Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated"Rated PG13, unmoderated but threads must stay on topic - that means you can flame each other all you want as long as it's legal
Unarmed Teenager Shot in Gated Community Part III: Zimmerman arrested
Since I'm so slow, let me rehash what I think your argument is and you can tell me if it's right. Don't forget, you're dealing with an idiot here so I may have missed some subtle nuance.
1. Racism is not something that we need to condemn unless it's gone on for 300 years or more.
2. If you disagree with number 1, you are an idiot.
3. ?? I don't know, deflect and start calling people idiots?
Dude, you are off the ****ing reservation. I was responding to the notion that the current media and public rhetoric is dangerous. It's no different than back then when all those on the right were saying they were just words. Now the shoe is on the other foot and it's dangerous rhetoric. Oh..., those scary black people, getting together in groups to voice their displeasure with the system. They might start a race war.
FTR stupid people have said stupid things regarding both of these media shitstorms. Just pointing out the hypocrisy. If you can't see it, you're a blind ideologue hypocrite. They both could have or will become dangerous. I just think the rights fear mongering and persecution complex right now is hilarious when I recall their position on political rebellion not so long ago.
__________________
History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.
Dude, you are off the ****ing reservation. I was responding to the notion that the current media and public rhetoric is dangerous. It's no different than back then when all those on the right were saying they were just words. Now the shoe is on the other foot and it's dangerous rhetoric. Oh..., those scary black people, getting together in groups to voice their displeasure with the system. They might start a race war.
FTR stupid people have said stupid things regarding both of these media shitstorms. Just pointing out the hypocrisy. If you can't see it, you're a blind ideologue hypocrite. They both could have or will become dangerous. I just think the rights fear mongering and persecution complex right now is hilarious when I recall their position on political rebellion not so long ago.
On these very forums, I have criticized FOX's "reporting" and was vrey weary of the danger. But the fear mongering happens on both sides. Remember MSNBC's coverage of the tea party?
"OMG a guy has a gun at a protest, lets show that! But be sure to crop the video so that people don't know the gun toater is a black guy"
But I'll ask again, how do the actions of FOX, in any way, justify what NBC has done regarding race? They are not one time offenders of this crap, you know. And for all the hate people have around here for FOX News sheep who follow Hannity without question, we sure have a lot of posters who did the exact same thing in this case with NBC.
On these very forums, I have criticized FOX's "reporting" and was vrey weary of the danger. But the fear mongering happens on both sides. Remember MSNBC's coverage of the tea party?
"OMG a guy has a gun at a protest, lets show that! But be sure to crop the video so that people don't know the gun toater is a black guy"
But I'll ask again, how do the actions of FOX, in any way, justify what NBC has done regarding race? They are not one time offenders of this crap, you know. And for all the hate people have around here for FOX News sheep who follow Hannity without question, we sure have a lot of posters who did the exact same thing in this case with NBC.
Do I think MSNBC's reporting on this comes close to FOX's reporting on the Tea Party or visa versa. No ****ing way. FOX was literally sponsoring and promoting the Tea Party rallies for one. MSNBC made a bad error with that edit. They've admitted it and most of their reporting has purposefully tried to remove race from the actual discussion of the case.
That said I don't feel like getting in a FOX vs MSNBC debate. We just had that debate. I was talking about the situation and discussion as a whole, from Twitter, to ABC World News Tonight to this very forum.
Do I think MSNBC's reporting on this comes close to FOX's reporting on the Tea Party or visa versa. No ****ing way. FOX was literally sponsoring and promoting the Tea Party rallies for one. MSNBC made a bad error with that edit. They've admitted it and most of their reporting has purposefully tried to remove race from the actual discussion of the case.
That said I don't feel like getting in a FOX vs MSNBC debate. We just had that debate. I was talking about the situation and discussion as a whole, from Twitter, to ABC World News Tonight to this very forum.
Does it piss you off that NBC doctored the 911 recordings to reflect outright racism in order to spark racial indignation?
Can you prove that it was NBC's intent and not a stupid producer who was fired?
Can you prove it wasn't? Does he represent NBC's wishes or is he just acting on his own without having to run the story by anyone higher up? Frankly, does it matter considering what the purposes of doing so were?
And oh ya, can anyone prove the unnamed person was actually fired....
Last edited by ForzaZuffa: 04-12-2012 at 02:10 PM.
I don't have access to Youtube at work. I'll respond to it later.
BTW, it's generally common courtesy to give people 24h to respond to a post before calling people out for ignoring it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForzaZuffa
Can you prove it wasn't? Does he represent NBC's wishes or is he just acting on his own without having to run the story by anyone higher up? Frankly, does it matter considering what the purposes of doing so were?
You made the positive claim. A negative like this cannot be proven. Therefore, the burden of proof it on your shoulders. Put up or shut up.
Last edited by Leafsdude7: 04-12-2012 at 02:19 PM.
Reason: Turns out "Latest Activity" clock is only active when a user is online :dunno:
Can you prove that it was NBC's intent and not a stupid producer who was fired?
It was obviously the intent of someone who represents NBC. Why else would it have been doctored in such a way? It was not an "error" like you claim, it was deliberately deceitful reporting that could have easily had serious consequences (likely, it already has). And someone high enough up had to approve it.
I don't have access to Youtube at work. I'll respond to it later.
BTW, it's generally common courtesy to give people 24h to respond to a post before calling people out for ignoring it, especially when you can easily click on said person's profile and see that they haven't logged in since the post in question.
Oh I'm very sorry, people jump on my posts all the time, including you, so I'm very sorry for not conforming to HF informal protocol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafsdude7
You made the positive claim. A negative like this cannot be proven. Therefore, the burden of proof it on your shoulders. Put up or shut up.
What a dumb statement. I didn't claim anything, I stated a fact- NBC allowed for the doctoring of a 911 recording with the purpose of gaining attention and viewership by using a propaganda technique to incite racial indignation. The burden of proof to prove it wasn't NBC's intent is my problem? Because I work for NBC? I don't have to prove ****, the story came out and they're sorry they did. They look absolutely terrible because someone representing them doctored a recording to incite racial indignation. Whether the producer did it on his own behest (highly debatable that he didn't have to run it by the higher ups considering the scope of the story, you're naive if you think otherwise) or whether NBC as a whole wanted to run it that way isn't the point.
And here's BS with the same level of brainpower and nothing to add as epsilon..... Nice to see the old gang making their way over to the new thread
IMO any white person who doesn't care that a major media outlet allowed for whites (because it's affected whites in Sanford, among other places to be effected) to be used as a propaganda device to promote racial tension is an absolute idiot.
And here's BS with the same level of brainpower and nothing to add as epsilon..... Nice to see the old gang making their way over to the new thread
IMO any white person who doesn't care that a major media outlet allowed for whites (because it's affected whites in Sanford, among other places to be effected) to be used as a propaganda device to promote racial tension is an absolute idiot.
Waiting for what? For us to watch a bunch of Youtube videos about some crimes? Sorry to burst your "it's just not fair, white people are victims of crimes!" bubble, but I don't really care. Certainly not enough to waste time watching videos on Youtube.
If you care so much about these crimes, why didn't you bring them up for discussion when they happened rather than whining about them in the discussion of another crime?
Also, if we are playing the "media is biased!" game, I want to know the last time a white-on-black crime got as much media attention and coverage as the OJ Simpson trial. The Rodney King case is probably the only example that's remotely close and even then I'd say OJ wins.
Oh I'm very sorry, people jump on my posts all the time, including you, so I'm very sorry for not conforming to HF informal protocol.
What a dumb statement. I didn't claim anything, I stated a fact- NBC allowed for the doctoring of a 911 recording with the purpose of gaining attention and viewership by using a propaganda technique to incite racial indignation. The burden of proof to prove it wasn't NBC's intent is my problem? Because I work for NBC? I don't have to prove ****, the story came out and they're sorry they did. They look absolutely terrible because someone representing them doctored a recording to incite racial indignation. Whether the producer did it on his own behest (highly debatable that he didn't have to run it by the higher ups considering the scope of the story, you're naive if you think otherwise) or whether NBC as a whole wanted to run it that way isn't the point.
If the producer who was fired is a scapegoat for NBC, you'd think he'd finger any hire ups who ok'd what was done. He was likely the one fired because he was the highest on the chain responsible for the deceit. Others under him put it together but likely he gave the final ok and that is probably why he is the only one canned. If somebody above him ok'd it he wouldn't stay silent since at this point he owes NBC nothing.
Waiting for what? For us to watch a bunch of Youtube videos about some crimes? Sorry to burst your "it's just not fair, white people are victims of crimes!" bubble, but I don't really care. Certainly not enough to waste time watching videos on Youtube.
If you care so much about these crimes, why didn't you bring them up for discussion when they happened rather than whining about them in the discussion of another crime?
Because I didn't know they'd happened in the first place, that's the point And also, I know you wouldn't see any of the liberal goofs you see defending the media agenda like you see in this thread. A thread about black on white hate crime would get zero play because nobody would hear about it outside of local news because the spin doctors are working their indoctrinating magic pushing a clear message
Too funny. Some are so ill-informed and follow the race-baiters no matter what they say
