In my opinion, saying the Israelis and Palestinians are morally equal is just as misleading as saying they're morally unequal. The Israelis kill far more Palestinians than Palestinians kill Israelis, so in numerical terms they're more responsible for more death. But that inequality is not because the Israelis are more bloodthirsty than the Palestinians or anything like that; it's because the Israelis are stronger while the Palestinians are more numerous. If an eighteen wheeler and a go-cart crash head-first into each other, the go-cart will get totaled even if both vehicles are moving at the same speed.
More to the point, as I've said in the context of liberals and conservatives in the United States, arguing over who is morally superior tends to do nothing but encourage factionalism.
In my opinion, saying the Israelis and Palestinians are morally equal is just as misleading as saying they're morally unequal. The Israelis kill far more Palestinians than Palestinians kill Israelis, so in numerical terms they're more responsible for more death. But that inequality is not because the Israelis are more bloodthirsty than the Palestinians or anything like that; it's because the Israelis are stronger while the Palestinians are more numerous. If an eighteen wheeler and a go-cart crash head-first into each other, the go-cart will get totaled even if both vehicles are moving at the same speed.
More to the point, as I've said in the context of liberals and conservatives in the United States, arguing over who is morally superior tends to do nothing but encourage factionalism.
In American politics and media, the Israeli side is almost always seen as being morally superior, which is part of the problem. While it's certainly true that the current ruling party in Israel certainly seems to favor having Republicans in charge, Democrats are no slouches in this department either, as hardly any politician is as hard-line on these issues as Chuck Schumer is. In the 2014 conflict, we simply wrote them another $225 million dollar check, which passed nearly unanimously in both Houses of Congress. Based on the annual defense budget of Israel (18 billion) and our 10-year military aide package (38 billion) we are providing roughly 22% of their entire defense budget. And almost all of that money goes right back into the pocket of US weapons manufacturers:
The 10-year agreement is the largest in U.S. history, with a significant portion of the money expected to be used to upgrade Israel's air force to Lockheed Martin's F-35 fighter aircraft. But while the actual memorandum of understanding hasn't been officially released by either country, it has a number of conditions that are different from previous U.S.-Israel aid deals.
Most importantly, it's structured so that more Israeli defense spending goes to U.S. companies. Israel's long-standing special arrangement for funds from the United States previously allowed Israel to spend 26 percent of the money in Israel — on Israeli-made defense products. But that provision is being phased out over the first five years of the deal.
Whatever your position on the issue is, it's impossible to argue that the aide package, in the end, ends up as a total boondoggle for the US military industrial complex.
Personally, I see no side as morally superior, both kill, and are killed. I see it as issue of rights and conflict mitigation more than anything else. I think it is not the best thing that the US gives money to both sides, as some of that goes to killing the other side. I am particularly bothered by the 'pay for slay' program the P's promote, and put off as well by the continual goading by the I's for building on hotly disputed territory, causing only more anger from the P's. As to the pay for slay business, I am still seeing the Taylor-Force act, passed by congress, waiting for a senate vote. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1164
Apparently destroying the EPA from within and literally living in the residence of a major energy lobbyist is such tiring work that Scott Pruitt's security detail was very concerned about his well-being. What a farce:
Also his daughter, a part time white house intern was living in another one of the energy lobbyist's residences but Scott only paid for the one.
This is the guy that spent 25k in taxpayer money on a soundproof booth right? Why I wonder? Could it be for private conversations with corporate lobbyists?
He also brought along his official EPA security detail to trips in including Disneyland and the Rose Bowl. Pruitt used between two and three dozen different agents during a six-week period.
This Pruitt guy is a stereotype of all Republican bad traits. - Is happy to ruin the environment for business purposes. - Scared for his safety, danger around every corner! Conservatives are motivated by fear. - In the pocket of corporate masters, doesn't care about you or anything as long as he gets his money. In fact it's better if you don't get yours. - Thinks he's better than everyone else, must fly first class to avoid mingling with the plebs. See Ben Carson's $31,000 table or Trump's weekly vacations to his golf resort.
Sinclair Broadcasting, which owns a MASSIVE amount of local television stations in this country, is engaging in what can only be seen as a coordinated propaganda campaign, using local news broadcasts. This has been in the works for some time:
For audio and visual of what you might expect to see in an Orwell novel, check out this clip of one news broadcast reading the required script, then watch as you see other stations from across the country saying the EXACT same thing:
For the record they are saying "We are very concerned about the troubling trend of one-sided stories plaguing our country." It is a directive from Sinclair executives to push Trump's "fake news" narrative, but far more insidious, because it is coming from (ostensibly), trusted local news personalities. Whatever this is, it has nothing to to with reporting the news.
Anyone want to guess who is under investigation by the FCC inspector general for his ties to Sinclair?? That's right, the destroyer of Net Neutrality himself, Ajit Pai:
For the record they are saying "We are very concerned about the troubling trend of one-sided stories plaguing our country." It is a directive from Sinclair executives to push Trump's "fake news" narrative, but far more insidious, because it is coming from (ostensibly), trusted local news personalities. Whatever this is, it has nothing to to with reporting the news.
BLATANT LIES!
They're saying "We are very concerned about the troubling trend of irresponsible one-sided news stories plaguing our country."
Still not as good as John Oliver having like 30 politicians (including President Obama) basically chanting "small business is the backbone of the economy", despite the fact that's BS. The economy is dominated by large corporations that dictate the day-to-day course of affairs. It's CONSUMERS that are the backbone of the economy.
Saw a very interesting stat today that I wanted to verify, and it turns out it is true. Transgender Americans (the ones Trump is deadset on banning from military service) are 2x more likely to enlist in the military as other Americans. From Business Insider from last year:
But about one-fifth of the transgender population in the US are veterans of the military — meaning that transgender people serve in the military at approximately twice the rate of the general population, according to a 2014 report by researchers at the UCLA School of Law.
There are approximately 15,500 transgender people on active duty or serving in the Guard or Reserve forces and 134,300 veterans or retired Guard or Reserve members, according to the 2014 data.
8,800 of those serving are on active duty.
This is a demographic/minority group in which 1/5 people voluntarily join the armed services of this country. But clearly, we can't put up with this kind of outrage any longer. How dare they sign up at such high numbers.
There is really no wiggle room here given these kind of stats. I don't see how someone can claim to support military service members in any capacity and also support the proposed transgender ban.
Also his daughter, a part time white house intern was living in another one of the energy lobbyist's residences but Scott only paid for the one.
This is the guy that spent 25k in taxpayer money on a soundproof booth right? Why I wonder? Could it be for private conversations with corporate lobbyists?
He also brought along his official EPA security detail to trips in including Disneyland and the Rose Bowl. Pruitt used between two and three dozen different agents during a six-week period.
This Pruitt guy is a stereotype of all Republican bad traits. - Is happy to ruin the environment for business purposes. - Scared for his safety, danger around every corner! Conservatives are motivated by fear. - In the pocket of corporate masters, doesn't care about you or anything as long as he gets his money. In fact it's better if you don't get yours. - Thinks he's better than everyone else, must fly first class to avoid mingling with the plebs. See Ben Carson's $31,000 table or Trump's weekly vacations to his golf resort.
@smeagolheart What republicans does this refer to (with bad traits), just those in office, or republicans voters as a whole? If it was those in office, both have been guilty of some of those things in my opinion. As to the study, it was interesting (but a small study) but I could also read some negatives and benefits into each point it broug ht up against the conservative mindset, as well as the opposite ideas that were inferred regarding liberal minds. All that said, yeah, Trump has made some choices for those in their respective positions that could be better.
Also his daughter, a part time white house intern was living in another one of the energy lobbyist's residences but Scott only paid for the one.
This is the guy that spent 25k in taxpayer money on a soundproof booth right? Why I wonder? Could it be for private conversations with corporate lobbyists?
He also brought along his official EPA security detail to trips in including Disneyland and the Rose Bowl. Pruitt used between two and three dozen different agents during a six-week period.
This Pruitt guy is a stereotype of all Republican bad traits. - Is happy to ruin the environment for business purposes. - Scared for his safety, danger around every corner! Conservatives are motivated by fear. - In the pocket of corporate masters, doesn't care about you or anything as long as he gets his money. In fact it's better if you don't get yours. - Thinks he's better than everyone else, must fly first class to avoid mingling with the plebs. See Ben Carson's $31,000 table or Trump's weekly vacations to his golf resort.
@smeagolheart What republicans does this refer to (with bad traits), just those in office, or republicans voters as a whole? If it was those in office, both have been guilty of some of those things in my opinion. As to the study, it was interesting (but a small study) but I could also read some negatives and benefits into each point it broug ht up against the conservative mindset, as well as the opposite ideas that were inferred regarding liberal minds. All that said, yeah, Trump has made some choices for those in their respective positions that could be better.
Honestly most voters are more independent and not hardcore party line on every issue. Those in office tend to fit some stereotypes. I was referring to those in office.
Liberals have stereotypes that get constant repetition from the Conservative media.
Republicans tend to fit a lot of criteria too. Their actions tend to be more like Ebenezer Scrooge (without the redemption in his story arc) - a rude jerk guy sitting on piles of cash while the world starves around them, they don't give a damn about the little guy.
Republicans are anti-environment these days and are always hatching schemes to gut or out and out destroy the EPA (ironic that a Republican created it!). The party denies climate change, while the world accepts it - the Paris climate accord has every single country (200+) in the world signing the agreement except snowflake Donald Trump wants out. Why? They are completely owned by corporations and they need to keep delivering more so they take it too far, it's not enough that a CEO makes 5000 times a average workers pay they need to also not raise minimum wage, maybe they need to cut it, it's not enough that companies can pollute the air, they need to pollute the water too, they might earn a few more bucks! Gotta have something to show big oil at the next fundraiser, they need a return on their investment!
"Investigators said Raniere preferred exceptionally thin women, so "slaves" had to stick to very low-calorie diets and document every food they ate.
As punishment for not following orders, women were forced to attend classes where they were made "to wear fake cow udders over their breasts while people called them derogatory names", or threatened with being put in cages, court papers say."
"Parlato reportedly claims Mack started as a slave for the group before eventually becoming a "slave master".
"Her nickname among defectors is ‘Pimp Mack'," Parlato was reported as saying."
What a bananas story. I volunteer to train hospitality workers how to look for signs of human trafficking, so I've heard some weird shit, including someone pimping out minors on a public Facebook page of all places, and another person running a human trafficking ring out of a wealthy suburb in Connecticut. But its never anyone high profile.
This story is almost too crazy to be true, so I wouldn't be shocked to learn that Mack's involvement wasn't as substantial as initially claimed. But damn, this is the weirdest story I've heard all year from Hollywood (including Weinstein). Crazy world we are living in.
Wow, apparently the brand they used on the women was not only cult leader Keith Reniere's initials, but also Allison Mack's
This is some crazy Dan Brown, Illuminati, conspiracy theory shiznizzle.
Apparently the cult leader had ties to many people. Richard Branson was a client and Kristen Gillibrand's father was their lobbyist for some time before quitting and returning his 100k paycheck. Roger Stone (big shocker!) was also a lobbyist for them, and so were Justice Richard Mays (a former civil rights activist) and Scott Harshbarger (former Massachusetts Attorney General).
Many of their programs have involved business executives, including the founder of BET and someone from Enron. Given how many "elites" are involved, from business executives to Hollywood stars, I'd expect this to be some loony story you'd find on Infowars, not Newsweek.
Cults seem to reveal the most bizarre and vulnerable side of human nature. In the last few weeks, I have been fairly obsessed with what happened in Jonestown. What strikes me as most amazing is what the people who were down there BEFORE Jim Jones arrived managed to accomplish was actually unbelievably impressive, creating a place to live from nothing but overgrown jungle. But the moment Jones arrived, the entire situation devolved into total darkness in less than a year. Though it is always portrayed as a mass suicide, after listening to the tapes of the very end, it's hard to view it as anything but mass murder. Especially when you realize that Jones had been practicing and perfecting manipulating people since childhood leading up to that moment. I still can't quite fathom what it must have felt like in that moment as the entire situation devolved into utter madness. Before 9/11, it was the largest loss of civilian life in US history, and all laid at the feet of one man's bottomless paranoia and megalomania.
Saw a very interesting stat today that I wanted to verify, and it turns out it is true. Transgender Americans (the ones Trump is deadset on banning from military service) are 2x more likely to enlist in the military as other Americans. From Business Insider from last year:
But about one-fifth of the transgender population in the US are veterans of the military — meaning that transgender people serve in the military at approximately twice the rate of the general population, according to a 2014 report by researchers at the UCLA School of Law.
There are approximately 15,500 transgender people on active duty or serving in the Guard or Reserve forces and 134,300 veterans or retired Guard or Reserve members, according to the 2014 data.
8,800 of those serving are on active duty.
This is a demographic/minority group in which 1/5 people voluntarily join the armed services of this country. But clearly, we can't put up with this kind of outrage any longer. How dare they sign up at such high numbers.
There is really no wiggle room here given these kind of stats. I don't see how someone can claim to support military service members in any capacity and also support the proposed transgender ban.
Without denigrating the service any person provides when enlisting in the armed forces, there could be a financial motivation for transgender individuals to join. Hormone therapy and surgeries are expensive and might not be covered by traditional insurance.
I have no issue with this practice. To me, it’s just like joining up to take advantage of the GI Bill. Quid pro quo, they give their bodies and souls to Uncle Sam for a few years and Uncle Sam gives them something in return.
.. It's like how Ted Nugent was saying he'd be in jail for killing Obama and Hillary needs to eat his machine gun, but now that Trumps king, why Honest Ted goes out and says he wants there to be civil discourse and he's done being a violent crazy person....
In June Ted Nugent said he will not engage in 'hateful rhetoric anymore'. Did anyone believe him?
Ted Nugent became the legal guardian of an 17-year old girl in the '70s simply so he could haul her around the country on tour and continue his affair with her. Moreover, that is something he PROUDLY admitted to in his own Behind the Music episode on VH1 back in the '90s, not some liberal conspiracy.
The far-right has gone so overboard in attacking these kids that even if they were making valid criticisms of them, it would be lost in the vitriol and bile they are spewing at them. Photoshopped images being passed off as real, a FOX News host making fun of one of them for not getting accepted to UCLA, the believe among many that they are crisis actors. Just what the hell is a crisis actor?? A teenage child who is kept in a closet until a mass shooting occurs and then is immediately teleported to Florida hours after the shooting occurs?? This is the Alex Jones wing of right-wing politics becoming ascendant. And I'm sorry, but 9/11 Truthers NEVER had the kind of influence on the Democratic Party in the Bush years that the people like Jones, Ingraham and Nugent have. It's the exact reason I was positive even in the early Republican primaries Trump was going to win the nomination. He is the living embodiment of talk radio and FOX News.
The guy on the right pretended to have bone spurs so he could avoid the Vietnam draft. He got five deferments. In interviews later he couldn't remember which leg or foot he claimed to have the bone spurs in. In interviews with Howard Stern Trump said his personal Vietnam was avoiding STDs while the men were away fighting the war.
Trump spent the morning tweeting about DACA, in which he said people are flowing over the border to take advantage of the policy. Since the rules state that to be eligible for DACA you have to have lived in the US since AT LEAST mid-2007, this means one of two things: either Donald Trump is aware of Mexican immigrants who have access to a time machine, or Donald Trump doesn't actually have the first f*****g clue how DACA even works. And since the answer is clearly the later, I'd like to know how anyone is supposed to "negotiate" with a President who can't even be bothered to learn the most BASIC information about the program.
Ted Nugent became the legal guardian of an 17-year old girl in the '70s simply so he could haul her around the country on tour and continue his affair with her. Moreover, that is something he PROUDLY admitted to in his own Behind the Music episode on VH1 back in the '90s, not some liberal conspiracy.
Aren't you the one who always says that celebrities have no influence, despite the massive fundraising and the fact that 90% of millennials get their news exclusively from John Oliver and other entertainment shows?
As soon as the shoe is on the other foot, you turn around and pretend that Nugent has any influence at all.
Ted Nugent became the legal guardian of an 17-year old girl in the '70s simply so he could haul her around the country on tour and continue his affair with her. Moreover, that is something he PROUDLY admitted to in his own Behind the Music episode on VH1 back in the '90s, not some liberal conspiracy.
Aren't you the one who always says that celebrities have no influence, despite the massive fundraising and the fact that 90% of millennials get their news exclusively from John Oliver and other entertainment shows?
As soon as the shoe is on the other foot, you turn around and pretend that Nugent has any influence at all.
The Republicans elected (another) celebrity President. And I don't know if you're referring to some statistic or just casually exaggerating, but John Oliver's show gets around 1 million total viewers per episode, and there are 80+ million millennials in the U.S.
Ted Nugent became the legal guardian of an 17-year old girl in the '70s simply so he could haul her around the country on tour and continue his affair with her. Moreover, that is something he PROUDLY admitted to in his own Behind the Music episode on VH1 back in the '90s, not some liberal conspiracy.
Aren't you the one who always says that celebrities have no influence, despite the massive fundraising and the fact that 90% of millennials get their news exclusively from John Oliver and other entertainment shows?
As soon as the shoe is on the other foot, you turn around and pretend that Nugent has any influence at all.
I mean, he's an NRA board member, and the NRA spends untold millions getting Republicans elected in every corner of the country they can find. But mostly, I just happen to believe that the Republican Party has become FAR more Ted Nugent, Rush Limbaugh, and FOX News than say, David Brooks or Ross Douthat, who seem to exist for the sole purpose of pretending that isn't the case. Otherwise Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio would be President (or would have at least come within striking distance of the nomination).
And @joluv is entirely correct. For all the talk on the right about wanting celebrities to shut up, they have elected TWO celebrities (meaning people who never would have gone anywhere if they hadn't come from the entertainment world) President since 1980 (one an actor, another a reality TV con-man) and another one Governor of California. I'm mostly of the opinion that you lose the "let's rag on celebrities" card when that is the case.
Ted Nugent should definitely keep talking. God knows threatening the President of the United States on multiple occasions didn't get him in any trouble, so I don't see why he should stop now. You would be correct about Nugent having no influence if any other Republican was in office right now. But there is a very thin-line at this point between the rhetoric of someone like Nugent and the guy occupying the Oval Office. Trump is, as much as he is a student of anything, a student of the way far-right media and punditry works. People don't seem to want to believe this, but Trump absolutely forms his opinions about every issue based on what he sees on FOX News. You can draw a straight line measured in minutes from when some topic is mentioned on the channel and Trump sending out a tweet about it. Trump isn't just a purveyor of propaganda, he is a consumer of it as well.
Ted Nugent became the legal guardian of an 17-year old girl in the '70s simply so he could haul her around the country on tour and continue his affair with her. Moreover, that is something he PROUDLY admitted to in his own Behind the Music episode on VH1 back in the '90s, not some liberal conspiracy.
Aren't you the one who always says that celebrities have no influence, despite the massive fundraising and the fact that 90% of millennials get their news exclusively from John Oliver and other entertainment shows?
As soon as the shoe is on the other foot, you turn around and pretend that Nugent has any influence at all.
The Republicans elected (another) celebrity President. And I don't know if you're referring to some statistic or just casually exaggerating, but John Oliver's show gets around 1 million total viewers per episode, and there are 80+ million millennials in the U.S.
I never said Republicans don't value celebrity. I don't see why any criticism of someone on the left has to be met with whataboutism, especially since you should know from everything I've said on this board that I am not in favor of right-wing celebrity culture.
I think its a travesty how intertwined celebrity and politics are right now. I find it incredibly disappointing that we have a reality TV star as president, especially such a crass one. Trump is a Republican Kardashian.
Also, John Oliver isn't alone. There is Samantha Bee, Trevor Noah, Stephen Colbert, Larry Wilmore, and recently Jimmy Kimmel. They all have one thing in common: they are all left-wing.
Republicans, for all their moaning about celebrity culture., have a pathetic tendency to grasp onto any celebrity who shares their views. Of course this is usually a D-Lister or has been 90s TV star who has nothing to lose by "coming out" as a conservative. That, or their career is already long established like Clint Eastwood. Republicans complaints about celebrities being involved in politics are really just Republican complaints about celebrities being involved in left-wing politics.
I mean, he's an NRA board member, and the NRA spends untold millions getting Republicans elected in every corner of the country they can find.
Yes, but people like Leonardo DiCaprio are on tons of boards of environmental organizations too. The entertainment industry spends tons of money as well, in addition to cultural influence. Harvey Weinstein alone has raised 1.5 million for Democrats, and that's just as an individual. If you want to look at lobbying, it might be worse. My former senator, Chris Dodd, was Hollywood's chief lobyist (Motion Picture Association of America), and they spend 2.6 million... in one year. That's just one organization. At least they spend their money somewhat equally by party, as if that should matter.
Entertainment sells. That's great, and I love entertainment. I also believe in free speech, and hold nothing against celebrities for speaking out (unless they say something truly stupid or act as demagogues). I just wish people didn't take them so seriously. I think you underrate how influential cultural institutions are in politics.
@booinyoureyes: To save me time on digging into television ratings and demographic statistics, am I correct that your 90% number came from nowhere and was just meant in the informal sense to convey "a lot"?
@booinyoureyes: To save me time on digging into television ratings and demographic statistics, am I correct that your 90% number came from nowhere and was just meant in the informal sense to convey "a lot"?
@joluv I found this. Doesn't sound quite so grim as @booinyoureyes stated, but it's still scary how much they rely on Facebook...
I actually don't mind people getting news off of social media, as long as the sources are dependable. I'd also appreciate it if there was diversity of viewpoint, but I think that is something that has to be actively sought after these days. I myself use twitter exclusively for news aggregation (and some sports here or there).
My main problem is news as entertainment, mainly because my fear is that when opinion is expressed through comedy or satire its veracity and persuasiveness is not based on the merits but on how witty or entertaining the presentation is.
I'd also point out, before people accuse me of being bias, that conservatives also engage in this through talk radio and other sources. There is no doubt that people that younger conservatives and yucky alt-rightersare turning to, like Milo Yiannopoulos and Steven Crowder (not equating the two), also benefited from being amusing (though I personally don't find Crowder funny).
Then again, I understand the impulse. Following the news and the policy discussions can be dispiriting, so people of course want to laugh and have fun with it. I don't expect everyone to read Ross Douthat and George Will columns all day (or Kristof and Ezra Klein if you're more liberal), but I do wish that people at least gave serious news a shot. It can actually be entertaining in a different way.
The courts just seem to be getting out of hand lately. Shouldn't this be in the realm of the FDA (not that the FDA isn't immune to suggestion by employees with previous ties to big business and stocks, but still)? I get a bit worried when the courts get involved in things without the proper scientific knowledge and ability to properly evaluate studies. Despite Court Ruling, There's No Certain Science Linking Coffee to Cancer
Might as well put out rulings on cooking meat, eating sugar, use of aluminum in anti-perspirent, flouride, too much this, too much that, etc. And with that in mind, I'm going to fix myself a cup right now.
Comments
More to the point, as I've said in the context of liberals and conservatives in the United States, arguing over who is morally superior tends to do nothing but encourage factionalism.
The 10-year agreement is the largest in U.S. history, with a significant portion of the money expected to be used to upgrade Israel's air force to Lockheed Martin's F-35 fighter aircraft.
But while the actual memorandum of understanding hasn't been officially released by either country, it has a number of conditions that are different from previous U.S.-Israel aid deals.
Most importantly, it's structured so that more Israeli defense spending goes to U.S. companies. Israel's long-standing special arrangement for funds from the United States previously allowed Israel to spend 26 percent of the money in Israel — on Israeli-made defense products. But that provision is being phased out over the first five years of the deal.
Whatever your position on the issue is, it's impossible to argue that the aide package, in the end, ends up as a total boondoggle for the US military industrial complex.
As to the pay for slay business, I am still seeing the Taylor-Force act, passed by congress, waiting for a senate vote.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1164
This is the guy that spent 25k in taxpayer money on a soundproof booth right? Why I wonder? Could it be for private conversations with corporate lobbyists?
He also brought along his official EPA security detail to trips in including Disneyland and the Rose Bowl. Pruitt used between two and three dozen different agents during a six-week period.
This Pruitt guy is a stereotype of all Republican bad traits.
- Is happy to ruin the environment for business purposes.
- Scared for his safety, danger around every corner! Conservatives are motivated by fear.
- In the pocket of corporate masters, doesn't care about you or anything as long as he gets his money. In fact it's better if you don't get yours.
- Thinks he's better than everyone else, must fly first class to avoid mingling with the plebs. See Ben Carson's $31,000 table or Trump's weekly vacations to his golf resort.
That 'Heya'. It is burned into my SOUL.
http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/sinclair-pennsylvania-fake-news-script-cbs21-nbc6-fox56-20180330.html
For audio and visual of what you might expect to see in an Orwell novel, check out this clip of one news broadcast reading the required script, then watch as you see other stations from across the country saying the EXACT same thing:
For the record they are saying "We are very concerned about the troubling trend of one-sided stories plaguing our country." It is a directive from Sinclair executives to push Trump's "fake news" narrative, but far more insidious, because it is coming from (ostensibly), trusted local news personalities. Whatever this is, it has nothing to to with reporting the news.
Anyone want to guess who is under investigation by the FCC inspector general for his ties to Sinclair?? That's right, the destroyer of Net Neutrality himself, Ajit Pai:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/02/15/fcc-chair-ajit-pai-investigated-sinclair-ties-lawmakers-say/342893002/
They're saying "We are
veryconcerned about the troubling trend of irresponsible one-sided news stories plaguing our country."Still not as good as John Oliver having like 30 politicians (including President Obama) basically chanting "small business is the backbone of the economy", despite the fact that's BS. The economy is dominated by large corporations that dictate the day-to-day course of affairs. It's CONSUMERS that are the backbone of the economy.
But about one-fifth of the transgender population in the US are veterans of the military — meaning that transgender people serve in the military at approximately twice the rate of the general population, according to a 2014 report by researchers at the UCLA School of Law.
There are approximately 15,500 transgender people on active duty or serving in the Guard or Reserve forces and 134,300 veterans or retired Guard or Reserve members, according to the 2014 data.
8,800 of those serving are on active duty.
This is a demographic/minority group in which 1/5 people voluntarily join the armed services of this country. But clearly, we can't put up with this kind of outrage any longer. How dare they sign up at such high numbers.
There is really no wiggle room here given these kind of stats. I don't see how someone can claim to support military service members in any capacity and also support the proposed transgender ban.
All that said, yeah, Trump has made some choices for those in their respective positions that could be better.
Liberals have stereotypes that get constant repetition from the Conservative media.
Republicans tend to fit a lot of criteria too. Their actions tend to be more like Ebenezer Scrooge (without the redemption in his story arc) - a rude jerk guy sitting on piles of cash while the world starves around them, they don't give a damn about the little guy.
Republicans are anti-environment these days and are always hatching schemes to gut or out and out destroy the EPA (ironic that a Republican created it!). The party denies climate change, while the world accepts it - the Paris climate accord has every single country (200+) in the world signing the agreement except snowflake Donald Trump wants out. Why? They are completely owned by corporations and they need to keep delivering more so they take it too far, it's not enough that a CEO makes 5000 times a average workers pay they need to also not raise minimum wage, maybe they need to cut it, it's not enough that companies can pollute the air, they need to pollute the water too, they might earn a few more bucks! Gotta have something to show big oil at the next fundraiser, they need a return on their investment!
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2018/03/stars-from-tv-show-smallville-reportedly-involved-in-recruiting-for-horrific-sex-cult.html
https://www.msn.com/en-au/entertainment/celebrity/smallville-actress-set-to-be-arrested-over-ties-to-sex-slave-cult/ar-AAviz1N
"Investigators said Raniere preferred exceptionally thin women, so "slaves" had to stick to very low-calorie diets and document every food they ate.
As punishment for not following orders, women were forced to attend classes where they were made "to wear fake cow udders over their breasts while people called them derogatory names", or threatened with being put in cages, court papers say."
"Parlato reportedly claims Mack started as a slave for the group before eventually becoming a "slave master".
"Her nickname among defectors is ‘Pimp Mack'," Parlato was reported as saying."
What a bananas story. I volunteer to train hospitality workers how to look for signs of human trafficking, so I've heard some weird shit, including someone pimping out minors on a public Facebook page of all places, and another person running a human trafficking ring out of a wealthy suburb in Connecticut. But its never anyone high profile.
This story is almost too crazy to be true, so I wouldn't be shocked to learn that Mack's involvement wasn't as substantial as initially claimed. But damn, this is the weirdest story I've heard all year from Hollywood (including Weinstein). Crazy world we are living in.
This is some crazy Dan Brown, Illuminati, conspiracy theory shiznizzle.
Apparently the cult leader had ties to many people. Richard Branson was a client and Kristen Gillibrand's father was their lobbyist for some time before quitting and returning his 100k paycheck. Roger Stone (big shocker!) was also a lobbyist for them, and so were Justice Richard Mays (a former civil rights activist) and Scott Harshbarger (former Massachusetts Attorney General).
Many of their programs have involved business executives, including the founder of BET and someone from Enron. Given how many "elites" are involved, from business executives to Hollywood stars, I'd expect this to be some loony story you'd find on Infowars, not Newsweek.
I have no issue with this practice. To me, it’s just like joining up to take advantage of the GI Bill. Quid pro quo, they give their bodies and souls to Uncle Sam for a few years and Uncle Sam gives them something in return.
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/wtf/battlestar-galacticas-nicki-clyne-is-a-member-of-the-secretive-dos-cult-that-includes-smallville-star-allison-mack/news-story/9a49c6ef50c6e6ba49b256d401115299
Crazy stuff.
http://time.com/4822417/ted-nugent-hateful-rhetoric-curtis-eboni/
Today, NRA board member Ted Nugent called the student survivors of a terrible Parkland mass shooting 'mushy brained' and said 'They have no soul'
https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2018/03/31/ted-nugent-slams-mushy-brained-parkland-survivors-they-have-no-soul/475554002/
The far-right has gone so overboard in attacking these kids that even if they were making valid criticisms of them, it would be lost in the vitriol and bile they are spewing at them. Photoshopped images being passed off as real, a FOX News host making fun of one of them for not getting accepted to UCLA, the believe among many that they are crisis actors. Just what the hell is a crisis actor?? A teenage child who is kept in a closet until a mass shooting occurs and then is immediately teleported to Florida hours after the shooting occurs?? This is the Alex Jones wing of right-wing politics becoming ascendant. And I'm sorry, but 9/11 Truthers NEVER had the kind of influence on the Democratic Party in the Bush years that the people like Jones, Ingraham and Nugent have. It's the exact reason I was positive even in the early Republican primaries Trump was going to win the nomination. He is the living embodiment of talk radio and FOX News.
The guy on the left stopped showering cleaning his body a month before his physical board for the Vietnam draft and "Then a week before, I stopped going to the bathroom. I did it in my pants. poop, piss the whole shot. My pants got crusted up."
http://gawker.com/5983634/patriotic-american-ted-nugent-shit-his-pants-to-avoid-the-draft
The guy on the right pretended to have bone spurs so he could avoid the Vietnam draft. He got five deferments. In interviews later he couldn't remember which leg or foot he claimed to have the bone spurs in. In interviews with Howard Stern Trump said his personal Vietnam was avoiding STDs while the men were away fighting the war.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/10/22/mccain-hits-trump-where-it-hurts-attacking-bone-spur-deferments-in-vietnam/
As soon as the shoe is on the other foot, you turn around and pretend that Nugent has any influence at all.
And @joluv is entirely correct. For all the talk on the right about wanting celebrities to shut up, they have elected TWO celebrities (meaning people who never would have gone anywhere if they hadn't come from the entertainment world) President since 1980 (one an actor, another a reality TV con-man) and another one Governor of California. I'm mostly of the opinion that you lose the "let's rag on celebrities" card when that is the case.
Ted Nugent should definitely keep talking. God knows threatening the President of the United States on multiple occasions didn't get him in any trouble, so I don't see why he should stop now. You would be correct about Nugent having no influence if any other Republican was in office right now. But there is a very thin-line at this point between the rhetoric of someone like Nugent and the guy occupying the Oval Office. Trump is, as much as he is a student of anything, a student of the way far-right media and punditry works. People don't seem to want to believe this, but Trump absolutely forms his opinions about every issue based on what he sees on FOX News. You can draw a straight line measured in minutes from when some topic is mentioned on the channel and Trump sending out a tweet about it. Trump isn't just a purveyor of propaganda, he is a consumer of it as well.
I think its a travesty how intertwined celebrity and politics are right now. I find it incredibly disappointing that we have a reality TV star as president, especially such a crass one. Trump is a Republican Kardashian.
Also, John Oliver isn't alone. There is Samantha Bee, Trevor Noah, Stephen Colbert, Larry Wilmore, and recently Jimmy Kimmel. They all have one thing in common: they are all left-wing.
Republicans, for all their moaning about celebrity culture., have a pathetic tendency to grasp onto any celebrity who shares their views. Of course this is usually a D-Lister or has been 90s TV star who has nothing to lose by "coming out" as a conservative. That, or their career is already long established like Clint Eastwood. Republicans complaints about celebrities being involved in politics are really just Republican complaints about celebrities being involved in left-wing politics. Yes, but people like Leonardo DiCaprio are on tons of boards of environmental organizations too. The entertainment industry spends tons of money as well, in addition to cultural influence. Harvey Weinstein alone has raised 1.5 million for Democrats, and that's just as an individual. If you want to look at lobbying, it might be worse. My former senator, Chris Dodd, was Hollywood's chief lobyist (Motion Picture Association of America), and they spend 2.6 million... in one year. That's just one organization. At least they spend their money somewhat equally by party, as if that should matter.
Entertainment sells. That's great, and I love entertainment. I also believe in free speech, and hold nothing against celebrities for speaking out (unless they say something truly stupid or act as demagogues). I just wish people didn't take them so seriously. I think you underrate how influential cultural institutions are in politics.
@joluv
I found this. Doesn't sound quite so grim as @booinyoureyes stated, but it's still scary how much they rely on Facebook...
My main problem is news as entertainment, mainly because my fear is that when opinion is expressed through comedy or satire its veracity and persuasiveness is not based on the merits but on how witty or entertaining the presentation is.
I'd also point out, before people accuse me of being bias, that conservatives also engage in this through talk radio and other sources. There is no doubt that people that younger conservatives and yucky alt-rightersare turning to, like Milo Yiannopoulos and Steven Crowder (not equating the two), also benefited from being amusing (though I personally don't find Crowder funny).
Then again, I understand the impulse. Following the news and the policy discussions can be dispiriting, so people of course want to laugh and have fun with it. I don't expect everyone to read Ross Douthat and George Will columns all day (or Kristof and Ezra Klein if you're more liberal), but I do wish that people at least gave serious news a shot. It can actually be entertaining in a different way.
Despite Court Ruling, There's No Certain Science Linking Coffee to Cancer
Might as well put out rulings on cooking meat, eating sugar, use of aluminum in anti-perspirent, flouride, too much this, too much that, etc.
And with that in mind, I'm going to fix myself a cup right now.