I turned on the radio and heard Spicer raving. For a short time I thought it was the sports guy, Bulldog, from Frasier. The Indianapolis accent and the angry attitude are identical….
I’ve posted the article linked below before, but it really is worth a read for the insight into how the brain processes lies. With our own election coming up, it highlights things to watch out for.
For instance, I’ve been one of the louder people here arguing for Clinton. One of the big negatives for Clinton is she still wore the stains of 25 years of smears, and I was well aware of that through living in the US for most of the 90s. But even for me, mentioning “Whitewater” first caused a strong feeling of vague negativity towards Clinton, before the thinking kicked in and I remembered that there were several independent investigations culminating in Ken Starr’s multi-year multi-million dollar inquisition into every aspect of the Clintons’ lives that found nothing worse than Monica and no misconduct whatsoever on Hillary’s part.
RT are no more believable than Fox. Assange released Russian hacked Hillary files. Facebook set up 250 fake news sites in Macedonia. Breibart offshoots many of them. Of course your happy focusing on Clinton who is a nobody now. We have a white racist supremacist in charge now and your focussed on fake news from the past.
And what about Matt Taibi, political editor for Rolling Stone, that they interview? Or Jesse Ventura’s kid who is on that panel, is he a Russian agent now as well?
Actually, RT is more believable than Fox, or any of the American networks. There are real debates on RT, about serious issues.
RT is also more rigorous and fair than either Al Jazeera or the BBC. I have never seen a political smear and ambush like this on RT, although this sort of thing used to happen in the Soviet Union during the Great Terror….
Yes definitely. Also the establishment is more nuanced than just that.
It is a carrot and stick approach. If you are co-operative, you will get access to sources, early notification of breaking stories, supporting materials, trips, scholarships, promotions, recognition, etc.
Which admittedly sounds a whole lot better than being an outsider frozen out of career advancement and reporting on the local weather at a regional station for the rest of your life.
The “Crooked Hillary” lie certainly got established frighteningly quickly and even when many people know Trump lies constantly they somehow seem to give him a free pass while seeing her as shady.
Of course we also need to be vigilant here. Key lied a lot, although not in the same pointless, bizarre way as Trump. His lies around the Dirty Politics issues certainly won through despite all evidence. English spins and denies: if he presents us with “alternative truths” then we need to find ways to call him out and present an alternative viewpoint without simply being responsive. If we set the agenda we have the advantage of the initiative.
Unfortunately, Hillary Clinton WAS crooked, and depraved.
Having said that, there is no doubt Trump is far worse than her, and his cabinet of horrors makes Obama’s, even with the likes of Rahm Emmanuel in it, look like this…
…there were several independent investigations culminating in Ken Starr’s multi-year multi-million dollar inquisition into every aspect of the Clintons’ lives that found nothing worse than Monica and no misconduct whatsoever on Hillary’s part.
And you’ve got a clip of her being mean about Gadaffi. Do you actually think about what you’re posting before you post it?
You haven’t touched on how the “Crooked Hillary” smear stuck, while a lot of people stuck to their delusion that the Chump “tells it like it is”. Despite all objective checking showing that Clinton was unusually honest for a politician and the Chump was extraordinarily dishonest.
But you go on believing she was merely laughing at the clean, painless, bloodless murder of a helpless man by her jihadist allies if that makes you feel better. I’m happy to give her the benefit of the doubt, even though I, like you, am sure she knew exactly what Gaddafi had suffered.
I thought it was utterly hypocritical for Trump, of all people, to call Hillary Clinton crooked. But that doesn’t mean she’s beyond criticism.
She was indeed up to her eyeballs in corruption. That’s not a Trump “alternative fact”, it’s a hard, absolute, irrefutable, Cartesian reality………
Morrisey, The Intercept is hardly a non-partisan “irrefutable” source. But, even if Clinton was pro-fracking (and I don’t know one way or the other), she’d still be a damn sight better than the lying, self-aggrandising, racist, misogynistic bully boy Trump and his band of swamp dwellers.
The Intercept is hardly a non-partisan “irrefutable” source.
Glenn Greenwald has, on several occasions, eloquently laid waste to the spurious notion of “balance” that has reduced the mainstream media to the shameful condition in which it is now. So, you’re correct, the Interceptcertainly does have a bias: for the truth, and against government spin. That means it has refused to turn a blind eye to the Obama administration’s crimes, and that’s why it’s infuriated the DNC—just recently John Dean urged the intelligence services to find a link between the Putin regime and the Intercept.
But, even if Clinton was pro-fracking (and I don’t know one way or the other)
Yes, you do know now, since you’ve had the chance to read that outstanding investigative piece by Lee Fang.
I’m interested to see you put the word irrefutable in sarcastic scare quotes, obviously so as to suggest the journalism at that outstanding site is dodgy or unreliable. To strengthen your case, perhaps you would like to cite an example of less than professional journalism by any journalist at theIntercept.
I dunno about “feeling better” about it, but it was a brief spur-of-the-moment reaction between interviews, so hardly a moment for a considered thought. Also, Gaddafi had the same position in 90s American public consciousness as bin Laden did in the noughties. So she would have had a “finally got rid of that problem” moment, even if it was still unconfirmed.
Frankly, the considered public gloating about bin Laden’s extra-judicial execution bothers me a lot more. Particularly given The Intercept’s recent piece about the crimes of Seal Team 6.
So Clinton put spin on her previously unpublicised promotion of fracking? Show me the top levels of any large organisation that doesn’t do that kind of thing routinely. It doesn’t mark her as “crooked”, particularly when measured on the politician’s scale.
So Clinton put spin on her previously unpublicised promotion of fracking? Show me the top levels of any large organisation that doesn’t do that kind of thing routinely. It doesn’t mark her as “crooked”, particularly when measured on the politician’s scale.
Fair comment, my friend.
Also, Gaddafi had the same position in 90s American public consciousness as bin Laden did in the noughties.
Gaddafi was demonized by the American political elite, just as they demonized Nelson Mandela during his long imprisonment. And I doubt many of the “American public” actually spent even half a minute actually educating themselves about Libya’s painful history. Irrespective of that, however, the sight of a privileged and powerful politician laughing at the fate of one of her targets remains profoundly disturbing to me.
Frankly, the considered public gloating about bin Laden’s extra-judicial execution bothers me a lot more.
Me too.
Particularly given The Intercept’s recent piece about the crimes of Seal Team 6.
In May 2011, Noelle McCarthy conducted a groveling interview with one of those bastards….
NOELLE McCARTHY: What kind of missions have you been on?
STEPHEN TEMPLIN: Well, the big one was Grenada. Everybody wanted a piece of Grenada!
NOELLE McCARTHY: Mmmm hmmmm….
STEPHEN TEMPLIN: Then there was Panama! And there’s a lot of problems with pirates in Somalia. Seal Team Six took down the pirates on that boat in Somalia…
Again with the confident assertions that should actually have the word “alleged” somewhere in the sentence. Feel free to substantiate any of this blather.
No doubt, but “alleged by Robert Fisk” isn’t any different from “alleged” in practical terms. Also: you might want to Google the terms ‘logical fallacy argument from authority.’
Yeah sorry my numbers were off. Out of the 18% of voters who didn’t like either Clinton or Trump, they broke for Trump by just 20 points over Hillary Clinton.
No surprises their considering the interference by the FBI. Assanges vendetta with Obama with hacked Hillary emails. Putin wants a weak Europe and a divided US. He has achieved both.
Just found this. CNN says that the 14% of voters who they describe as being “disillusioned” with both candidates broke for Trump by a full 69% to 15%. That’s a more than 50% margin.
Politics is always for dummies,hence one should not expect the best from politicians as Popper suggested quite convincingly ,
“I am inclined to think that rulers have rarely been above the average, either morally or intellectually, and often below it. And I think that it is reasonable to adopt, in politics, the principle of preparing for the worst, as well as we can, though we should, of course, at the same time try to obtain the best. It appears to me madness to base all our political efforts upon the faint hope that we shall be successful in obtaining excellent, or even competent, rulers.
Well i have a theory For many election cycles the game has been to make people choose “least worse” this works to maintain the duopoly , people are scared of losing their vote
but the end point of such strategem is when the public is presented with two choices who are not just “least worse” but both completely unacceptable. At that point they (the ones who still vote) will choose the least predictable evil….. trump
The same Clinton who let Donna Brazile hold her post as Vice DNC chair, after she was fired from CNN for giving the debate questions to Clinton, and yes let her hold that post into the election, when one of the main concerns in the US public’s mind was cronyism? WTF! http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/10/cnn-severs-ties-with-donna-brazile-230534
The same Hillary Clinton who wouldn’t allow Nina Turner to speak at the DNC Convention, as some type of ritualistic punishment? and thus alienate millions of Democrat voters. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RuVQp3XytM
I could go on and on, but the proof is in the pudding, Clinton lost the election to the most unpopular presidential candidate in US history.
Your Clinton, the DNC along with MSM are almost solely responsible for Trump, that’s it, end of story…wouldn’t you think a little self reflection would be in order about now?
Adrian, I’ve said many many times that I would have much preferred Bernie to Hillary. For that matter, I preferred O’Malley or many many other Dems. If a vote for Stein would have had the effect of giving her any leverage (rather than just helping Trump), there’s no question that’s what I would have done. Have you got sufficient mental flexibility to finally take that on board?
The time for pushing an alternative to Clinton was during the primary. But once Clinton became the nominee, there’s the unpalatable task of choosing which candidate with a chance of winning would be the least damaging. You seem to be unable to front up to task like that, clinging instead to some kind of conspiracy fantasy.
Meanwhile, my post was about the effects of repeated flagrant lying … but somehow just mentioning Clinton seems to send you and CV and Morrissey into a blind frothing rage.
Sorry if I came on a bit to strong, but I regard the Clinton’s and the DNC and their neo liberal ideological project as a root cause of this disaster, so talking about her, even retrospectively, winds me up, deep breaths…deep breaths.
BTW, MSM have indulged in some pretty hard core alternative truth telling, and straight out propaganda on behalf of the Democrats over the past 12 months and especially in the last 3-4 months, so they can’t have it both ways.
Assange released Russian hacked Hillary files.
Facebook set up 250 fake news sites in Macedonia.
Breibart offshoots many of them.
Of course your happy focusing on Clinton who is a nobody now.
We have a white racist supremacist in charge now and your focussed on fake news from the past.
Your becoming a bore who thinks he knows everything not unlike Twitlers.
Assanges vendetta with Obama with hacked Hillary emails.
Putin wants a weak Europe and a divided US.
He has achieved both.
NOPE
For many election cycles the game has been to make people choose “least worse” this works to maintain the duopoly , people are scared of losing their vote
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/25/us/politics/debbie-wasserman-schultz-dnc-wikileaks-emails.html?_r=0
http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/10/cnn-severs-ties-with-donna-brazile-230534
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RuVQp3XytM