1 2 > 
 
   
 

The Fourth branch of government

 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  9213
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
04 August 2018 16:25
 

Trump claims the media is the enemy of the people because he is at war with the media and is trying to turn the people against it.

Given the choice between the First Amendment guarantee of a free press and the dildo elected president, I’ll take the press, every time.

 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3114
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
04 August 2018 16:40
 

You do the dirty work of “fake news”. You have been watching crap such a long time, you can not tell the difference…

Image Attachments
 
Capture.JPG
 
 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3114
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
04 August 2018 16:48
 

Not Just fake news ... and Racist too!

Image Attachments
 
Capture.JPG
 
 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  9213
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
05 August 2018 00:46
 

Says the guy who receives his information solely from a single, partisan source.  You have no credibility on this topic, Celal, but as a fanboy of authoritarianism this can be expected.

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  2704
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
05 August 2018 01:24
 
Skipshot - 04 August 2018 04:25 PM

Trump claims the media is the enemy of the people because he is at war with the media and is trying to turn the people against it.

Given the choice between the First Amendment guarantee of a free press and the dildo elected president, I’ll take the press, every time.

Although there are some valid criticisms of social media, it also serves to support traditional media and makes lying and keeping secrets more difficult.

 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
 
Avatar
 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
Total Posts:  586
Joined  13-02-2017
 
 
 
05 August 2018 10:48
 
Celal - 04 August 2018 04:48 PM

Not Just fake news ... and Racist too!

I heard something about this controversy.  Is that quote what it is about?  I’m not exactly seeing how that quote is racist.  She’s pretty clearly asking a dumb rhetorical question, not calling white people “grovelling goblins”, just like I might ask “So, you think black people are dumb. Does that mean they belong in the jungle swinging from trees?”  Obviously I’m not saying they do belong in the jungle swinging from trees but am asking if you think they should be.  You thinking they should be is racist, but asking if you think they should be isn’t.

I hope there is more to this controversy than that.

[ Edited: 05 August 2018 10:50 by TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher]
 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3114
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
05 August 2018 11:14
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 05 August 2018 10:48 AM
Celal - 04 August 2018 04:48 PM

Not Just fake news ... and Racist too!

I heard something about this controversy.  Is that quote what it is about?  I’m not exactly seeing how that quote is racist.  She’s pretty clearly asking a dumb rhetorical question, not calling white people “grovelling goblins”, just like I might ask “So, you think black people are dumb. Does that mean they belong in the jungle swinging from trees?”  Obviously I’m not saying they do belong in the jungle swinging from trees but am asking if you think they should be.  You thinking they should be is racist, but asking if you think they should be isn’t.

I hope there is more to this controversy than that.

See posts #104 and #105 in link

https://forum.samharris.org/forum/viewthread/71169/P90

Here are some other examples of her tweets:

“Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men.”

Another:

“Dumbass fucking white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants.”

Another:

“#CancelWhitePeople”

At one point, Jeong tweeted a crude graph claiming that as whiteness increased so did awful. Later she said that white people smell like dogs.

Here’s another one:

“White people have stopped breeding. You’ll all go extinct soon. That was my plan all along.”


New York Times - the symbol of liberalism is now officially racist!  Apparently the left thinks racism against White People “Impossible”. The same way the infantilized   blacks thinking they can not be racists.

 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
 
Avatar
 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
Total Posts:  586
Joined  13-02-2017
 
 
 
05 August 2018 11:21
 
Celal - 05 August 2018 11:14 AM
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 05 August 2018 10:48 AM
Celal - 04 August 2018 04:48 PM

Not Just fake news ... and Racist too!

I heard something about this controversy.  Is that quote what it is about?  I’m not exactly seeing how that quote is racist.  She’s pretty clearly asking a dumb rhetorical question, not calling white people “grovelling goblins”, just like I might ask “So, you think black people are dumb. Does that mean they belong in the jungle swinging from trees?”  Obviously I’m not saying they do belong in the jungle swinging from trees but am asking if you think they should be.  You thinking they should be is racist, but asking if you think they should be isn’t.

I hope there is more to this controversy than that.

See posts #104 and #105 in link

https://forum.samharris.org/forum/viewthread/71169/P90

Here are some other examples of her tweets:

“Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men.”

Another:

“Dumbass fucking white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants.”

Another:

“#CancelWhitePeople”

At one point, Jeong tweeted a crude graph claiming that as whiteness increased so did awful. Later she said that white people smell like dogs.

Here’s another one:

“White people have stopped breeding. You’ll all go extinct soon. That was my plan all along.”


New York Times - the symbol of liberalism is now officially racist!  Apparently the left thinks racism against White People “Impossible”. The same way the infantilized   blacks thinking they can not be racists.

Ok, there we go.  Thanks.  Now I see what the controversy is about.  Yeesh…

 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  394
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
06 August 2018 13:30
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 05 August 2018 11:21 AM
Celal - 05 August 2018 11:14 AM
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 05 August 2018 10:48 AM
Celal - 04 August 2018 04:48 PM

Not Just fake news ... and Racist too!

I heard something about this controversy.  Is that quote what it is about?  I’m not exactly seeing how that quote is racist.  She’s pretty clearly asking a dumb rhetorical question, not calling white people “grovelling goblins”, just like I might ask “So, you think black people are dumb. Does that mean they belong in the jungle swinging from trees?”  Obviously I’m not saying they do belong in the jungle swinging from trees but am asking if you think they should be.  You thinking they should be is racist, but asking if you think they should be isn’t.

I hope there is more to this controversy than that.

See posts #104 and #105 in link

https://forum.samharris.org/forum/viewthread/71169/P90

Here are some other examples of her tweets:

“Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men.”

Another:

“Dumbass fucking white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants.”

Another:

“#CancelWhitePeople”

At one point, Jeong tweeted a crude graph claiming that as whiteness increased so did awful. Later she said that white people smell like dogs.

Here’s another one:

“White people have stopped breeding. You’ll all go extinct soon. That was my plan all along.”


New York Times - the symbol of liberalism is now officially racist!  Apparently the left thinks racism against White People “Impossible”. The same way the infantilized   blacks thinking they can not be racists.


Ok, there we go.  Thanks.  Now I see what the controversy is about.  Yeesh…

I guess you don’t buy the explanation that Jeong was using the language that was tweeted to her, but replacing [lesbian, gook, other hate-spewing terms] with “white” in order to make a point as to how hateful it is.  I do buy that, since I’ve attempted to use the same technique, of course, real racists just get excited & fail to grasp the concept.  I don’t think the tweets say anything about whether Jeong is racist or not, they’re satirizing white racism.

 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  9213
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
06 August 2018 15:11
 

I was going to ignore Celal’s diversionary posts because he routinely and deliberately ignores context and I didn’t want to do the obvious research to counter his lies and distortions, and then lynmc chimed in.

It took me 10 seconds to find this:  https://www.vox.com/2018/8/3/17644704/sarah-jeong-new-york-times-tweets-backlash-racism

As I recently discussed on Vox’s daily podcast Today, Explained, the alt-right has codified a systemic method of deep-diving into perceived enemies’ past and decontextualizing their online interactions, with the goal of demonizing them through sustained campaigns of harassment and very loud virtual yelling.

It’s a simultaneously diabolical and simple strategy: greatly exaggerate and feign outrage over your so-called foe’s behavior while removing, distorting, or ignoring the context surrounding it.

As usual, Celal thoroughly discredits himself as a rational person and at the same time establishes himself as a radical right-wing troll.  It’s no wonder his posts are mostly ignored.  That, and he won’t stay on topic, ref. the OP.

 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
 
Avatar
 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
Total Posts:  586
Joined  13-02-2017
 
 
 
06 August 2018 15:14
 
lynmc - 06 August 2018 01:30 PM
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 05 August 2018 11:21 AM
Celal - 05 August 2018 11:14 AM
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 05 August 2018 10:48 AM
Celal - 04 August 2018 04:48 PM

Not Just fake news ... and Racist too!

I heard something about this controversy.  Is that quote what it is about?  I’m not exactly seeing how that quote is racist.  She’s pretty clearly asking a dumb rhetorical question, not calling white people “grovelling goblins”, just like I might ask “So, you think black people are dumb. Does that mean they belong in the jungle swinging from trees?”  Obviously I’m not saying they do belong in the jungle swinging from trees but am asking if you think they should be.  You thinking they should be is racist, but asking if you think they should be isn’t.

I hope there is more to this controversy than that.

See posts #104 and #105 in link

https://forum.samharris.org/forum/viewthread/71169/P90

Here are some other examples of her tweets:

“Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men.”

Another:

“Dumbass fucking white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants.”

Another:

“#CancelWhitePeople”

At one point, Jeong tweeted a crude graph claiming that as whiteness increased so did awful. Later she said that white people smell like dogs.

Here’s another one:

“White people have stopped breeding. You’ll all go extinct soon. That was my plan all along.”


New York Times - the symbol of liberalism is now officially racist!  Apparently the left thinks racism against White People “Impossible”. The same way the infantilized   blacks thinking they can not be racists.


Ok, there we go.  Thanks.  Now I see what the controversy is about.  Yeesh…

I guess you don’t buy the explanation that Jeong was using the language that was tweeted to her, but replacing [lesbian, gook, other hate-spewing terms] with “white” in order to make a point as to how hateful it is.  I do buy that, since I’ve attempted to use the same technique, of course, real racists just get excited & fail to grasp the concept.  I don’t think the tweets say anything about whether Jeong is racist or not, they’re satirizing white racism.

I don’t have a particular opinion on this; I was merely expressing that I see what the controversy is about.  But since you bring it up, I don’t particularly care about her motives, or her foreknowledge, or her intent anymore than I cared about those same factors in Barr’s tweet.  I don’t think whether she is a racist is the relevant issue, or that she isn’t the relevant defense.  The tweets are racist just for what they are, just like if I said “those monkeys play some damn good basketball” is racist even if I’m expressing admiration of, not animus towards, players in the NBA.  However she intended the language she used, the language she used was racist.  I think what people are calling The Times out on is a tendency to be fine with someone like Barr losing her show for calling Jarrett a Muslim monkey but applying a double standard when a minority behaves in the same way.  And from my view, they have a point…

 

[ Edited: 06 August 2018 15:17 by TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher]
 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  9213
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
06 August 2018 15:28
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 06 August 2018 03:14 PM

I don’t have a particular opinion on this; I was merely expressing that I see what the controversy is about.

?????  No opinion, but you have an observation and then proceed to give an opinion on the observation?  Why waste everyone’s time pretending to be non-committal?

TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 06 August 2018 03:14 PM

But since you bring it up, I don’t particularly care about her motives, or her foreknowledge, or her intent anymore than I cared about those same factors in Barr’s tweet.  I don’t think whether she is a racist is the relevant issue, or that she isn’t the relevant defense.  The tweets are racist just for what they are, just like if I said “those monkeys play some damn good basketball” is racist even if I’m expressing admiration of, not animus towards, players in the NBA.  However she intended the language she used, the language she used was racist.  I think what people are calling The Times out on is a tendency to be fine with someone like Barr losing her show for calling Jarrett a Muslim monkey but applying a double standard when a minority behaves in the same way.  And from my view, they have a point…

So your opinion is that context is irrelevant?  So long.

 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
 
Avatar
 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
Total Posts:  586
Joined  13-02-2017
 
 
 
06 August 2018 15:39
 
Skipshot - 06 August 2018 03:28 PM
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 06 August 2018 03:14 PM

I don’t have a particular opinion on this; I was merely expressing that I see what the controversy is about.

?????  No opinion, but you have an observation and then proceed to give an opinion on the observation?  Why waste everyone’s time pretending to be non-committal?

TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 06 August 2018 03:14 PM

But since you bring it up, I don’t particularly care about her motives, or her foreknowledge, or her intent anymore than I cared about those same factors in Barr’s tweet.  I don’t think whether she is a racist is the relevant issue, or that she isn’t the relevant defense.  The tweets are racist just for what they are, just like if I said “those monkeys play some damn good basketball” is racist even if I’m expressing admiration of, not animus towards, players in the NBA.  However she intended the language she used, the language she used was racist.  I think what people are calling The Times out on is a tendency to be fine with someone like Barr losing her show for calling Jarrett a Muslim monkey but applying a double standard when a minority behaves in the same way.  And from my view, they have a point…

So your opinion is that context is irrelevant?  So long.

Watch that foot because if your knee jerks any harder you’re going to break it.

The context here is that she was behaving as badly as people were behaving towards her, and if this were kindergarten, that would be fine, but since it’s not, maybe we should hold her to a higher standard.  In any case, I don’t have an opinion on her, or whether The Times should hire her, or any other interest in this matter beyond putting your knee back in place by pointing out an analysis of an issue and saying one side has a point is not tantamount to agreeing with them.  Nor does it commit to any particular position on hiring her or not.  All I’m saying is that whatever is done, the relevant issue is what she actually said, not excuses about why she said it.

 

[ Edited: 06 August 2018 15:58 by TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher]
 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  9213
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
06 August 2018 15:57
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 06 August 2018 03:39 PM
Skipshot - 06 August 2018 03:28 PM
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 06 August 2018 03:14 PM

I don’t have a particular opinion on this; I was merely expressing that I see what the controversy is about.

?????  No opinion, but you have an observation and then proceed to give an opinion on the observation?  Why waste everyone’s time pretending to be non-committal?

TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 06 August 2018 03:14 PM

But since you bring it up, I don’t particularly care about her motives, or her foreknowledge, or her intent anymore than I cared about those same factors in Barr’s tweet.  I don’t think whether she is a racist is the relevant issue, or that she isn’t the relevant defense.  The tweets are racist just for what they are, just like if I said “those monkeys play some damn good basketball” is racist even if I’m expressing admiration of, not animus towards, players in the NBA.  However she intended the language she used, the language she used was racist.  I think what people are calling The Times out on is a tendency to be fine with someone like Barr losing her show for calling Jarrett a Muslim monkey but applying a double standard when a minority behaves in the same way.  And from my view, they have a point…

So your opinion is that context is irrelevant?  So long.

Watch that foot because if your knee jerks any harder you’re going to break it.

The context here is that she was behaving as badly as people were behaving towards her, and if this were kindergarten, that would be fine, but since it’s not, maybe we should hold her to a higher standard.  In any case, I don’t have an opinion on her, or whether The Times should hire her, or any other interest in this matter beyond putting your knee back in place by pointing out an analysis of an issue and saying one side has a point is not tantamount to agreeing with them.  Nor does it commit to any particular position.  All I’m saying is that whatever is done about this, the relevant issue is what she actually said, not excuses about why she said it.

So you admit context in your world is not relevant.  So long.

 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
 
Avatar
 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
Total Posts:  586
Joined  13-02-2017
 
 
 
06 August 2018 16:15
 
Skipshot - 06 August 2018 03:57 PM
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 06 August 2018 03:39 PM
Skipshot - 06 August 2018 03:28 PM
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 06 August 2018 03:14 PM

I don’t have a particular opinion on this; I was merely expressing that I see what the controversy is about.

?????  No opinion, but you have an observation and then proceed to give an opinion on the observation?  Why waste everyone’s time pretending to be non-committal?

TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 06 August 2018 03:14 PM

But since you bring it up, I don’t particularly care about her motives, or her foreknowledge, or her intent anymore than I cared about those same factors in Barr’s tweet.  I don’t think whether she is a racist is the relevant issue, or that she isn’t the relevant defense.  The tweets are racist just for what they are, just like if I said “those monkeys play some damn good basketball” is racist even if I’m expressing admiration of, not animus towards, players in the NBA.  However she intended the language she used, the language she used was racist.  I think what people are calling The Times out on is a tendency to be fine with someone like Barr losing her show for calling Jarrett a Muslim monkey but applying a double standard when a minority behaves in the same way.  And from my view, they have a point…

So your opinion is that context is irrelevant?  So long.

Watch that foot because if your knee jerks any harder you’re going to break it.

The context here is that she was behaving as badly as people were behaving towards her, and if this were kindergarten, that would be fine, but since it’s not, maybe we should hold her to a higher standard.  In any case, I don’t have an opinion on her, or whether The Times should hire her, or any other interest in this matter beyond putting your knee back in place by pointing out an analysis of an issue and saying one side has a point is not tantamount to agreeing with them.  Nor does it commit to any particular position.  All I’m saying is that whatever is done about this, the relevant issue is what she actually said, not excuses about why she said it.

So you admit context in your world is not relevant.  So long.

No, I said the relevant context is that she was behaving like those behaving towards her.  As far as I’ve heard, this is her defense—that she was responding in kind to make a point, but she didn’t mean what she was saying the way that she said it.  I suggested that since this isn’t kindergarten, we should hold a higher standard; that we shouldn’t excuse bad behavior by saying, in effect, “But he hit me first!”. 

If it helps, consider a racist Tweet to flip the tables on a racist Tweeter as hitting Bobby back because he hit first.  It doesn’t matter that the intent is to show Bobby how it feels to be hit.  I still hit him.  Analogously, it doesn’t matter that her intent was to show racists how it felt to be the target of racism, or to show people what racism against them looks like; she still used a racist Tweet to do it.  In effect she admits to this in her defense, otherwise it wouldn’t be a defense. And that’s the context that matters.  Not only does this context not change the facts of what she did; the context, by her own admission, establishes the Tweets as racist, otherwise she couldn’t have made her point.  It’s just now she’s using that context as an excuse to say they weren’t racist after all because all she wanted to do was show someone how it feels to be a victim of racism, or to demonstrate what racism against whites looks like.  But for that to work, the Tweet had to be racist in turn, otherwise there’s no lesson… and so forth.

In any case, that excuse shouldn’t fly; we aren’t in kindergarten anymore.  She Tweeted what she Tweeted.  The Tweets were racist simply by what was said, regardless of her intent to teach a lesson through them.  Add to this the lesson couldn’t have been taught without the Tweets being racist and the context convicts her too.

No one really cared what Barr’s excuses were—that she didn’t know Jarrett was black; that she was on Ambein, and so forth.  I’m saying if we are going to apply a standard, the same standard that applied to Barr should apply to Jeong.  That it’s not being applied is what, it seems to me, conservatives are up in arms about.  And like I said, they have a point.

Now, whether Barr should have lost her show or Jeong should or shouldn’t be hired…that’s another matter, and I don’t have an opinion on either one.  If you pressed me, I guess I’d want to make sure the punishment fit the crime.  And in neither case are we talking about murder here, even in its cultural form…

 

[ Edited: 07 August 2018 05:20 by TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher]
 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3114
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
06 August 2018 21:17
 

New York Times Response Strategy

Image Attachments
 
Capture1.jpg
 
 
 1 2 >