winterwhile: GM Bailout?

No thats the Union Bailout

and its going to fail again

no fundamental changes were made, so fail in time

2/10

TFerWannaBe: This is all part of a larger strategy - spin Ronney's positions until the public and the Obama campaign get dizzy following them, then lead the ignorant directly to the polls while everyone else stumbles around.

Pin the Vote On the Democratic Party?

czetie: Weaver95: look, i'm sure that Orwellian historical rewrite shiat works just fine in the GOP echo chamber but out here in the real world we tend to ignore doublethink and call you out on blatant bullshiat.

I have a theory that the people running the GOP haven't yet realized that the Internet never forgets. This kind of BS worked fine when lies couldn't be easily debunked and the debunking instantly widely circulated so that the debunking becomes a bigger story than the lie (remember the infamous Rick Perry video?). It's no coincidence, IMO, that the core constituency of the GOP increasingly overlaps with "people who didn't grow up with the Internet". It's also no coincidence that Karl Rove got out when he did: as despicable a human being as he is, he was also smart enough to recognize that his strategy of "lie until your teeth hurt" was becoming decreasingly effective.

There used to be a saying, "a lie can go around the world before the truth has tied its laces". These days, a lie can get a good head start but the truth quickly catches it up, gives it a good kicking, and posts the video on YouTube for everybody to watch.




No, they know about it. It doesn't matter to them, their constituency has two plans of attack on the internet:

1) Claim anything that contradicts you is Socialist Soros-funded lies. You won't believe how many people consider Snopes.com to be Democratic propaganda.
2) Create an echo chamber of 'grass roots' 'new media' 'independent' 'news' sites that blast their version of events so long and solidly that for any actual fact you cite, they have 200 different sites with their own 'facts' they can cite that says the exact opposite thing. They all cross-reference each other and it's usually impossible to get an original source, but their solidarity gives the impression that anything contradictory is a lie and they will never back down.


These people now control the internet. Read any comments section of any major news site. They vastly outnumber the sane people now.

Rmoney is just one of those joke nominations, right? Like Cthulu 2012 or the Barking Spider party. No one can really be this funny while straight faced.

Romney would have done this

Not trying to defend this guy at all but wake me when he doesn't take at least two conflicting stances on any given issues.

The guy makes pathological liars and used-car salesmen look upstanding. How he is the de-facto nominee and not laughed out of primaries is beyond me. Is there literally any issue he hasn't told the audience what they want to hear instead of what he truly believes?

zedster: winterwhile: GM Bailout?

No thats the Union Bailout

and its going to fail again

no fundamental changes were made, so fail in time

but GOP attacking US car companies while giving government aid and funds to German and Japanese companies in the South a okay? The GOP are a bunch of scabs on the back of UAW workers. If the UAW was gone do you think Honda, BMW, and VW would pay the workers in the right to work plants similar wages to union shops?

It was not the unions, it was bad leadership up top and unfair advantages given by GOP politicans to their rivals. Pro-American and pro-free market my arse

so, what you are saying, is move all those jobs overseas?

thats you point?

The facts? Romney is just not that smart or talented. As I've mentioned before, he's W.

Nothing at all without his daddy's accomplishments

I read this yesterday and thought I was reading the onion. It is just baffling. It is beyond I was for it before I was against it.

czetie: I have a theory that the people running the GOP haven't yet realized that the Internet never forgets. This kind of BS worked fine when lies couldn't be easily debunked and the debunking instantly widely circulated so that the debunking becomes a bigger story than the lie (remember the infamous Rick Perry video?).

I am convinced that politicians and MSM (both left and right) want to better regulate 'news aggregators' like FARK so they can better control the message. If FOX news publish a story that Obama is weak on Iran, the FOX news web site will be filled with anti-Obama comments supporting the claim. The narrative is undermined though by FARK and other sites because the original story is shown with the proof of the BS. It makes it hard to spread lies.

Remember the good ole days when news papers would print Letters to the Editor? You think they published the letters that didn't support the views of the editor? Those letters found the bottom of the waste bin.

zedster: It was not the unions, it was bad leadership up top and unfair advantages given by GOP politicans to their rivals.

Yes but they make for a very convenient scapegoat instead of blaming management for it because they're Job Creators after all (blessed be their name) and Job Creators are always right so obviously it had to be those libtarded union's fault.

Why? Fark you that's why...

Marcus Aurelius: To be fair, the first thing Romney did when he got control of a company was to make it take out a massive loan. But the difference is that while Obama plowed the money back into GM, Romney put the money in his pocket.

Therein lies the difference.

Litterally.

wildcardjack: Rmoney is just one of those joke nominations, right? Like Cthulu 2012 or the Barking Spider party. No one can really be this funny while straight faced.

I didn't lookfor a citation but it is true. The UAW made some huge consessions at all the auto companies, even Ford. The story the GOP spreads that uneducated auto workers are making $100,000/year is a lie. I think starting wage is like $14/hour.

I'm sure no film exists of him giving a policy speech detailing the exact opposite plan

/roll the tape.

robmilmel: Frightening part is, this is just the tip of the derpburg. This is gonna get reaaaaaaaaaal stupid reaaaaaaaaal fast.

The thing is I don't know how much more stupid we can get. I mean how much further can we sink?

Mrtraveler01: The thing is I don't know how much more stupid we can get. I mean how much further can we sink?

Much,much further I only assume because of the rabbit hole the primaries were.

Karac: "The fact that the auto companies today are profitable is because they've shed costs," Fehrnstrom said. "The reason they shed those costs and have got their employee labor contracts less expensive is because they went through that managed bankruptcy process. It is exactly what Mitt Romney told them to do."

Anybody got any hard citations for GM's union contracts in 2007 vs their contracts now? I'm not saying that I think Romney's guy is outright lying, I'm just saying his head might be up his ass he's huffing his own fumes.

The talking point from the GOP after the deal was that Obama gave the unions control of the company.

MithrandirBooga: czetie: Weaver95: look, i'm sure that Orwellian historical rewrite shiat works just fine in the GOP echo chamber but out here in the real world we tend to ignore doublethink and call you out on blatant bullshiat.

There used to be a saying, "a lie can go around the world before the truth has tied its laces". These days, a lie can get a good head start but the truth quickly catches it up, gives it a good kicking, and posts the video on YouTube for everybody to watch.

No, they know about it. It doesn't matter to them, their constituency has two plans of attack on the internet:

1) Claim anything that contradicts you is Socialist Soros-funded lies. You won't believe how many people consider Snopes.com to be Democratic propaganda.
2) Create an echo chamber of 'grass roots' 'new media' 'independent' 'news' sites that blast their version of events so long and solidly that for any actual fact you cite, they have 200 different sites with their own 'facts' they can cite that says the exact opposite thing. They all cross-reference each other and it's usually impossible to get an original source, but their solidarity gives the impression that anything contradictory is a lie and they will never back down.


These people now control the internet. Read any comments section of any major news site. They vastly out ...

Also, the way search engine rankings are so easily manipulated (especially with a conglomerate that can put the same content of hundreds of separate websites) that half the time if you're looking for the real story, the entire first page of results can easily be the fiction.

It doesn't stop the real story from getting out there completely, but when the volume level is so much higher for the lie, most people are going to listen to it. And then you have stuff like this which I didn't see followed up anywhere else, and that only got 15 comments here on Fark? (unless there was a dupe that I missed?)

And when you've got massive segments of the population conditioned to believe what they are told even when there is no physical evidence to support it, even when it flies in the face of everything we understand about how the world actually works, one can easily lose hope.

God created the world in seven days, Jesus rose from the dead after three days, and companies will scale up production and hire people when you give the already wealthy more money, not when demand increases.

Y'know, if I wasn't already living in the future, I'd probably kill myself.

Fortunately, here in the future, everybody can talk to everybody else, anywhere in the world, and even though there's loads of bad information out there, the fact remains that there is SO MUCH information out there.

Much of the behaviour we can see amongst those who blindly believe and follow what they are told were conditioned in this way through limited access to information; people typically believe what they are told if they're never even exposed to a different perspective or ideas. The deeply religious tend to be those who were brought up in that environment, and not even exposed to the idea that their specific worldview might not be absolutely correct until they were too set in their ways to consider other possibilities.

You can already see it happening- religiousness is consistently decreasing across younger generations- not that religion is all that is wrong with the world (though it can and does cause some difficulties) but it's a useful metric for this type of mindset. And what we can see is that as people have more access to information, as they are exposed to more information younger, they are learning to question sooner, and to decide for themselves. And the information is everywhere. The internet is everywhere. In our homes, our schools, our libraries, our telephones. And the scenario above, with all the misinformation sites, most of those are coming from a breed of people who cannot reproduce in the modern world. They are among the last of their ilk, and while their death thrashes may yet leave wide swaths of devastation, once enough of the cogs have failed, the hate-machine will falter. Heck, we may even be able to turn it inwards against itself, hastening the process while minimizing external damage.

On that note, did you hear about Romney's plan to revoke the tax exempt status of churches to fund a tax cut for those whose income exceeds 250,000/year?

wow, sorry 'bout the Wall 'o Text everybody.

Tor_Eckman: Not surprised at all. They have already failed miserably trying to claim that bailing out GM was a bad thing. But that pesky reality is simply too inconvenient for even today's GOP to deny.

As others have already said, I'm sure Romney's goons will soon be claiming that Mitt told Obama where and when to find Bin Laden.

I wouldn't put it past them to claim that Romney is really a member of SEAL team 6, and thus PERSONALLY capped bin Laden.

Jorn the Younger: wow, sorry 'bout the Wall 'o Text everybody.

it's OK, tl;dr

Maybe Romney really IS a robot. Or more specifically, a CYLON!

Think about it. We all think the flip-flopping is just simple incompetence, but just suppose for a moment, that it's all part of an incredibly long con game that could only be dreamed up by a thinking machine. Maybe Romney really did give Obama the idea to bail out GM (only not so obviously by writing several op-ed pieces and making speeches saying the exact opposite) PRECISELY so he could claim he gave him the idea and criticize him for being a copycat Socialist Muslim during the general election campaign!

Layers upon layers upon layers people! All this has happened before, and all this will happen again.

Ah, it's still fun to see the Fark Independents who 2 weeks ago were clamoring for anyone but RMoney to get the GOP nod claim that they always liked him the whole time..

bingethinker: TsarTom: How long until he ordered and shadow-led the strike to kill Osama?

Are you kidding? He was there, he pulled the trigger to kill the guy. That's why Obama won't release the video!

I heard it on this guy's radio show.
[i306.photobucket.com image 640x480]

Hell I think we would demand to make him president for life if he did so.

Mitt Romney was for the bailouts before he was against them. Now he's for them again. We'll see what happens next week.

Here is the Mormon Creed on Lying. It explains a lot about Mitt MoRmoney

Link

Old and busted: "Shakes Magic-8 ball..." headline
New Hotness: "Shakes Etch-a-Sketch..." headline

DrD'isInfotainment: Here is the Mormon Creed on Lying. It explains a lot about Mitt MoRmoney

Link

Wow. The more I learn about mormonism the more it does seem like a cult.

Ha! Good luck with that!

Wyalt Derp: They must think we're goldfish.

His voters are jealous of the ivory tower eleetizm of gold fish.

I always try to plug this awesome video in Rmoney threads: Mitt Romney and the Infinite Sadness

The Republican 'Milk before Meat' tactics fit well with the image Romney is trying to create.

Muta: Remember the good ole days when news papers would print Letters to the Editor? You think they published the letters that didn't support the views of the editor? Those letters found the bottom of the waste bin.

I don't believe that for a second, those ones were probably published much more. They just throw out the ones that make sound arguments, so the readers can all see how easily the opposition is to discredit.

Jorn the Younger: You can already see it happening- religiousness is consistently decreasing across younger generations- not that religion is all that is wrong with the world (though it can and does cause some difficulties) but it's a useful metric for this type of mindset. And what we can see is that as people have more access to information, as they are exposed to more information younger, they are learning to question sooner, and to decide for themselves. And the information is everywhere. The internet is everywhere. In our homes, our schools, our libraries, our telephones. And the scenario above, with all the misinformation sites, most of those are coming from a breed of people who cannot reproduce in the modern world. They are among the last of their ilk, and while their death thrashes may yet leave wide swaths of devastation, once enough of the cogs have failed, the hate-machine will falter. Heck, we may even be able to turn it inwards against itself, hastening the process while minimizing external damage.

I don't believe in anything myself, but in many ways religion seems like a scapegoat here to me. It can make a good tool to enforce one's own mindset, but I don't think it's really the heart of the problem at all. In my real world experience, the vast majority of theists I've come across are reasonable people who are just a thousand times less vocal than the unreasonable ones. Obviously a lot of that has to do with location, but that shows the magnitude of the effect your peers have on you. I've also come across several antitheists who cite bogus facts/statistics in their arguments and deflect when you call them out. The problem is group mentality, even if you took religion out of the equation I don't think it does much to combat the development of groups with exclusionary mindsets. Speaking in general (all sorts of beliefs and opinions, not merely religious ones), there's nothing wrong with thinking "X is a crazy thing to believe". There is something very wrong with someone with a strong belief in Y thinking "no rational/reasonable person could ever not agree with Y". These two are different things if you don't cut divide issues into a limited number of possible opinions. The problem is that an exclusionary mentality is somewhat human nature, and my personal opinion is that labeling religion in general as bad because it can be used to encourage this isn't significantly different from labeling knives as bad because they can be used to kill people. Even if you think there's no truth to a religious belief, it can be an emotional fallback for a person and you should differentiate a person who draws from it that sort of benefit from one who uses it to encourage hate. You don't take away all the knives, you teach people not to stab others with them. Teaching will never rid the world of stabbings, but I think it's a better option than labeling all who use knives as bad.

/tl;dr

christianity: I don't believe that for a second, those ones were probably published much more. They just throw out the ones that make sound arguments, so the readers can all see how easily the opposition is to discredit.

The Hannity-Colmes solution, if you will.

actualhuman: christianity: I don't believe that for a second, those ones were probably published much more. They just throw out the ones that make sound arguments, so the readers can all see how easily the opposition is to discredit.

The Hannity-Colmes solution, if you will.

Didn't watch it much, but I never really got the feeling that Colmes was a bad thinker, in fact it seemed like he blew Hannity out of the water in that regard. He just seemed much less aggressive, so an audience who measures the value of an argument by who can shout louder would have no problem determining who to agree with.

StopLurkListen: So it's OK for conservatives to like (or buy) the Volt now?

[i257.photobucket.com image 390x216]

Nope. Still not buying anything from Unamerican Motors.

New talking point, guys! No more "Not Buying from Government Motors" jokes, Romney's now claiming credit for the success of the bailout. Please adjust your AM radio call-ins, peeps.

No. Mitt doesn't tell actual conservatives what to think, just like McCain didn't. He's simply the lesser of two evils, so we'll be voting for him come November. It doesn't matter what he's saying about GM because we already know Obama is a much bigger liar and more corrupt than any president in our lifetime. Abd yes, that includes Nixon.

So if you were dumb enought to buy a Volt, I wouldn't count on the demand or resale value increasing any time soon.

Roy_G_Biv: No. Mitt doesn't tell actual conservatives what to think, just like McCain didn't. He's simply the lesser of two evils, so we'll be voting for him come November.

A "just like McCain didn't" outcome is fine with me.

Roy_G_Biv: It doesn't matter what he's saying about GM because we already know Obama is a much bigger liar and more corrupt than any president in our lifetime. Abd yes, that includes Nixon.

Obama broke into Republican Party headquarters in the middle of the night to snoop on their campaign plans?

If not, that's a pretty stupid comparison to make.

Roy_G_Biv: Nope. Still not buying anything from Unamerican Motors.

Yes, because car companies overall are so patriotic and loyal to their home country.

/sarcasm

Romney is a shiatty candidate who has surrounded himself with dullards.

His party's idiotic policies are really the least of Romney's problem. The biggest is that he's a joke of a candidate that lost to someone like McCain in the primaries 4 years ago and took months and hundreds of millions of dollars to put away the likes of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum this year. Comments like this one are made at least on a weekly basis by the candidate, his spouse, his staff or his surrogates. I can't recall a more undisciplined campaign...and it's been running for 6+ years!

That said, dumbass Romney can probably get away with bullshiat like this in April. Still very few people paying attention to the campaign and those that are almost all know better. But here's the problem for Romney: Just like McCain he doesn't seem to understand the fact we have audio and video recording devices. I can almost see it now. The Obama campaign will just tuck this one away, then Obama will either drop this in his "laughing this shiat is so stupid" delivery in his stump speech, or he'll bust it out with Romney standing right in front of him during a debate and all but laugh in his face.

christianity:
I don't believe in anything myself, but in many ways religion seems like a scapegoat here to me. It can make a good tool to enforce one's own mindset, but I don't think it's really the heart of the problem at all. In my real world experience, the vast majority of theists I've come across are reasonable people who are just a thousand times less vocal than the unreasonable ones. Obviously a lot of that has to do with location, but that shows the magnitude of the effect your peers have on you. I've also come across several antitheists wwho cite bogus facts/statistics in their arguments and deflect when you call them out. The problem is group mentality, even if you took religion out of the equation I don't think it does much to combat the development of groups with exclusionary mindsets. Speaking in general (all sorts of beliefs and opinions, not merely religious ones), there's nothing wrong with thinking "X is a crazy thing to believe". There is something very wrong with someone with a strong belief in Y thinking "no rational/reasonable person could ever not agree with Y". These two are different things if you don't cut divide issues into a limited number of possible opinions. The problem is that an exclusionary mentality is somewhat human nature, and my personal opinion is that labeling religion in general as bad because it can be used to encourage this isn't significantly different from labeling knives as bad because they can be used to kill people. Even if you think there's no truth to a religious belief, it can be an emotional fallback for a person and you should differentiate a person who draws from it that sort of benefit from one who uses it to encourage hate. You don't take away all the knives, you teach people not to stab others with them. Teaching will never rid the world of stabbings, but I think it's a better option than labeling all who use knives as bad

That's true, and I don't look at religion as an inherently bad thing, and I probably should have been more precise with my language. There are many aspects of religious organisations that are positive, and there are many members of any given faith for whom 'church is a thing to do on Sunday'- they are not die-hard adherents to the dogma, but enjoy gathering with their neighbors once a week and having a sing-along, having group dinners, and other social and charitable functions of "church life". Ideally, most of those roles would be filled by more basic social clubs, without the religion so thoroughly interwoven. For I know that faith is a personal matter, and when I rail against religion, or religious institutions, it is because most of them want to take away my freedom to make that, and other, choices for myself. And as Prime said, 'Freedom is the right of all sentient beings.' The very basis of morality is the idea that those will the ability to determine their own destiny have the right to do so- that which is immoral is that which violates the rights of others to self-determine.

Mr. Coffee Nerves: It's going to be a long six months, isn't it?

It already has.
/bunkers down