Florida High School Shooting

[Fanatical Meat]

I just think the whole thing is pretty funny, the Russian trolls spent how much on our election? $40,000 or something? In some key states they spent under $100. The United States spent about $110,000,000.00 on Radio Free Europe last year given Europeans our wisdom on what their politics should be.

Don't mistake me, i'm very happy to spend that money on what is best for America and what is in our best interests, but why would you guys get so puckered up about Russians reciprocating ? You should expect it and be aware our enemies are always out to get us.

Figure has been bumped up to 1 million per month minimum during the election and that figure is just ads and stuff to promote posts. I’m assuming the troll army gets a salary and I’m assuming they have computers, phones and office space so it’s likely even higher.
While I don’t know much about radio free Europe I’d assume the total budget is more than adveri

 

[fskimospy]

ans where is that footage? article?
buried

Here’s a link to him interviewed on MSNBC, clearly stating his opposition to gun control related to this tragedy. I found this in five seconds on google.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/parklan...nk-gun-control-would-have-prevented-massacre/

Seems like apologies are in order, no?

By the way I’ve lost track of how many times conservatives claim the media doesn’t cover something and that’s indicative of bias, only to find out minutes later that they have covered it extensively. Oddly enough this never makes them question their belief in media bias.

 

[mdram]

Here’s a link to him interviewed on MSNBC, clearly stating his opposition to gun control related to this tragedy. I found this in five seconds on google.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/parklan...nk-gun-control-would-have-prevented-massacre/

Seems like apologies are in order, no?

By the way I’ve lost track of how many times conservatives claim the media doesn’t cover something and that’s indicative of bias, only to find out minutes later that they have covered it extensively. Oddly enough this never makes them question their belief in media bias.

can you find it on msnbc? i googled him also, and it was not on the sites that did the interviews

 

[MomentsofSanity]

can you find it on msnbc? i googled him also, and it was not on the sites that did the interviews

https://www.msnbc.com/brian-william...shooting-at-florida-high-school-1162064451915

Took two seconds

You expect an interview from 6 days ago to be on the front page? That's not how it works.

 

[HomerJS]

Believe me if the networks find students who watched their friends killed who are still in favor of not changing gun laws they would have them on in 2 seconds.

 

[fskimospy]

can you find it on msnbc? i googled him also, and it was not on the sites that did the interviews

Haven’t watched it but I’m pretty sure this is the same interview, hosted on MSNBC’s site.

https://www.msnbc.com/brian-william...shooting-at-florida-high-school-1162064451915

I imagine your next argument will be that MSNBC didn’t label this as a story about how these two survivors don’t support gun control. This would be, ironically, MSNBC doing exactly what Aiden says they should be doing, focusing their title on the survivors and not gun policy.

There is no media conspiracy against guns or conservatives. There never has been and there never will be.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Haven’t watched it but I’m pretty sure this is the same interview, hosted on MSNBC’s site.

https://www.msnbc.com/brian-william...shooting-at-florida-high-school-1162064451915

I imagine your next argument will be that MSNBC didn’t label this as a story about how these two survivors don’t support gun control. This would be, ironically, MSNBC doing exactly what Aiden says they should be doing, focusing their title on the survivors and not gun policy.

There is no media conspiracy against guns or conservatives. There never has been and there never will be.

It is. It's the same one I linked to.

 

[fskimospy]

It is. It's the same one I linked to.

It’s weird how the media that is apparently burying opposing viewpoints had their lead anchor interviewing people with opposing viewpoints. This shows just how deep the bias and conspiracy goes.

 

[Bird222]

It only takes a few to pilot the drone strikes bro. The automation of these things means operations can be handed off to whoever.

The fire power the plebes have will not make up the difference even with a full on revolt.

The wealthy ruling class have the most to fear, and since they're sitting on piles of money, can literally hire replacements. Man is easily corruptible.

Hopefully we won't have to find out but you'll do better with guns than without.

 

[HomerJS]

Paranoia about the media is part of why this country is having so many problems. Unjustified bias is fairly easy to identify but assuming every story is fake is insane. People who constantly scream the MSM makes up stories are willing to believe the likes of Donald Trump. His bullshit can be identified with your eyes yet these people just brush it off.

A President should comport himself with the highest standards, not the lowest.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

It’s weird how the media that is apparently burying opposing viewpoints had their lead anchor interviewing people with opposing viewpoints. This shows just how deep the bias and conspiracy goes.

I think it's more that if one person has an opposing viewpoint they should be given equal time to everyone on the other side.

It's the Trump philosophy. I did one good thing two months ago and you don't spend as much time talking about it as the hundreds of completely shitty things I've said and done this week. BIASED!

 

[fskimospy]

Hopefully we won't have to find out but you'll do better with guns than without.

Our country has to put up with ~30,000 deaths a year so people can have a marginally better chance at defeating some future tyrannical government? That seems to be a very high price to pay for very little payoff.

 

[fskimospy]

I think it's more that if one person has an opposing viewpoint they should be given equal time to everyone on the other side.

It's the Trump philosophy. I did one good thing two months ago and you don't spend as much time talking about it as the hundreds of completely shitty things I've said and done this week. BIASED!

I've seen some of those takes already, that the negative press coverage of Trump is indicative of media bias. Apparently it's not permitted to think that negative media coverage of Trump might be due to say, the chaos and incompetence that has characterized basically every aspect of his administration.

 

[HomerJS]

Our country has to put up with ~30,000 deaths a year so people can have a marginally better chance at defeating some future tyrannical government? That seems to be a very high price to pay for very little payoff.

Defeat a tyrannical government that has tomahawk missiles. AR-15 should work quite well.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Hopefully we won't have to find out but you'll do better with guns than without.

Wishful thinking when military hardware is rolling through your town.

 

[realibrad]

I think it's more that if one person has an opposing viewpoint they should be given equal time to everyone on the other side.

It's the Trump philosophy. I did one good thing two months ago and you don't spend as much time talking about it as the hundreds of completely shitty things I've said and done this week. BIASED!

I disagree with it being a Trump philosophy. We had the Equal Time Rule, and Fairness Doctrine. Please do not change history. Trump is many things, but these things should not be attributed to him when we have had these ideas for a while.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

I disagree with it being a Trump philosophy. We had the Equal Time Rule, and Fairness Doctrine. Please do not change history. Trump is many things, but these things should not be attributed to him when we have had these ideas for a while.

You have no idea what the fairness doctrine was, clearly.

 

[realibrad]

You have no idea what the fairness doctrine was, clearly.

The Fairness Doctrine had two basic elements: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows, or editorials. The doctrine did not require equal time for opposing views but required that contrasting viewpoints be presented. The demise of this FCC rule has been considered by some to be a contributing factor for the rising level of party polarization in the United States.[2][3]

The idea that both sides need to be heard. What did you think it was about?

 

[Puffnstuff]

You have no idea what the fairness doctrine was, clearly.

Good thing it was abolished or Faux would be in a heap of trouble.

 

[realibrad]

Good thing it was abolished or Faux would be in a heap of trouble.

Well no, they do have some opposing views. The Fairness Doctrine was not about equal time, just that you needed to give both sides. So you could have a 90/10 split and still be okay. I included it along with the Equal Time Rule to show how we have had these ideas long before Trump.

 

[zinfamous]

I just think the whole thing is pretty funny, the Russian trolls spent how much on our election? $40,000 or something? In some key states they spent under $100. The United States spent about $110,000,000.00 on Radio Free Europe last year given Europeans our wisdom on what their politics should be.

Don't mistake me, i'm very happy to spend that money on what is best for America and what is in our best interests, but why would you guys get so puckered up about Russians reciprocating ? You should expect it and be aware our enemies are always out to get us.

So what you're arguing here is that the typical republican mind is so mushy and so preposterously easy to compromise, that a couple of grand here and there is all it takes to influence enough of them into believing obvious bullshit propaganda and sway them towards voting against themselves and against US interests. So for efficiency sake, I'd have to agree wtih you that Russia is way more efficient and effective at working our elections than are our own political parties. I mean, when you have a voting base like those in the GOP that are so willing to destroy the country for their own personal "wins on the internet!" then I'd say it's more of an assement of the pettiness of many of our citizens, the dangers they pose when it comes to their power to vote, and the utter weakness of our institutions. Until the security threat that is the GOP, and voters like yourself, are removed from this country, our consitution will never be safe.

So yeah, I pretty much agree with your comment here. You guys are a threat to western democracy, considering how cheaply your votes are bought. Hell, even Slowspyder has repeatedly admitted that he "changed his mind about Hillary!" because of "new information" which, as we all know and you have now been forced to finally admit, was fake Russian propaganda. But nah--they didn't influence anything, right?! They just managed to change the votes of a merry band of blissful imbeciles. ...but not the same as effecting the election, right?

 

[glenn1]

Defeat a tyrannical government that has tomahawk missiles. AR-15 should work quite well.

The Taliban fought the Soviet Union and the U.S. with mostly small arms and seemed to do OK, and Afghanistan is also a lot smaller in area than the entire U.S.

So what you're arguing here is that the typical republican mind is so mushy and so preposterously easy to compromise, that a couple of grand here and there is all it takes to influence enough of them into believing obvious bullshit propaganda and sway them towards voting against themselves and against US interests. So for efficiency sake, I'd have to agree wtih you that Russia is way more efficient and effective at working our elections than are our own political parties. I mean, when you have a voting base like those in the GOP that are so willing to destroy the country for their own personal "wins on the internet!" then I'd say it's more of an assement of the pettiness of many of our citizens, the dangers they pose when it comes to their power to vote, and the utter weakness of our institutions. Until the security threat that is the GOP, and voters like yourself, are removed from this country, our consitution will never be safe.

So yeah, I pretty much agree with your comment here. You guys are a threat to western democracy, considering how cheaply your votes are bought. Hell, even Slowspyder has repeatedly admitted that he "cahnged his mind about Hillary!" because of "new information" which, as we all know and you have now been forced to finally admit, was fake Russian propaganda. But nah--they didn't influence anything, right?! They just managed to change the votes of a merry band of billsful imbeciles. ...but not the same as effecting the election, right?

That's one view. The other is that Hillary Clinton was such a uniquely bad candidate that she lost once to a minority with experience years in federal government you can count on one hand, and a second time to Trump who is to date the most unpopular person to ever run for POTUS as a major party candidate. Seems like the Russians didn't need a whole lot of work to make her loss happen, she did it mostly on her own.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Well no, they do have some opposing views. The Fairness Doctrine was not about equal time, just that you needed to give both sides. So you could have a 90/10 split and still be okay. I included it along with the Equal Time Rule to show how we have had these ideas long before Trump.

Now how does that counter what I said in relation to Trump? He constantly complains the media isn't talking about X, Y or Z instead of A. They have reported on them. But he demands they do it more. The problem is Trump does A-W and those outweigh the rest.

You just described above exactly what I was talking about. He think it should be 50-50 even if there isn't a 50-50 balance in what's being talked about. He demands other things be discussed instead.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

The Taliban fought the Soviet Union and the U.S. with mostly small arms and seemed to do OK, and Afghanistan is also a lot smaller in area than the entire U.S.

Point taken but I think it’s safe to assume the average Taliban guy is used to living with a lot less than the most hardened AR15 owner. Culturally I don’t think that would work out too well here and that’s a good thing. Being able to care for the sick or women & Children is important

 

[realibrad]

So what you're arguing here is that the typical republican mind is so mushy and so preposterously easy to compromise, that a couple of grand here and there is all it takes to influence enough of them into believing obvious bullshit propaganda and sway them towards voting against themselves and against US interests. So for efficiency sake, I'd have to agree wtih you that Russia is way more efficient and effective at working our elections than are our own political parties. I mean, when you have a voting base like those in the GOP that are so willing to destroy the country for their own personal "wins on the internet!" then I'd say it's more of an assement of the pettiness of many of our citizens, the dangers they pose when it comes to their power to vote, and the utter weakness of our institutions. Until the security threat that is the GOP, and voters like yourself, are removed from this country, our consitution will never be safe.

So yeah, I pretty much agree with your comment here. You guys are a threat to western democracy, considering how cheaply your votes are bought. Hell, even Slowspyder has repeatedly admitted that he "cahnged his mind about Hillary!" because of "new information" which, as we all know and you have now been forced to finally admit, was fake Russian propaganda. But nah--they didn't influence anything, right?! They just managed to change the votes of a merry band of billsful imbeciles. ...but not the same as effecting the election, right?

Propaganda becomes a lot easier *to believe* when it conforms to your bias. People that are highly educated in a subject can easily believe things that they know are not true, because they want to believe it is true. Make no mistake that just because one side might be doing more of it that the other side does not do it a lot as well. People that I think are quite smart have expressed things that were flat out wrong and not just in a technical pedantic way either. If people that educated can make such obvious mistakes, then its to be expected that less educated people might also make the mistake.

In no way though should we just accept what Russia did. It is amazing and scary that people are downplaying this.