It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Conspiracy of American Political Peril

page: 10
174
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 



Straight up news are not supposed to be part of BAN, unless there is a conspiracy in it, as I was explained, and any article which has a conspiracy in it will be critical of the policy being implemented. Hence it will be critical of the Obama administration.

So most straight up news will not be part of BAN, and now threads which are critical of the Obama administration are also not going to be part of BAN, or even BPN.


I, nor the OP, ever mentioned 'BAN.' BPN seems more appropriate.




posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
What was once primarily the forte' of "news junkies," "political hacks," and politicians, the knee-jerk intense hatred of any political ideology not yours has infected our society. The infection is so dangerously deep and harmful we can aptly compare it to stage four lymphoma.

 


What is to be said but you are spot on correct.

The politicians encourage the polarization and division because it makes for easy manipulation...the middle is always the greatest challenge to them in elections and policy.

News outlets...well they are profit entities these days and you make money by telling people what they want to hear and re-affirming their world view...Advertisers know their demographic when news slants one way or another...they know what products to sell.

And us..the people.. it is easier to shout than listen. We can now tune in and hear "news" that will make us feel affirmed, smart, insightful...when in reality we are just being told what we want to hear.

A disease...yes. All I can do is to continue to push myself out of my own comfort zone and try to see both sides...and stop shouting once in a while and ask myself..is their a valid opinion to be heard?

Beneath the bickering, beneath the rhetoric, does an unbiased truth lurk? Can I imagine that I have no political leaning and see a given subject clearly? I try, lord knows, not always successfully, but trying has to count for something...right?

FYI - I am not a big fan of the all politics/both parties suck and should be equally hated. This seems like a cop-out. Both parties have their warts and graces. Finding them without bias is a challenge though.

[edit on 13-10-2009 by maybereal11]



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:22 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   
This is a really good idea. I can't really get across how surreal it was to watch a couple of Americans scream at each other over, for example, the Bush/Kerry 2004 election. The terms 'conservative' and 'liberal' are largely meaningless too.

Good Move..............



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Speaking of Rush'

Matthews: 'Someone's Going To Jam a CO2 Pellet Into Rush's Head'


What some guys won't say to get attention . . .

Analogizing Rush Limbaugh to a James Bond villian, Chris Matthews today fantasized: "at some point somebody's going to jam a CO2 pellet into his head and he's going to explode like a giant blimp."

Hosting MSNBC's 10 AM hour today, Matthews made his remark while chatting with Politico's Jonathan Martin and Anne Kornblut of WaPo.

CHRIS MATTHEWS: You guys see Live and Let Die, the great Bond film with Yaphet Kotto as the bad guy, Mr. Big? In the end they jam a big CO2 pellet in his face and he blew up. I have to tell you, Rush Limbaugh is looking more and more like Mr. Big, and at some point somebody's going to jam a CO2 pellet into his head and he's going to explode like a giant blimp. That day may come. Not yet. But we'll be there to watch. I think he's Mr. Big, I think Yaphet Kotto. Are you watching, Rush?


newsbusters.org...

How do you classify this?

Is this madness?

[edit on 113131p://bTuesday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Speaking of Rush'
Matthews: 'Someone's Going To Jam a CO2 Pellet Into Rush's Head'
How do you classify this? Is this madness?


Given that folks in the States seem to have a certain proclivity towards shooting celebrities, yes...I think that comment was way outta line and he ought to be censured for it. Dems and lefties aren't untitled to any free pass, either.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Speaking of Rush'
Matthews: 'Someone's Going To Jam a CO2 Pellet Into Rush's Head'
How do you classify this? Is this madness?


Given that folks in the States seem to have a certain proclivity towards shooting celebrities, yes...I think that comment was way outta line and he ought to be censured for it. Dems and lefties aren't untitled to any free pass, either.


Yes, that was pretty outlandish, even for Matthews,



[edit on 113131p://bTuesday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by maybereal11
Beneath the bickering, beneath the rhetoric, does an unbiased truth lurk?

Yes. And here it is...

Society and cultures that grow beyond "critical masses" have always required an organized hierarchy of government to solve or address problems or issues to big for the individuals to solve on their own. It's a natural and logical evolution of any society... a governing entity is required.

An appropriate governing entity is one that supports and embraces individual responsibility while understanding a small minority of society's individuals will be in a legitimate position where they are unable to help themselves. Such an outlook is neither "conservative" nor "liberal," it's logical.

The problem we have now is that the "governing entity" is so large and dysfunctional, it's not that no societal problems can be properly solved, there is no inherent desire to find solutions. A major part of the barrier to solutions is the overwhelmingly acidic atmosphere of one side versus the other.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   
ah, welcome to our own version of a 'Free Speech Zone'.

bravo



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Ya know . . .


If you do not want to read the political debates, then do not click on the link. That easy.

This is censorship, plain and simple


This reeks to high heaven. This is something the government would do, and it does not reflect well for this site.

Basically, when you cut through the prose of SO's post, it boils down to this: "We do not want to hear any criticisms of Obama."

Where was this new section from 2000-2008? ATS was awash in the anti-Bush crowd. In fact, anti-Bush sentiment is still alive and strong here. The sam crap that was said about Bush is now being said about Obama. How come the new section did not start then.

I called foul when there was the Illegal Drug discussion crackdown.

I call foul now on the silencing of political debate.

How much more is ATS willing to sell out?

[edit on 10/13/2009 by Lemon.Fresh]



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Quite simple. You are so caught up in the us vs them paradigm that rationality is not sinking in.


So being critical of the Obama administration's policies is being caught up in the "us vs them paradigm", I see.


Originally posted by intrepid
I checked the removed post and his post was fine, your reply was more of the same political BS that initiated this change.


All I did was excerpt part of what SO was saying, and then I responded to that member's last comment. If it is ok for him to say anyone who sees this being about threads that are critical of Obama must be smoking something, my response to him should have been fine too, which had nothing to do with politics but about his response.



Originally posted by intrepid
As SO has said, we've had to do this in the past because of the rancor of whatever given party spews that it gets intolerable. As any cogent person can see 90%+ are happy to see this change implemented. THAT should tell you something.


And let's see what at least one of those people who agrees has posted in the not so distant past, which I already posted in this same thread yet hasn't been moved yet.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

But the above is an ok post, which shouldn't be moved to the new forum, and posts such as the following are full of propaganda and vitriol right?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You see, the thing is not that I mind that a new forum was made. What I mind is the way that the posts which are moved there are being labeled, as well as anyone who participates in those threads, and respond there.

Quite a few of those threads have nothing to do with any propaganda, and not full of vitriol as is claimed, they are just critical of the policies of the new administration.

Anyway, as i said, I already explained what i had to say, so thanks.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Where was this new section from 2000-2008?

It was all sent to AbovePolitics.com, which didn't work and resulted in the feeling that all political discussion was relegated to a back seat.

You seem to be another prime example of someone either unable to understand what I say, or sees different words than those I type.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 




An appropriate governing entity is one that supports and embraces individual responsibility while understanding a small minority of society's individuals will be in a legitimate position where they are unable to help themselves. Such an outlook is neither "conservative" nor "liberal," it's logical.



Obviously you are a wise and observant man. I think one issue that seperates the Liberal and Conservative is where the line is drawn on who is in the small minority who legitimately cannot help themselves vs the opposite end of encouraging people to be helpless in order for the government to gain more control and politicians to get themselves elected.

Most conservatives seem to think the number of legitimate helpless is fairly small. I can only think of a few reason to support someone.
1. They have severe mental health issues.
2. They are severly mentally impaired to the level of handicap.
3. They are severly physically handicapped.

This cannot be more than a 1 percent of the population, and most likely would be signifigantly lower.

Other than that why does the government need to redistribute our wealth? Is it our fault that someone didn't take advantage of the free education system or the freedom to choose whatever work they are good at?

Edit: Because I am a suck typist

[edit on 13-10-2009 by StinkyFeet]



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh
 


In what way is this censorship? It's been moved to a differing forum, still accessible, last I checked, to everyone in the membership...

Censorship would be...it's gone and no one can get to it.

My goodness, people, all that has happened is SO opened a new forum to consolidate all the anti-, and pro-Obama, and other political craziness in one forum. Get a grip.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by StinkyFeet
Other than that why does the government need to redistribute our wealth?

There are only two reasons:

1) invest in the future (education, infrastructure, etc.)

2) invest in the overall well-being of the society (health, safety, etc.)



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
This is censorship, plain and simple



How does allowing these threads to continue equate to censorship? Censorship is "to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable". These threads are not being suppressed or deleted. They are being placed in the proper forum, just as Area 51 threads are placed in the proper forum and Global Meltdown threads are placed in their forum.

These threads are being allowed to exist in their rightful place. How is that censorship?



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:48 AM
link   


This is getting infuriating.


LOL. This is actually a massive problem on ATS. A full 20 per cent of the membership don't even bother to read the opening post and just start bashing away without digesting it. Too many hormones, not enough IQ. There isn't much the staff can do about it but it ruins a lot of threads. Perhaps some out-of-the-box thinking would remedy it.

*

I think the other reason that people just end up blindly sniping at each other is that on ATS there are rules against collaborating, or at least there are some grey areas. If I started a thread saying: "I want to make a documentary on the fake left/right paradigm." and asked for help, Would it go into the trash bin?

ATS could become a massive force for good if the immense brainpower here could be harnessed and channeled instead of expressing itself through pointless frustration.

*

In England we have known about the fake left/paradigm for years.

The next monster to deal with is the apathy and sense of hopelessness that descends when you realise that the dialogue is largely controlled. Many people in the UK have just given up and that's just as bad as arguing over nothing.

Despite this, I have high hopes for the world. One day America will resurrect itself and go back to constitutional rule.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by CoffinFeeder

Oddly, its the democrap style shouting down and mud slinging that doesn't get censored here.


"Democrap"....Baiting in this thread?

FYI - There are plenty of sites where you can post and recieve slaps on the back for simply being a jerk. ATS is just trying to not be one of them.



new topics

top topics



 
174
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join