StrangeSox Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 But they don't actually do that. They just dump data out there with no regard for curation or protecting anyone. They barely ever done anything useful, and they certainly aren't a journalistic enterprise and more of just a data dump. Plus that still doesn't address them clearly being in the tank for Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 QUOTE (raBBit @ Aug 11, 2016 -> 01:56 PM) All this "reckless" behavior the media talks about is far worth the value they provide in exposing the behavior of the governing elites. It's comical the way the media attacks WikiLeaks for doing ya know, actual journalism. You really think I needed Wikileaks to tell me that the Iraq War was a joke or that the DNC favored Clinton? These are things that anyone could have learned if they wanted to spend an afternoon actually doing their own research. None of them are any better than the other. They all answer to a master, irrespective of who that master is. Asssanage just has a different master, but no one should consider him a "trustworthy" source. Whether he is attacking Republicans, Democrats, etc he has an agenda. And that to me is not real "journalism", that is propaganda. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/669264...src=twsrc%5Etfw https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/717458...src=twsrc%5Etfw So it's just a matter of preference. I prefer my American master to Assanage's Russian masters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 QUOTE (raBBit @ Aug 11, 2016 -> 02:56 PM) All this "reckless" behavior the media talks about is far worth the value they provide in exposing the behavior of the governing elites. It's comical the way the media attacks WikiLeaks for doing ya know, actual journalism. Except WikiLeaks doesn't do, ya know, actual journalism. Unvetted data dumps while acting as a puppet for a country =/= journalism. They're in the same tier as Fox News. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 QUOTE (raBBit @ Aug 11, 2016 -> 05:46 PM) What does Fox News have to do with anything? WikiLeaks makes your candidate look bad so they equal Fox News? MSNBC is just a smidge above the both of them, but barely and only because they don't make Fox News' atrocious charts. But what they all have is massive political agendas and fear mongering depending on who is in power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (raBBit @ Aug 11, 2016 -> 04:46 PM) What does Fox News have to do with anything? WikiLeaks makes your candidate look bad so they equal Fox News? I actually prefer Fox News. At least they dont pretend to be something they arent. Wikileaks pretends that they are unbiased, but if you spend 5 minutes doing some research you will find out who they really are. Do you wonder why Wikileaks attacked the Panama papers? Do you wonder why the Kremlin suggested Assanage be given a nobel prize? Do you wonder why he has/had a show on Russia today a program that is funded by the Kremlin? So lets be fair, Fox News is far more trustworthy than Wikileaks. Edited August 11, 2016 by Soxbadger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 For people who are considering Gary Johnson, what is it about his platform that you find interesting? I know there's going to be a lot of "he's not Trump or Clinton" votes for him this year, so this is more of a question for people who are voting for Johnson because they actually like him rather than protest votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 Socially liberal, smaller government. Also, not Trump or Clinton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Aug 11, 2016 -> 07:17 PM) Socially liberal, smaller government. Also, not Trump or Clinton. Prepare to be beaten down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 I don't particularly which I've explained dozens of times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Aug 11, 2016 -> 08:17 PM) Socially liberal, smaller government. Also, not Trump or Clinton. Basically this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illinilaw08 Posted August 12, 2016 Share Posted August 12, 2016 QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Aug 12, 2016 -> 08:31 AM) Basically this. The Libertarians and the Green Party both have a bunch of nutty policies the further down their platform you get (no income tax, no public education, and no Social Security are big ones from the Libertarians). But I suspect a lot of that is because they are fringe parties and with the small size of the party, the platform can be swayed by the fringe elements. If the Libertarians can use this election to mainstream some of their ideas and really become small government (not no government) and socially liberal party, they might actually find some legitimate traction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Aug 12, 2016 -> 11:14 AM) The Libertarians and the Green Party both have a bunch of nutty policies the further down their platform you get (no income tax, no public education, and no Social Security are big ones from the Libertarians). But I suspect a lot of that is because they are fringe parties and with the small size of the party, the platform can be swayed by the fringe elements. If the Libertarians can use this election to mainstream some of their ideas and really become small government (not no government) and socially liberal party, they might actually find some legitimate traction. They absolutely have a bunch of nutty policies. They are far, far from perfect. But their basic premise of fiscal conservatism and social liberalness align with myself pretty well. They are also competing with two of the worst possible candidates we've ever had, so there's not a high bar for them to surpass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Aug 15, 2016 -> 11:13 AM) They absolutely have a bunch of nutty policies. They are far, far from perfect. But their basic premise of fiscal conservatism and social liberalness align with myself pretty well. They are also competing with two of the worst possible candidates we've ever had, so there's not a high bar for them to surpass. The goal in this election isn't to get one of them elected, it is to bring the two major parties back to the center of the country on their extreme flight to the wings of their respective parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RegionSox Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 I don't see how voting for the Libertarians forces things back to the middle. Bringing back the gold standard and eliminating Social Security and the Department of Education aren't exactly moderate policies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 I 'd like to know more about this brainwashing through academia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 I don't know that I'd count what happened at u of i as being because of the left or liberals, we were generally pissed about it and there was a national movement of academics against that. You can dig through the old dem thread to see similar pattern here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 QUOTE (raBBit @ Aug 15, 2016 -> 01:43 PM) Who was the force behind Salaita's removal? Prominent donors and some of the people in the board. Again the actual academic reaction was widespread disgust and censor from academic bodies of u of i. The political reaction was largely one of support from conservatives as they tend to be strongly pro Israel. Painting that event as an example of liberal oppression is just baffling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 QUOTE (raBBit @ Aug 15, 2016 -> 02:38 PM) I went through it in school. It's very much publicized. It's not an actual brainwashing, but there's a lot of professors who teach you their ideology instead of how to look at an issue, contrasting viewpoints, problem solving, etc. A few recent examples: Harvard has banned a good deal of their prominent conservative alumni. DePaul has banned conservative speakers like Ben Shapiro and Milo Yiannopopolus from coming on campus. U of I took a professor's tenure away for a speaking out against Israel's treatment towards Palestine. Occidental expelled one of their most esteemed students over what an extremist professor deemed rape. Missouri allowed Ben Shapiro and bowed repeatedly towards the conservative government in the state. So, right-wing brainwashing in academia? (Yes, I'm aware that BLM protests led to the stepping down of the system president. My point is that there's not some university-wide Illuminati indoctrinating people.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 Welp, Gary Johnson just Aleppo'd his political career lol. Back to the drawing board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Sep 8, 2016 -> 09:14 AM) Welp, Gary Johnson just Aleppo'd his political career lol. Back to the drawing board. Yeah that's like Syrian Conflict 101 right there. He was trying to downplay it after, but he was pretty embarrassed (as he should be). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 brutal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 8, 2016 -> 09:44 AM) brutal He did own up to the mistake today. Something not many politicians would have done. https://www.yahoo.com/news/gary-johnson-res...-135404310.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Sep 8, 2016 -> 10:13 AM) He did own up to the mistake today. Something not many politicians would have done. https://www.yahoo.com/news/gary-johnson-res...-135404310.html Yeah, but that will never get posted. Only the soundbyte, because that is what the electorate understands. The operatives have their marching orders, and off they go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RegionSox Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 It's good that he admitted he screwed up, but the whole incident shows that he isn't familiar with the Syrian Crisis at all. I think any candidate should know the rudimentary basic facts of such a major issue by this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 8, 2016 -> 11:41 AM) Yeah, but that will never get posted. Only the soundbyte, because that is what the electorate understands. The operatives have their marching orders, and off they go. He literally just posted it lol. What trends online isn't what the media decides, it's us. If an article about a terrorist attack in Europe gets 100k shares on Facebook, but an article from the same media outlet discussing a terrorist attack in Nigeria or Lebanon only gets 400 shares, which one's getting put on the front page? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts