Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

The History Channel

Page 3 of 4 [ 62 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

10 Sep 2010, 10:17 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
sartresue wrote:
Redneck channel topic

I can see it now...Billy Joe McAllister jumping off the Tallahassee Bridge, the Ozark Mountain Daredevils and Jackie Blue, Family Fueds, Arnold the pig and Green Acres, Flatt and Scruggs and HeeHaw, and the Beverly Hillbillies thrown in to what AngelRho proposed. :P

And do not forget the KKK, and burning the Qu'ran :roll:

24 hour Good Ol'Boys Network.


That already exists: it's called Fox News.


What's the current opposite to Fox News? I haven't watched broadcast or cable television consistently (with the exception of occasionally watching an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation if my wife and I happen to be awake at 11pm and otherwise not busy, or the local weather channels when there are tornadoes happening around us) for about nearly a decade. When I lived in a motel while working for Wal-Fart back in 2007, I had the chance to watch television again and such shows as Mythbusters, Future Weapons, Stargate Atlantis, Star Trek Enterprise, and such other shows that I hadn't know existed until then. However, it's easy enough to find them on Amazon (and even YouTube occasionally) so I have no need to bother with scheduling my life around the schedule of networks. But back to the point, that is that I don't know which news network is currently the most anti-conservative mouthpiece of Democrats. Fox is treated like the mouthpiece of the Republican party, which they may or may not be depending upon the currently practiced ideologies of Republicans in power of the official Republican party. But which is the current outlet of anti-conservative rhetoric? It also needs to be lampooned if such is to be done for its opposite.


Fox News tends to be big on rhetoric over reporting facts and loves to cover those one-off stories about the man who jumped off a bridge on a dare or the like (the fluff/"human interest" stories).

The interesting dynamic is that Fox News has done a very effective job at setting the tone and pace of "news reporting". Almost like as if CNN watches Fox News and changes the spin but still report from what Fox News has said despite that not everything Fox News reports is anywhere near accurate or true. Take that recent NAACP video clip, for example; Fox News ran it first then everyone else essentially ran with Fox News' story rather than actually doing the necessary research on it. Same with ACORN.

But yeah, when they're not reporting false news, they tend to do the wacky human interest stories.


Hey, what if their news wasn't false? How would you like to live in the world they portray?


It's not much better than the actual world we live in. The only problem is that they side with giving too much power to corporations and certain religious sects and work for denying rights for the individual but use effective rhetoric to appeal to those workers who are being harmed by the policies they support.

It's interesting how one can use the right rhetoric to sell things to people who don't stand to benefit from such policies. Fox News would be happy if our economy was more like China's in terms of workers' rights and benefits...or in other words, if a Foxconn factory existed here in the capacity it does in China, they'd say it was a good thing and praise the workers and continue the empty rhetoric of praising such abusive work conditions and requirements.


So, is it more the policies they advocate which such rather than the truth of falseness of the rhetoric which they employ to conclude improper measures?


My problem is that the rhetoric is false and the policies don't benefit me. They appeal to workers/working class but the masters they serve are against workers rights. Republicans want to take away overtime and have already made it easier for companies to deny overtime pay to workers. I don't know what you make but if it's less than $90k/yr then you would be better served with a more liberal head (with the understanding that they'd actually enact liberal policies...Obama's actually been enacting a lot of moderate republican policy more than any actual liberal policy)


_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson


greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

10 Sep 2010, 10:31 am

skafather84 wrote:
My problem is that the rhetoric is false and the policies don't benefit me. They appeal to workers/working class but the masters they serve are against workers rights. Republicans want to take away overtime and have already made it easier for companies to deny overtime pay to workers. I don't know what you make but if it's less than $90k/yr then you would be better served with a more liberal head (with the understanding that they'd actually enact liberal policies...Obama's actually been enacting a lot of moderate republican policy more than any actual liberal policy)

In which case, iamnotaparakeet should turn liberal.


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

10 Sep 2010, 8:05 pm

skafather84 wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
So, is it more the policies they advocate which such rather than the truth of falseness of the rhetoric which they employ to conclude improper measures?


My problem is that the rhetoric is false and the policies don't benefit me. They appeal to workers/working class but the masters they serve are against workers rights. Republicans want to take away overtime and have already made it easier for companies to deny overtime pay to workers. I don't know what you make but if it's less than $90k/yr then you would be better served with a more liberal head (with the understanding that they'd actually enact liberal policies...Obama's actually been enacting a lot of moderate republican policy more than any actual liberal policy)


Actually, I'm just an unemployed student. Studying accounting at a college which has a contract for developing crap textbooks by the lowest bidder though, which I'm not thrilled beyond words about... However, isn't what you said similar to Pascal's wager? Pascal's wager has been called an "argument by consequences" and I think that suggesting the adoption of current American liberality on the basis of beneficial consequences is just the same type of argumentation. Or am I wrong about this, and how so?



oscuria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,748

10 Sep 2010, 9:11 pm

Image


_________________
sticks and stones may kill you.


skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

10 Sep 2010, 9:18 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
So, is it more the policies they advocate which such rather than the truth of falseness of the rhetoric which they employ to conclude improper measures?


My problem is that the rhetoric is false and the policies don't benefit me. They appeal to workers/working class but the masters they serve are against workers rights. Republicans want to take away overtime and have already made it easier for companies to deny overtime pay to workers. I don't know what you make but if it's less than $90k/yr then you would be better served with a more liberal head (with the understanding that they'd actually enact liberal policies...Obama's actually been enacting a lot of moderate republican policy more than any actual liberal policy)


Actually, I'm just an unemployed student. Studying accounting at a college which has a contract for developing crap textbooks by the lowest bidder though, which I'm not thrilled beyond words about... However, isn't what you said similar to Pascal's wager? Pascal's wager has been called an "argument by consequences" and I think that suggesting the adoption of current American liberality on the basis of beneficial consequences is just the same type of argumentation. Or am I wrong about this, and how so?


Could you explain that position a little better because, to me, it sorta sounds like a jump in logic. Also, I'm not a very big fan of American liberality mainly because it's ineffective. I like what they do in Finland better (and I would move there if I had a legitimate opportunity).


_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson


skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

10 Sep 2010, 9:19 pm

oscuria wrote:
Image


I could never smoke a bowl with that guy because his hair would just absolutely freak me out for the duration of the time I was high.


_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

10 Sep 2010, 9:26 pm

skafather84 wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
So, is it more the policies they advocate which such rather than the truth of falseness of the rhetoric which they employ to conclude improper measures?


My problem is that the rhetoric is false and the policies don't benefit me. They appeal to workers/working class but the masters they serve are against workers rights. Republicans want to take away overtime and have already made it easier for companies to deny overtime pay to workers. I don't know what you make but if it's less than $90k/yr then you would be better served with a more liberal head (with the understanding that they'd actually enact liberal policies...Obama's actually been enacting a lot of moderate republican policy more than any actual liberal policy)


Actually, I'm just an unemployed student. Studying accounting at a college which has a contract for developing crap textbooks by the lowest bidder though, which I'm not thrilled beyond words about... However, isn't what you said similar to Pascal's wager? Pascal's wager has been called an "argument by consequences" and I think that suggesting the adoption of current American liberality on the basis of beneficial consequences is just the same type of argumentation. Or am I wrong about this, and how so?


Could you explain that position a little better because, to me, it sorta sounds like a jump in logic. Also, I'm not a very big fan of American liberality mainly because it's ineffective. I like what they do in Finland better (and I would move there if I had a legitimate opportunity).


It's on wikipedia where a claim that Pascal's Wager is a form of "argument by consequences". Basically, Pascal's Wager was that if atheism were true, there would be no heaven or hell just nothingness, but if Christianity were true, then heaven and hell would exist rather than mere nothingness. It's what many preacher's mock as the "fire insurance gospel" and many atheists mock since it only considered two options.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

10 Sep 2010, 9:30 pm

skafather84 wrote:
oscuria wrote:
Image


I could never smoke a bowl with that guy because his hair would just absolutely freak me out for the duration of the time I was high.


If I were to trim my beard down a couple of inches I might look like that guy. :P



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

10 Sep 2010, 9:51 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
So, is it more the policies they advocate which such rather than the truth of falseness of the rhetoric which they employ to conclude improper measures?


My problem is that the rhetoric is false and the policies don't benefit me. They appeal to workers/working class but the masters they serve are against workers rights. Republicans want to take away overtime and have already made it easier for companies to deny overtime pay to workers. I don't know what you make but if it's less than $90k/yr then you would be better served with a more liberal head (with the understanding that they'd actually enact liberal policies...Obama's actually been enacting a lot of moderate republican policy more than any actual liberal policy)


Actually, I'm just an unemployed student. Studying accounting at a college which has a contract for developing crap textbooks by the lowest bidder though, which I'm not thrilled beyond words about... However, isn't what you said similar to Pascal's wager? Pascal's wager has been called an "argument by consequences" and I think that suggesting the adoption of current American liberality on the basis of beneficial consequences is just the same type of argumentation. Or am I wrong about this, and how so?


Could you explain that position a little better because, to me, it sorta sounds like a jump in logic. Also, I'm not a very big fan of American liberality mainly because it's ineffective. I like what they do in Finland better (and I would move there if I had a legitimate opportunity).


It's on wikipedia where a claim that Pascal's Wager is a form of "argument by consequences". Basically, Pascal's Wager was that if atheism were true, there would be no heaven or hell just nothingness, but if Christianity were true, then heaven and hell would exist rather than mere nothingness. It's what many preacher's mock as the "fire insurance gospel" and many atheists mock since it only considered two options.



So what you're saying is that I'm falling short in only expressing two sides? I mean my own beliefs are pretty nuanced and straddle back and forth between where I think government belongs and absolutely doesn't belong or where government is wrong in implementation of "help" versus what I think could actually help (I'm not a big fan of infantilizing adults). Is the american left wrong on stuff? Absolutely wrong on some stuff but considering my position as a lower-end worker, I'd rather the left side than the right side's laissez faire approach or, even worse, settling matters through private arbitration (which distinctly puts the individual at a disadvantage with complaints against a company).


_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson


skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

10 Sep 2010, 9:52 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
oscuria wrote:
Image


I could never smoke a bowl with that guy because his hair would just absolutely freak me out for the duration of the time I was high.


If I were to trim my beard down a couple of inches I might look like that guy. :P


You've got your hair feathered straight up on all sides like a peacock Doc Brown?


_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson


greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

10 Sep 2010, 10:13 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
oscuria wrote:
Image


I could never smoke a bowl with that guy because his hair would just absolutely freak me out for the duration of the time I was high.


If I were to trim my beard down a couple of inches I might look like that guy. :P

I see the resemblence :P


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

11 Sep 2010, 8:14 am

oscuria wrote:
Image


Who or what is THAT????????

ruveyn



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

11 Sep 2010, 1:55 pm

ruveyn wrote:
oscuria wrote:
Image


Who or what is THAT????????

ruveyn


Obviously someone preaching the truth on History Channel about how Nazis working with the UFO aliens are a sign of the coming apocalypse as predicted by the bible and nostradamus.


_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

11 Sep 2010, 2:10 pm

skafather84 wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
oscuria wrote:
Image


Who or what is THAT????????

ruveyn


Obviously someone preaching the truth on History Channel about how Nazis working with the UFO aliens are a sign of the coming apocalypse as predicted by the bible and nostradamus.


It looks more like a set up photo from a pseudo article of the Onion.



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

11 Sep 2010, 2:19 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
oscuria wrote:
Image


Who or what is THAT????????

ruveyn


Obviously someone preaching the truth on History Channel about how Nazis working with the UFO aliens are a sign of the coming apocalypse as predicted by the bible and nostradamus.


It looks more like a set up photo from a pseudo article of the Onion.


http://www.legendarytimes.com/giorgio/


_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson


greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

11 Sep 2010, 7:34 pm

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nL7zugVZx3o[/youtube]

He is actually a regular in the show Ancient Aliens.


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?