fonewear said: »
We have a strategy here at the White House it's called: Let Hilliary deal with the mess I created.
Pretty sure that's been White House standard since about l963.
"Let the next poor sot deal with it."
Random Politics & Religion #00
|
Random Politics & Religion #00
Pretty sure that's been White House standard since about l963. "Let the next poor sot deal with it."
[+]
Leviathan.Chaosx said: » Jetackuu said: » Leviathan.Chaosx said: » Obama could have easily decided to not withdraw or keep a certain number of troops there (as was discussed), rather than trying to take credit for ending involvement in Iraq. He can tell the troops what to do, doesn't mean it's legal under international law. You know, kind of like how Putin is violating international law by annexing part of a Sovereign nation, and using force to do it. Two completely different situations. Welp, Vic has made his decree. Conversation's over guys.
[+]
Has anyone noticed a trend in news articles where they give commentary on an event without actually saying what happened? I feel like I'm jumping in on the middle of a conversation more and more and I can't tell if it's just crappy journalism or not.
[+]
Personally, I could be convinced to drill more here temporarily to cut our reliance on foreign oil as we ween ourselves off of oil in almost entirety over the next few decades, as long as there's the proper R&D into doing just that and not just senselessly drilling for every last drop until we're out of options.
Then just let the damn fanatics in the desert handle their own situations. Bahamut.Ravael said: » Has anyone noticed a trend in news articles where they give commentary on an event without actually saying what happened? I feel like I'm jumping in on the middle of a conversation more and more and I can't tell if it's just crappy journalism or not. No facts, just feels.
[+]
Americans loathe reading. It might interrupt that Bud Light and Pizza Hut combo that's all the rage.
[+]
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » Americans loathe reading. It might interrupt that Bud Light and Pizza Hut combo that's all the rage. Well, you can't say stuff like that without getting me curious as to how true it is, lol. I did find this interesting map, but I dunno how accurate it is. I'm being snarky to some extent but the reality is that with the amount of information Western audiences are inundated with, the likelihood of reading long tracts of information diminishes with each passing day.
Hence the era of zingers and sound bytes. It's a backhanded slap to the West but also the consequences of having so much to take in, we're mentally exhausted. Good in one way as it broadens your knowledge base (jack of all trades, master of none) but it makes for shallow understanding. Things like Dostoyevsky and Plato are essentially so tl;dr at this point, we're missing out on the essence of critical thinking - which is to actually *read* ***.
[+]
It doesn't help that our leaders are essentially promoting stupidity and cultivating a nation of fools.
Being smart? Getting a quality education? That's terrible. Go do something more productive like flash your *** or *** somewhere. Preferably in a grainy sex tape you made while drunk on those Bud Lights. Bahamut.Ravael said: » Has anyone noticed a trend in news articles where they give commentary on an event without actually saying what happened? I feel like I'm jumping in on the middle of a conversation more and more and I can't tell if it's just crappy journalism or not. I loathe commercial news outlets. They are more focused on viewer retention and ratings than journalism because they are bound to their advertisers. It's driven news into soundbites and commentary rather than reporting facts. Facts are boring, people would rather watch Star Trek reruns, and that's the big problem with the information age. With such a quantity of information, nobody seems to care if it's true or not.
[+]
Odin.Jassik said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » Has anyone noticed a trend in news articles where they give commentary on an event without actually saying what happened? I feel like I'm jumping in on the middle of a conversation more and more and I can't tell if it's just crappy journalism or not. I loathe commercial news outlets. The are more focused on viewer retention and ratings than journalism because they are bound to their advertisers. It's driven news into soundbites and commentary rather than reporting facts. Facts are boring, people would rather watch Star Trek reruns, and that's the big problem with the information age. With such a quantity of information, nobody seems to care if it's true or not. Heck, even sports articles are becoming a problem. I stumbled upon a baseball article that sounded interesting (weird, I know). I was reading about why a particular player reacted the way he did to a particular thing in a particular game that I obviously didn't see, only to realize that nowhere did the article mention what the event was that caused the player to react in the first place. Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » It doesn't help that our leaders are essentially promoting stupidity and cultivating a nation of fools. This is, incidentally, probably the source of a lot of the militant liberalism that some folks rail so hard against. It's like you've now got two entire generations that were raised to learn everything they could, to grow, to take in technology, to pursue excellence in their chosen fields... ... ... ...and now it's expected for them to go back to...what? Being mindless unskilled workers for whatever wages are offered and to just take everything they're told by anyone "in authority" (that is with power, money, or both) over them at face value? You can't feed everyone a company or party line anymore and expect them to blindly believe it. Some will. But many, many won't. And when people get too vehement about their own given cause (feminists, MRAs, the "gay mafia", Westboro, whatever) and the sides just become more and more dug in and not even standing FOR their own beliefs as much as standing AGAINST someone else's. Bahamut.Ravael said: » Odin.Jassik said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » Has anyone noticed a trend in news articles where they give commentary on an event without actually saying what happened? I feel like I'm jumping in on the middle of a conversation more and more and I can't tell if it's just crappy journalism or not. I loathe commercial news outlets. The are more focused on viewer retention and ratings than journalism because they are bound to their advertisers. It's driven news into soundbites and commentary rather than reporting facts. Facts are boring, people would rather watch Star Trek reruns, and that's the big problem with the information age. With such a quantity of information, nobody seems to care if it's true or not. Heck, even sports articles are becoming a problem. I stumbled upon a baseball article that sounded interesting (weird, I know). I was reading about why a particular player reacted the way he did to a particular thing in a particular game that I obviously didn't see, only to realize that nowhere did the article mention what the event was that caused the player to react in the first place. To some extent this is justified, if not entirely appropriate. To me this is indicative of an author of a print media outlet who knows that people don't want to read what happened; they already saw it live or on Sportscenter or whatever and aren't looking for news of the event, but a deeper look into the event. Personally, I would still give an intro about what actually happened, but... Odin.Jassik said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » Has anyone noticed a trend in news articles where they give commentary on an event without actually saying what happened? I feel like I'm jumping in on the middle of a conversation more and more and I can't tell if it's just crappy journalism or not. I loathe commercial news outlets. They are more focused on viewer retention and ratings than journalism because they are bound to their advertisers. It's driven news into soundbites and commentary rather than reporting facts. Facts are boring, people would rather watch Star Trek reruns, and that's the big problem with the information age. With such a quantity of information, nobody seems to care if it's true or not. I'd much rather watch an episode of TNG for the 50th time than listen to how I'm an awful steward of the planet (which I am not). With ratings on CNN and MSNBC the way they are, it does not look like im the only one. It's so bad for them that they've had to resort to almost tabloid measures to keep people watching. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Odin.Jassik said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » Has anyone noticed a trend in news articles where they give commentary on an event without actually saying what happened? I feel like I'm jumping in on the middle of a conversation more and more and I can't tell if it's just crappy journalism or not. I loathe commercial news outlets. They are more focused on viewer retention and ratings than journalism because they are bound to their advertisers. It's driven news into soundbites and commentary rather than reporting facts. Facts are boring, people would rather watch Star Trek reruns, and that's the big problem with the information age. With such a quantity of information, nobody seems to care if it's true or not. I'd much rather watch an episode of TNG for the 50th time than listen to how I'm an awful steward of the planet (which I am not). With ratings on CNN and MSNBC the way they are, it does not look like im the only one. It's so bad for them that they've had to resort to almost tabloid measures to keep people watching. Well, it might be interesting to see if they change their entire approach just to stay alive. You know, like MTV, TLC, and others whose programming doesn't even resemble what it started out as. Bahamut.Ravael said: » You know, like MTV, TLC, and others whose programming doesn't even resemble what it started out as. What blows my mind is that people watch them now. I understood under their original pretense... Ragnarok.Nausi said: » I'd much rather watch an episode of TNG for the 50th time than listen to how I'm an awful steward of the planet (which I am not). With ratings on CNN and MSNBC the way they are, it does not look like im the only one. It's so bad for them that they've had to resort to almost tabloid measures to keep people watching. I'm with you entirely. Couldn't tell you the last time I watched news on television. I check a few sources for major events and most glaze over for headlines and direct quotes, as the spin language is grating at best. And besides, TNG? I can watch Up the Long Ladder over and over just for Rosalyn Landor. (...yes, I know the episode name and the obscure actress who played her. I'd say don't judge me, but I don't really give a damn.) Hey
Vox magazine is apparently the central hub for PC-disgustingness. My favorite part: "You can think of the push to drop "guys" as political correctness run amok, or you can think of it as making a tiny change that doesn't cost you anything and will keep you from being a jerk to half the population — and help you make the world just a tiny bit more fair. " See if you drop "guys" as accepted lexicon, you can get some good feelz!
[+]
Quote: A measure allowing some court officials to refuse to perform gay marriage responsibilities because of their religious beliefs became law in North Carolina on Thursday, but opponents said litigation challenging the new measure was likely to come soon. The state House voted Thursday to override Republican Gov. Pat McCrory's veto of the bill, making the law effective immediately. The Senate voted to override last week. North Carolina becomes the second state with such an exemption for court officials. Utah passed a similar one earlier this year. The new law means some register of deeds workers who assemble licenses and magistrates to solemnize civil marriages can decide to stop performing all marriages if they hold a "sincerely held religious objection." The best news is essentially public sources like PBS or BBC or Al Jazeera or the internet sources doing real news, rather than endless fluff pieces.
For all the free market worship, mainstream news proves that a monetary focus is a great way to ***everything up and dumb everything down. Now back to Don Lemon and black hole MH370. No, I'm never going to let that gem of human stupidity go.
[+]
TNG is nothing but endless morality tales but the show did a great job of never seeming too in bed with a political ideology. Season 1 is an abortion though.
I've seen TNG called communist, fascist, liberal and libertarian. Personally I feel it depends on the writers and that all answers are acceptable. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Hey Vox magazine is apparently the central hub for PC-disgustingness. Consider that in a language such as mine, italian, all words are gendered and there's nothing else you can use. So what do we do here, stop talking? Ragnarok.Nausi said: » saying "hey you guys" is sexist and it's a big problem.[/url] YouTube Video Placeholder Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Hey Vox magazine is apparently the central hub for PC-disgustingness. My favorite part: "You can think of the push to drop "guys" as political correctness run amok, or you can think of it as making a tiny change that doesn't cost you anything and will keep you from being a jerk to half the population — and help you make the world just a tiny bit more fair. " See if you drop "guys" as accepted lexicon, you can get some good feelz! Quote: Friends Folks Everyone Colleagues Gang Team Y'all Guys and girls Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » TNG is nothing but endless morality tales but the show did a great job of never seeming too in bed with a political ideology. Season 1 is an abortion though. I've seen TNG called communist, fascist, liberal and libertarian. Personally I feel it depends on the writers and that all answers are acceptable. Oh, future earth is entirely a make believe communist utopia.
[+]
Regardless, my faith in humanity will always be tainted so long as TMZ remains in business. The mere fact that there are enough people reading/watching to sustain its existence is very troubling to me.
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Hey Vox magazine is apparently the central hub for PC-disgustingness. My favorite part: "You can think of the push to drop "guys" as political correctness run amok, or you can think of it as making a tiny change that doesn't cost you anything and will keep you from being a jerk to half the population — and help you make the world just a tiny bit more fair. " See if you drop "guys" as accepted lexicon, you can get some good feelz! Guys is a neutral term much like ya'll. If you're at the point where you're slicing up how to properly address people without coming off as 'offensive' to this extent it's time to pack it in and masturbate for a few hours.
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Hey Vox magazine is apparently the central hub for PC-disgustingness. My favorite part: "You can think of the push to drop "guys" as political correctness run amok, or you can think of it as making a tiny change that doesn't cost you anything and will keep you from being a jerk to half the population — and help you make the world just a tiny bit more fair. " See if you drop "guys" as accepted lexicon, you can get some good feelz! Oddly, I've always felt saying "hey you guys" when there are women present, but that's more a cognitive dissonance thing than a PC thing. But I'm also of enough redneck stock that I don't feel too ashamed at throwing a "you all" or "y'all" out as needed. Leviathan.Chaosx said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Hey Vox magazine is apparently the central hub for PC-disgustingness. My favorite part: "You can think of the push to drop "guys" as political correctness run amok, or you can think of it as making a tiny change that doesn't cost you anything and will keep you from being a jerk to half the population — and help you make the world just a tiny bit more fair. " See if you drop "guys" as accepted lexicon, you can get some good feelz! Quote: Friends Folks Everyone Colleagues Gang Team Y'all Guys and girls Can't we just accept that when people use this particular form of vernacular (guys), it adopts a neutered context? As for gang being racist, the masters of PC, are the only ones allowed to prioritize the protected classes. Isn't "guys and girls" just as sexist? Leviathan.Chaosx said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Hey Vox magazine is apparently the central hub for PC-disgustingness. My favorite part: "You can think of the push to drop "guys" as political correctness run amok, or you can think of it as making a tiny change that doesn't cost you anything and will keep you from being a jerk to half the population — and help you make the world just a tiny bit more fair. " See if you drop "guys" as accepted lexicon, you can get some good feelz! Quote: Friends Folks Everyone Colleagues Gang Team Y'all Guys and girls I don't know about racist, but saying "Hey gang!" has a very whitebread 50s Howdy-Doody feel to it for me.
[+]
|
All FFXIV and FFXI content and images © 2002-2025 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD.
FINAL FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.