This just throughly ticks me off

Pops2

Active Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
3,072
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
UT
#2
flip sides of the same coin. left & right are equally guilty of distorting the truth for their political goals.
the sad thing is their isn't much that can or will be done about it. maybe she could go pop some people in the nose. a descent jury would probably vote to acquit, i know i would.
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#3
flip sides of the same coin. left & right are equally guilty of distorting the truth for their political goals.
the sad thing is their isn't much that can or will be done about it. maybe she could go pop some people in the nose. a descent jury would probably vote to acquit, i know i would.
Oh, I blame both sides for this one.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
94,266
Likes
3
Points
36
Location
Where the selas blooms
#4
Shame on the NAACP and the Obama administration -- both of whom have been the target, time after time after time, of the Rupert Murdoch network's swift-boating -- for letting Faux dictate their reactions.

Sometimes I think Rupert Murdoch really IS in charge of this country.
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#5
This is charming:

The Self-Destruction Of Andrew Breitbart - The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

Actually, I take back a little of what I said before. Both sides distort the truth. However, I see a lot more "reality-free" reporting and outright lies (especially edited tapes, this is not the first time) coming from the right. Or at least, a lot more reality-free material that makes it onto the nightly news. I also see a lot more of people defending that same material . . . when Dan Rather fell forged material, he was promptly forced to resign in disgrace. However, with some notable exceptions, including Jonah Goldberg, the blame from the right is targeted not at this jerk but at the Obama administration for falling for his edited video. (They don't recieve a free pass, in fact I'm appalled at their behavior).

Sometimes I wonder if the Faux News crew has even stopped PRETENDING to try to present the truth.
 

Puckstop31

Super-Genius
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
5,847
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
#7
Oh... How convienient....


Context matters THIS time? Seems to me that any time one of you smear Glenn Beck that context does not matter.

Oh, I know... He is just part of Rupert Murdoch's 'evil empire'. "Faux" et all..

:rolleyes:


If ANY of you think for even a second that the CNN, MSNBC, et all are any less biased than Fox... You are deluded.


The "left" media is crying because she was taken out of context. LOL Where was any of that what the outright LIES made up against Rush Limbaugh when he was trying to buy the NFL Rams?

(And NO, I am not defending Rush... I don't care much for him. But he got screwed by outright LIES when he was trying top conduct a private business transaction....)

What a phucking joke. :rolleyes:
 

Puckstop31

Super-Genius
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
5,847
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
#8
Shame on the NAACP and the Obama administration -- both of whom have been the target, time after time after time, of the Rupert Murdoch network's swift-boating -- for letting Faux dictate their reactions.

Sometimes I think Rupert Murdoch really IS in charge of this country.
Yeah... Rather than having CNN and the rest hand in foot be used as propaganda arms.

:rolleyes:

Please.... Is Bush, Murdoch, Fox, etc are all such 'idiots', why give them the power? Why not ignore them? Or present your own facts?


Do you ever actually LISTEN to or read any of 'the other side'?
 

eddieq

Silence! I ban you!
Staff member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
8,833
Likes
3
Points
38
Location
PA
#9
Plus, no matter how the tape was edited, she DID discriminate against this couple. Her admission that "I did enough" and "didn't give them the full force of what I could do" simply because they were not black is discrimination. Her being forced to resign over that is the correct decision. Period.

Media outlets: left, right and center are not to be believed and always taken with a grain of salt. The way it was spun and really spun out of control was wrong, but it's wrong no matter who does it. CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc.
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#10
Plus, no matter how the tape was edited, she DID discriminate against this couple. Her admission that "I did enough" and "didn't give them the full force of what I could do" simply because they were not black is discrimination. Her being forced to resign over that is the correct decision. Period.

Media outlets: left, right and center are not to be believed and always taken with a grain of salt. The way it was spun and really spun out of control was wrong, but it's wrong no matter who does it. CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc.

Ummm . . . really? She did it 24 years ago, she DID save their farm, they are now friends of hers, and she didn't work for the government at the time (she worked for an organization to help black farmers)

I see. If you ever do anything wrong, even if it was many years ago, even if no one is harmed, and then you own up to it as a teaching example, you should be fired from your current job.
 

Puckstop31

Super-Genius
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
5,847
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
#11
Plus, no matter how the tape was edited, she DID discriminate against this couple. Her admission that "I did enough" and "didn't give them the full force of what I could do" simply because they were not black is discrimination. Her being forced to resign over that is the correct decision. Period.

Media outlets: left, right and center are not to be believed and always taken with a grain of salt. The way it was spun and really spun out of control was wrong, but it's wrong no matter who does it. CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc.
Or, if you think the NAACP is not a blatantly racist organization... If there is any one group keeping the flames of racism alive, its them.
 

Puckstop31

Super-Genius
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
5,847
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
#12
Ummm . . . really? She did it 24 years ago, she DID save their farm, they are now friends of hers, and she didn't work for the government at the time (she worked for an organization to help black farmers)

I see. If you ever do anything wrong, even if it was many years ago, even if no one is harmed, and then you own up to it as a teaching example, you should be fired from your current job.
I don't even care about that at this point. If she was wronged and taken 'out of context' or whatever... Make it right.


But it is UTTERLY rediculous that NOW, all of a sudden, context matters. Frankly, its a little insulting.

Are there any real REPORTERS anymore?
 

eddieq

Silence! I ban you!
Staff member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
8,833
Likes
3
Points
38
Location
PA
#13
Ummm . . . really? She did it 24 years ago, she DID save their farm, they are now friends of hers, and she didn't work for the government at the time (she worked for an organization to help black farmers)

I see. If you ever do anything wrong, even if it was many years ago, even if no one is harmed, and then you own up to it as a teaching example, you should be fired from your current job.
Sure. If there were things in my past that surfaced and could possibly put a bad face on the company I work for, I'm sure they'd fire me. I'd be pissed off, but applying the same rule here, it would be deserved.

I'm not going to start crying "reverse racism" or whatever any other white guys like to call it, but reverse the roles. White guy "does the minimum" for a black farmer but goes all out for a white farmer. There would not just be a call for resignation, there would be senate hearings, public flogging and CNN/MSNBC would be hounding him left and right.

Discrimination and racism sucks. It sucks hard no matter who is doing it and it shouldn't be tolerated.
 

GlassOnion

Thanks, and Gig 'em.
Joined
Oct 29, 2005
Messages
9,065
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Tejas
#14
I see. If you ever do anything wrong, even if it was many years ago, even if no one is harmed, and then you own up to it as a teaching example, you should be fired from your current job.
Soo...what's the cut-off point for how long we have to wait until our actions have no consequences any more? Might be useful for future plots.
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#15
Yeah... Rather than having CNN and the rest hand in foot be used as propaganda arms.

:rolleyes:

Please.... Is Bush, Murdoch, Fox, etc are all such 'idiots', why give them the power? Why not ignore them? Or present your own facts?


Do you ever actually LISTEN to or read any of 'the other side'?
Yes. And sometimes they have interesting things to say. And sometimes they are totally crazy.

But I hear a lot more things that are just plain inaccurate from the right. Its sort of like our discussion about Glen Beck and the common carrier regulation. I'll admit to not having seen the whole clip, but it wasn't just a sentence or two, and it was clear that he was just plain factually wrong. I don't know how often that happens, but it was pretty obvious in that case.

Or Mitch McConnell (a person I actually know) informing us that tax revenue went up during the Bush administration . . . really?

As for Mr. Limbaugh, he did say some VERY unfortunate things. On the other hand, I thought he should have been left alone to buy his football team . . . but the answer to that was that the PLAYERS didn't want him as part owner. They didn't like him and thought he was offensive. Perhaps one shouldn't go out of one's way to say things that are likely to offend black people if your life dream is to own a team of a sport many of the players of which are black. And though I've never listened to his show, I've heard some fairly long clips that were, well, offensive. Long enough to have the context . . . long enough to even see why people might think they are funny . . . but nonetheless, stuff that I am entirely unsurprised that black people find offensive. Rush invites controversy. He enjoys it. He thrives on it. And sometimes he pays the consequences of it.

As for presenting our own facts, many people do. However, it is a sign of how POWERFUL these people are that the prompt response to the release of a heavily edited video was panic and firing someone. Which is what really ticks me off, the cowardace of just about everyone else, from the center right to the left when confronted with this crap.

I'll also point out that this woman is not important. She's not a public figure like Rush Limbaugh. She's a fairly minor government employee. She doesn't speak for the NAACP, or the USDA for that matter. When she spoke on that video she spoke for herself. As a practical matter, what was the point of releasing the edited video in the first place? Who CARES what she said? What's the point? As far as I can tell so that they can point at a random black person and say "See, they are racist too!" Never mind that wasn't really what she said, of course.
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#16
Sure. If there were things in my past that surfaced and could possibly put a bad face on the company I work for, I'm sure they'd fire me. I'd be pissed off, but applying the same rule here, it would be deserved.

I'm not going to start crying "reverse racism" or whatever any other white guys like to call it, but reverse the roles. White guy "does the minimum" for a black farmer but goes all out for a white farmer. There would not just be a call for resignation, there would be senate hearings, public flogging and CNN/MSNBC would be hounding him left and right.

Discrimination and racism sucks. It sucks hard no matter who is doing it and it shouldn't be tolerated.

Oh, horse-crap. I'll bet you that if a white guy did EXACTLY the same thing, and fessed up to it in the same way, stating that he learned a lesson, everyone would pat him on the back. A few people might call for his resignation, and everyone else would point out that he's a changed man and an example of how you can get past racism. She's talking about how she was wrong to be racist . . . in 1986. In 1986, or around that time, anyway, David Duke ran for President.

And yes. About the cut-off. One, there's a thing called the statute of limitations. Beyond that . . . as a general rule, in a sane universe, if someone did something that didn't hurt anyone 24 years ago, and has since confessed that they are wrong, in a context where doing that thing was pretty common (like racism in 1986) yes, you let it go. We've forgiven major politicans for everything from drug use to racism to negligent homicide. Not going to forgive this woman for not going all out to help people she wasn't really obligated to help, but helped anyway?
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#17
And context always matters.

However, I've seen two videos make it into the mainstream media that were so heavily edited as to be outright fraudulent . . . and they both came from the right.

As for quotes out of context, seen that from both sides. Probably equally.
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#18
Also, Eddie . . . I have no idea what you were up to 24 years ago, but either your boss is one unforgiving jerk or you were up to some seriously bad crap if it would get you fired today.
 

eddieq

Silence! I ban you!
Staff member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
8,833
Likes
3
Points
38
Location
PA
#19
Oh, horse-crap. I'll bet you that if a white guy did EXACTLY the same thing, and fessed up to it in the same way, stating that he learned a lesson, everyone would pat him on the back.
And on this point, I will disagree with you. I think there would be a call for his job from the left the same way the right was calling for hers.

I understand your argument. And you're right, it was nearly a quarter of a century ago. I'm not the same person I was 24 years ago. I'm sure that she is not also. I also think that the organization has the right to call for her resignation if they feel it's in their best interests.

I'm also a realist. She'll be fine here. She'll make a bundle on lawsuits against Fox for the edited video and against the USDA for forcing her resignation. Not to mention the lecture circuit. Her phone has to be ringing off the hook with people asking her to come speak at their functions. I fully expect her to be on Oprah or the View any day now.
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#20
We'll have to disagree until it happens.

But I can think of several major figures, including the recently deceased Senator Byrd, who are ex-racists, who apologized, and were forgiven. I can also think of some who weren't forgiven, to be sure. But most people who did something wrong (and this was pretty minor) that long ago, and then apologize and use it as a teaching moment, they are generally forgiven. Unless, of course, someone has a political bone to pick.

Yes, she'll be okay, I'm sure. But that doesn't make it any less injust.

As for the NAACP, they are considerably to the left of me. I don't agree with them on many issues. They DO engage in race-baiting on occasion and I think their statement about the Tea Party was stupid. But they had a key role in the civil rights movement, and their job is to stand up for black people. Just like the Anti-Defamation League stands up for Jews. I often disagree with them as well. But to say that someone is racist because just because they represent the interests of a particular, often-disadvantaged group is perhaps going a bit far. And to be fair about the Tea Party thing, there have been a number of people prominently involved in the Tea Party who said and did some very regretable things with regard to race. I'm delighted to see that those people are now being expelled, because I don't think the movement is racist . . . I think there are things about the movement that appeal to racists, which is entirely different.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top