Red Mosquito

BurtReynolds wrote:

digster wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:
What would you say happened to the opinion editor at the NYT if not a coordinated attempt at silencing disagreement?

I've been posting about in the Media thread, and would rather not rehash the same arguments, but I do feel quite certain that I would never have an argument that would convince you. As I said in that thread, the 'big bad media is out to get us' has been around forever, and is so fundamental to being on the right in this country that it's not going anywhere.

And to be honest, it is what it is and that's how it will be; if conservatism in the U.S. can't get an erection without feeling oppressed by the Liberal Media Hollywood Ivy League Elite, fine; whatever gets them going. But asking everyone else to buy into the fetish is a taller order.

You never answered the question in the media thread either. You just keep babbling about narrative and persecution complexes.

This went something along the lines of you saying that the New York Times fired it's op-ed head because he published a piece by a Republican, I responded that obviously that was not what happened and I assumed you knew that as such, and you told me I was COMPLETELY blind. So, in other words, it went pretty much as expected.

And Burt, I agreed with you that the higher number of liberals than conservatives could have ramifications on the type and tenor of coverage, even if it didn't take the form of an unseen Consortium with its targets set on conservatives. But yeah, I also mentioned something along the lines of a persecution complex because:

Given that (as I have successfully argued in the media thread) the liberal media is the nearly de facto The Media and they claim to be unbiased, then yes, it is a threat to free speech. Though luckily due to the rapid decline in their relevance, and a diminishing belief in their authority, a weakening one.

When the shoe fits. Do you ever question why you see everything about the media as fitting into this viewpoint you have? You've never considered the possibility that it's less considered, more complex, and less purposeful than what you've concocted in your head? Or is the problem for you that there are liberals in media, and that you feel liberals are incapable of accurately reporting on something or someone conservative?

digster wrote:

Given that (as I have successfully argued in the media thread) the liberal media is the nearly de facto The Media and they claim to be unbiased, then yes, it is a threat to free speech. Though luckily due to the rapid decline in their relevance, and a diminishing belief in their authority, a weakening one.

When the shoe fits. Do you ever question why you see everything about the media as fitting into this viewpoint you have? You've never considered the possibility that it's less considered, more complex, and less purposeful than what you've concocted in your head?

Yes, I've considered it. Maybe I'm crazy. Or maybe you are. Who knows? Yet we still muddle through, forming worldviews from our unique perspectives while trying to recognize and eliminate our biases as we go. None of this means anything. It's just gaslighting.

You might think that I believe there is some vast, conscious left wing conspiracy, where they plan this all out in meetings. As I've said, that isn't necessary. I'll have to dig up the argument for how this is possible (which has some problems), but I'll get around to it later.

Some of us do more than muddle through reddit philosophy pages, though.

Mickey wrote:Some of us do more than muddle through reddit philosophy pages, though.

you've never read anything that wasn't assigned to you.

Absolutely shocked that you don't know how academia works.

in some ways we are very different people.

Mickey wrote:Absolutely shocked that you don't know how academia works.

All you need is an ipad

BurtReynolds wrote:in some ways we are very different people.

Which is why I so look forward to your précis on the unwilled, unconscious liberal media conspiracy.

Electromatic wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:Read the comments from that post on FB. Lots of racist PJ fans

I mean, some asshole was upset about Rage Against the Machine’s politics this week. Dumb ass comments are the age we live in. Pretty obviously Mike, being the stand up guy he is, is quite literally standing against what happened to George Floyd and others. Kaepernick kneeled and people decided what it meant, branded it and lost their minds. It’s not our job to fix every idiot on the internet. It’s our job to do our best to help others and try to make them feel valued and try to make their lives better. In the midst of all that stupidity, there are a few fans to whom this little gesture meant a lot. That’s cool to me.

verb_to_trust wrote:I for one love politics crossing over into everything I see or hear on a daily basis

verb completely en fuego

the most effective way to convince serfs to adopt the academic agenda is to inform them they are inferior in thought and deed

96583UP wrote:the most effective way to convince serfs to adopt the academic agenda is to inform them they are inferior in thought and deed

I think it's musket time.

hey man nice shot.
And the media headline: there's video of him shoving a woman to the ground, too (after she hit him). Things are about to heat up!

when they protect the symbols of their actual power:

BurtReynolds wrote:when they protect the symbols of their actual power:

Another beautiful wall.

BurtReynolds wrote:hey man nice shot.

And the media headline:

there's video of him shoving a woman to the ground, too (after she hit him). Things are about to heat up!

This dude will have an expensive defense, but whats the likehood he gets charged with a felony?

Angry crowd: "Get him!" "Kick his ass!"

Oh wait, he has a gun? No fair!

I'm quite certain he was merely quietly observing that protest.

antifa strikes....oh nevermind

Mickey wrote:I'm quite certain he was merely quietly observing that protest.

Is anyone implying that?