you see as “good” or “unbiased”?
Actually it's been proven time and time again that Fox News' viewers are by far the least informed.Anyone who suggests these false narratives are not pervasive and as much part of problem as talk radio and Fox News, really can't see past their own bias.
Fox News viewers tend to be less educated and more rural. They tend not to know things like what the capital of Canada is, nor do they care.Actually it's been proven time and time again that Fox News' viewers are by far the least informed.
They are not like the others. They are straight-up propaganda at this point.
Pretty easy. Here is a quick start.What do conservatives think the "liberal agenda" is? The one that the left leaning mainstream media is always pushing.
It would be interesting to find out if they've correctly identified it and think it's bad policy or whether they're just mistaken in what they think we want.
Didn't she claim the government would base their decisions on the level of productivity in society?jon_mx said:The most ironic thing about this story is the idea the "Palin's 'death panel' rhetoric is a lie", is itself a lie. Sure is it horrible spin loaded with hyperbole, but there was truth to it. There is a Board of Trustees in Obamacare which is triggered by healthcare spending ceilings which make recommendations on healthcare and prescription coverage which could in fact be life-saving coverage for some patients. Certainly Trump says many things which are factually indefensible, but Palin's death panels are not in that category. Our mainstream media has been pushing left-leaning false narratives for decades, which IMHO is why Trump's rhetoric is effective.
Right-wingers (very few of whom are conservative anymore) neither know or care what the liberal agenda (if there is one) is. They know what they like, the rules of their club, the sentiments which ring their bells, and anything that ain't that is the "liberal agenda". Dont matter how many shades of that (so many even we dont know) there are - there's heaven & there's hell, there's shooters and there's targets, you're in the club or trying to pound down the door to rape the cows & steal the women. nufcedWhat do conservatives think the "liberal agenda" is? The one that the left leaning mainstream media is always pushing.
It would be interesting to find out if they've correctly identified it and think it's bad policy or whether they're just mistaken in what they think we want.
No. 5 is a little overboard but overall this isn't a bad start.Pretty easy. Here is a quick start.
1. The media wants aggressive action on global warming.
2. The media wants to protect abortion rights.
3. The media wants a highly progressive tax structure.
4. The media tends to endorse big government solutions to issues such as health care and environment.
5. The media endorses an aggressive politically correct agenda where minority victims are always right and are to be believed.
That is fine, and most people who agree with those points can't see the media bias. But if you are on the other side on any of those watching the mainstream news can be frustrating.No. 5 is a little overboard but overall this isn't a bad start.
Obviously, to me, the mainstream media is mostly on the right side of policy.
Palin's "Death Panels" was a reference to a section of the bill in which Medicare would pay physicians to talk to their patients on Medicare about end-of-life care options, living wills, advance directives, etc. And yes, she suggested decisions would be based on productivity. It was outright lying.Didn't she claim the government would base their decisions on the level of productivity in society?
Any Bernie Bro will tell you they don't support either of these things.3. The media wants a highly progressive tax structure.
4. The media tends to endorse big government solutions to issues such as health care and environment.
Sure. But which sources do you see as being less biased than others?I don't trust any one sourse as unbiased. When I see a story which appears too one-sided, I seek other sources to verify those facts and fill in the blanks. I can count on with near certainty, when a story is seems one-sided there are always mitigating facts which are being hidden.