Bowling Green Massacre

[Fiddlewick]

Another poorly worded defense for white supremacists and other troll-y neck-beard opinions on the world and people that they know nothing about. This is why you don't see them out in public using their own name to help rally for their "free speech", they are trolling, and they are cowards who hide behind their anonymity because they are too weak to rebut their opinions in real life.

He told you that he disagreed with those people though, or is he lying just so he can get that evil opinion out about everyone being allowed to say what they want, no matter how unpopular it is. Social media is a good thing for voicing one's opinion.
And thinking that people should be allowed to speak their mind without being silenced does not remind me of something a white supremacist would support.

[Tinykong]

I'll never forget that day. I had just come from the bank, after earning my first billion, when I heard it on the news.

[Machismo]

As much as I disagree with those people, I can't help but look at this as censorship. Censorship does not address the root causes of any problem. They probably broke the terms of service and I'm aware these are private companies that have the right to remove content from their sites, but it highlights the need for truly free internet. I don't think we can let unpopular opinions be silenced, no matter how much we disagree with them. I might someday hold an unpopular opinion and be victim to the same treatment. Relying on profit seeking private companies to be the gatekeepers to our media and communication is a sketchy situation at best. It's on par with letting the government censor us. I look forward to more blockchain based social media developments.

There's still plenty of avenues for people to voice their opinions. Hell, they can even have their own web pages, and Milo writes for a popular site. It's not like anyone is being silenced. It's no different than if I went into a grocery store, and pissed all over the floor. If they kick me out, I'm not going to starve, I'll just have to go to a different store.

[Fiddlewick]

There is apparently a large discrepancy on what some people think "fake news" is. Admittedly, it has a connotative meaning at this point, which is why clarification is warranted. When I hear "fake news" I think of a news site putting out false information in order to misinform. In this case, it was a news article about an interview on a news station with an administration official. The official lied in the interview. By yelling out "fake news" which are we to believe that person is referring to? For me, the last place to look, would be the person who's not actually part of the "news." Logically, one would think he was referring to the initial article posted by the OP, as it is a news story from a news site. Not only that, he then sought to deflect by talking about what she probably meant, and how totally dangerous those guys were. he deliberately ignore the lie, whilst trying to deflect. There were two actual news sites involved and a government official, and he yelled out "fake news" to reference the only part of the equation that had nothing to do with being in the "news" business.

I agree that just shouting "fake news" is a bad idea, but again it boils down to what I said earlier, about whether you believe it's the news network's responsibility to make sure that the ones they interview use truth, as opposed to lies.
As for the deflections and ignoring of what she said, aswell as the talk about the refugees, I won't really mention that myself, because I am as I said, not here to defend him.

[melodramocracy]

You know, you think back to Dan Quayle, who is best known (and really only known) for misspelling the word 'potato'.

Then you look at the level of forgiveness that's shown towards the idiocy of the current administration, and wonder how the fuck our standards got so incredibly low.

[Machismo]

I agree that just shouting "fake news" is a bad idea, but again it boils down to what I said earlier, about whether you believe it's the news network's responsibility to make sure that the ones they interview use truth, as opposed to lies.
As for the deflections and ignoring of what she said, aswell as the talk about the refugees, I won't really mention that myself, because I am as I said, not here to defend him.

I prefer interviewers to fact check on the spot. Honestly, maybe Chris Matthews didn't know that she was lying (or telling a huge falsehood). We expect people to be informed, but when they tell a huge lie, and we aren't sure, maybe it's best to fact check later. People don't like to look foolish or dumb on television. It would be even worse if it was the person doing the interview who was wrong.

If I were giving the interview, I probably would not have fact checked on the spot, because I didn't know what she was talking about. As someone who was good at getting things he wanted via lies and deception, if you say something with enough confidence, almost nobody will question you in the moment. Mind you, I mostly did this in the Marines to get things needed for missions without the red tape, but it was damn effective.

There's also some stations that go out of their way to focus on fact checking after the interview. they will cite any falsehoods or clarifications, and often call the interviewee up afterwards to get further comments. Anderson Cooper has done this a lot.

[Vyxn]

You guys have nothing better to do then be all outraged about some one making a slip of the tongue

now where you this critical about Obamas 57 states or how about him saying corpse man instead of corpsman numerous time in the same speech

this acute case of Trump derangement syndrome with many of you is just plane ludicrous

[Somewhatconcerned]

Stuff like this makes you question if you will ever trust anything this administration says.

Any voter fraud investigation findings, jobs report, economy reports...I would doubt anything they say as they have already shown to be liars.

[Vyxn]

You know, you think back to Dan Quayle, who is best known (and really only known) for misspelling the word 'potato'.

Then you look at the level of forgiveness that's shown towards the idiocy of the current administration, and wonder how the fuck our standards got so incredibly low.

like the idiocy of thinking we had 57 states or saying corpse man instead of corpsman numerous time in the same speech? that level of idiocy?

[purebalance]

Does it really matter if it actually happened or not? As long as we feel like it happened, that's good enough.

That's what the left has been saying for decades now so why is it wrong when the right uses it?

[Bodakane]

You guys have nothing better to do then be all outraged about some one making a slip of the tongue

now where you this critical about Obamas 57 states or how about him saying corpse man instead of corpsman numerous time in the same speech

this acute case of Trump derangement syndrome with many of you is just plane ludicrous

WTF?

You're literally comparing the 57 state thing to justifying a Muslim ban over an incident that never happened?

You cannot be serious.

[Machismo]

You guys have nothing better to do then be all outraged about some one making a slip of the tongue

now where you this critical about Obamas 57 states or how about him saying corpse man instead of corpsman numerous time in the same speech

this acute case of Trump derangement syndrome with many of you is just plane ludicrous

Were you this dismissive when the Obama administration lied about the cause of the Benghazi attacks?

Lucky for me, I mocked both for the obvious lie.

[Fiddlewick]

I prefer interviewers to fact check on the spot. Honestly, maybe Chris Matthews didn't know that she was lying (or telling a huge falsehood). We expect people to be informed, but when they tell a huge lie, and we aren't sure, maybe it's best to fact check later. People don't like to look foolish or dumb on television. It would be even worse if it was the person doing the interview who was wrong.

There's also some stations that go out of their way to focus on fact checking after the interview. they will cite any falsehoods or clarifications, and often call the interviewee up afterwards to get further comments. Anderson Cooper has done this a lot.

I think fact checking might be good on the spot, depending on the circumstances and the nature of the interview, but it might leed to an unneccesary negative tone to the interview. It is of course a news network's responsibility to show the public the truth (In my opinion) and as such, fact checking it afterwards is important, especially if it's some gigantic lie.

I will say that I have not personally seen the interview though, just so we're clear on the matter.

[TrumpIsPresident]

Right, so, lemme help you out here.
Funding and helping to plot an attack in Iraq, is not the same as attempting to plot an attack on U.S. soil.

But you're sooooooo close. Still wrong. But close.

Oh, oh yea?

Quote me the part where I said they were attempting to attack on US soil.

You wont find it, bad kitty!

[Machismo]

I think fact checking might be good on the spot, depending on the circumstances and the nature of the interview, but it might leed to an unneccesary negative tone to the interview. It is of course a news network's responsibility to show the public the truth (In my opinion) and as such, fact checking it afterwards is important, especially if it's some gigantic lie.

I will say that I have not personally seen the interview though, just so we're clear on the matter.

I agree that fact checking on the spot is better. However, the interviewer must be damn sure about it. It boils down to how informed the interviewer is, and how confident he is. You also run the risk of an interview getting derailed (which can actually be a very good thing).

[TrumpIsPresident]

You are the one who seems to have a different definition of "fake news' than just about everyone else. You'll notice that I'm not the only one trying to figure out what your definition of fake news is. In this case, the subject was an Indepentent.uk article, and you yelled out "fake news." Are you so upset that people assumed you were talking about the news story that was presented in the original post? Not only that, you then started to try and deflect in order to make it sound more favorable to your clear and well-known agenda. Not only that, you then tried to say that everyone is the "news."

That's their tune now because that's the direction the bandwagon went ...like I cant tell when people all start saying the same thing.

Others however realized the difference from the start and they even said so.

And everybody should have realized it after I said it very clearly ...8 times (actually its like 12 times now).

You personally were responsible for most of the back and forth which, from the pure repetition alone, should have never happened.

I'll accept that apology whenever you want to offer it, no hard feelings on my part.

[Deleted]

Meh, she made a mistake. I make mistakes too.

Usually when I see you comment lately its all "Its fake news!" "Fake news!"

Now its "Meh, she made a mistake."

What?

Then again, she is the one that coined "Alternative facts".

[Rixis]

WTF?

You're literally comparing the 57 state thing to justifying a Muslim ban over an incident that never happened?

You cannot be serious.

If I remember correctly, there was a long thread about the 57 state thing too, almost certainly started by Vyxn too, can probs find it if you search his started threads

[Vyxn]

WTF?

You're literally comparing the 57 state thing to justifying a Muslim ban over an incident that never happened?

You cannot be serious.

if you would actually do a little investigation instead of flying off the handle caused by your Trump derangement syndrome you would have found out that she was meaning the Bowling Green terrorist you know the several dozen Qaeda-Iraq terrorist that came into the US posing as refugees


here why don't you educate yourself with some facts before you jump on everything you can to be critical of Trumps administration

Exclusive: US May Have Let 'Dozens' of Terrorists Into Country As Refugees
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qae...ry?id=20931131


because I know what the hell is going on and not being clueless I knew exactly what she was referring to when she made her slip of the tounge


[Infracted]

[melodramocracy]

like the idiocy of thinking we had 57 states or saying corpse man instead of corpsman numerous time in the same speech? that level of idiocy?

b....b... but Obama, amirite?