NBC apologizes for cutting “under God” from Pledge of Allegiance before U.S. Open

[Bowfinger]

There was no dishonest insinuation and no smear was intended. I felt he missed the point of this thread and commented on it. He had the full opportunity to express himself...instead he made a childish assertion that I was trying to somehow put words in his mouth and then he chose to run away. Now we have a "third party" with an axe to grind for some apparent reason. Do you?

Do you care to offer specifics on exactly how you found my questions to be a "dishonest insinuation" as well as how I used them to "smear" in a way Fox News would be proud? I responded directly to your questions...please return the favor.

"So deliberate manipulation by the media motivated purely on the basis of ideology is acceptable? Or only in those cases where you agree with the motive?"

Your words, highly loaded, insinuating a position Pens1566 did not take.

My only axe to grind is I detest dishonesty. While disingenuous comments like the one I quoted above are hardly noteworthy here, you then drove it lower by denying the clear intent behind your words. That's what prompted me to comment. I have no respect for people who try to weasel away from their own words. It betrays a fundamental lack of character.

But that's just my opinion. You are obviously welcome to set your own standards for honesty and character.

 

[zsdersw]

My only problem was that they apologized for doing it. Do it, be proud of it, stand by it. NO ONE who would complain is worth having as a viewer.

This.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

"So deliberate manipulation by the media motivated purely on the basis of ideology is acceptable? Or only in those cases where you agree with the motive?"

Your words, highly loaded, insinuating a position Pens1566 did not take.

My only axe to grind is I detest dishonesty. While disingenuous comments like the one I quoted above are hardly noteworthy here, you then drove it lower by denying the clear intent behind your words. That's what prompted me to comment. I have no respect for people who try to weasel away from their own words. It betrays a fundamental lack of character.

But that's just my opinion. You are obviously welcome to set your own standards for honesty and character.

I responded directly to your questions and asked that you do likewise...damn, I never thought those questions were really that difficult. The clear intent of my words were to make a point...if "loaded" questions (used to make a point) are a problem for you, then I suggest you put me on ignore...I'm sure you'll be much happier that way not having to deal with my dishonesty and fundamental lack of character.

BTW, thank you for admitting you do have an axe to grind. However I do find it ironic that you initially dove into this discussion labeling yourself as a "third party" implying objectivity which we now clearly see would be a dishonest insinuation.

But that's just my opinion. You are obviously welcome to set your own standards for honesty and character.

 

[PokerGuy]

My only problem was that they apologized for doing it. Do it, be proud of it, stand by it. NO ONE who would complain is worth having as a viewer.

Yeah, alienating millions of viewers and many advertisers is a great business model.

Like it or not, a very large portion of the population believes in some form of religion, and a portion of that group will be offended when the network specifically edits out a single portion of the pledge. It was a stupid decision to make the edits, and it would be an even more stupid decision to be stubborn about it afterwards. Much better to apologize, (hopefully) fire the idiots responsible and move on.

 

[PokerGuy]

standards for honesty and character.

Or, in his case, lack of them.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Yeah, alienating millions of viewers and many advertisers is a great business model.

Like it or not, a very large portion of the population believes in some form of religion, and a portion of that group will be offended when the network specifically edits out a single portion of the pledge. It was a stupid decision to make the edits, and it would be an even more stupid decision to be stubborn about it afterwards. Much better to apologize, (hopefully) fire the idiots responsible and move on.

This ^

 

[zsdersw]

Yeah, alienating millions of viewers and many advertisers is a great business model.

Like it or not, a very large portion of the population believes in some form of religion, and a portion of that group will be offended when the network specifically edits out a single portion of the pledge. It was a stupid decision to make the edits, and it would be an even more stupid decision to be stubborn about it afterwards. Much better to apologize, (hopefully) fire the idiots responsible and move on.

It should be obvious to even someone of your stature that while a large portion of the population believes in some form of religion, only a small minority of those are going to be offended and only a small minority within that small minority are going to be so offended that they will stop watching NBC.

Fears by execs and advertisers about some sort of major and long-lived backlash over this are, more often than not, as unfounded and ridiculous as fears by lots of reactionary people about things like climate change, oil exhaustion, etc.

 

[Bowfinger]

I responded directly to your questions and asked that you do likewise...damn, I never thought those questions were really that difficult. The clear intent of my words were to make a point...if "loaded" questions (used to make a point) are a problem for you, then I suggest you put me on ignore...I'm sure you'll be much happier that way not having to deal with my dishonesty and fundamental lack of character.

Nah. I don't have anybody on ignore. I'm not afraid to have my beliefs challenged by others views.

It is nice to see you finally acknowledge that far from just "asking two simple questions," you were actually trying to make a point, insinuating Pens was taking an inconsistent and perhaps hypocritical position. Better late than never I suppose.

BTW, thank you for admitting you do have an axe to grind. However I do find it ironic that you initially dove into this discussion labeling yourself as a "third party" implying objectivity which we now clearly see would be a dishonest insinuation.

Well, that was retarded. I like the color blue. I objectively observe that the sky is blue. Therefore, I'm dishonest for making the observation.

How about you man up and accept accountability for your behavior instead of childishly lashing out at those who point it out?

But that's just my opinion. You are obviously welcome to set your own standards for honesty and character.

Really? You're resorting to, "I know you are but what am I?" Lame.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

It is nice to see you finally acknowledge that far from just "asking two simple questions," you were actually trying to make a point....

Did I somewhere outright deny or even merely 'insinuate' at any time that I was not trying to make a point? Do I really need to specifically say "asking two simple questions to make a point" lest I be perceived as disingenuous or dishonest by an 'objective' "third party" person like yourself? Really?

..., insinuating Pens was taking an inconsistent and perhaps hypocritical position. Better late than never I suppose.

If I insinuated anything it's that Pens missed the point of this thread which is about NBC deliberately manipulating media to fit their agenda...it's not about whether or not "under God" should/shouldn't be in the Pledge of Allegiance. I then asked him if he thought media manipulation in this manner was acceptable or not. I also asked you the same question which you've evaded answering at every turn. I would hope that both of you would say "no" to the first question and make the 2nd question irrelevant...but that appears to be very difficult for some reason.

My 2nd question was indeed "loaded" and was intended to provoke thought...accusing me of dishonest insinuation is pure diversion. You've both had every opportunity to respond and dispel this unfair insinuation by just answering the fucking questions! Instead all I get is this cry baby crap about being disingenuous and dishonest. Seriously.

Well, that was retarded. I like the color blue. I objectively observe that the sky is blue. Therefore, I'm dishonest for making the observation.

How about you man up and accept accountability for your behavior instead of childishly lashing out at those who point it out?

Really? You're resorting to, "I know you are but what am I?" Lame.

I don't view you as being objective in any way, shape, or form...sorry...well sorta sorry.

 

[Nebor]

Yeah, alienating millions of viewers and many advertisers is a great business model.

Sometimes social progress trumps business\profitability. Certainly in the case of the war against religion, since most religious people are so stupid that they're essentially a gold mine of money to anyone smart and unscrupulous enough to take advantage of them.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Yeah, alienating millions of viewers and many advertisers is a great business model.

Like it or not, a very large portion of the population believes in some form of religion, and a portion of that group will be offended when the network specifically edits out a single portion of the pledge. It was a stupid decision to make the edits, and it would be an even more stupid decision to be stubborn about it afterwards. Much better to apologize, (hopefully) fire the idiots responsible and move on.

Yeah, cause $ is more important than beliefs,ideology, political foundations, etc. By all means, cater to and encourage stupidity so that you can become a more effective exploiter and rapist. THATs the cultural model we want in our nation.

*celebrates the absolute death of morality and reason with all the other fascist, ignorant, 65iq pieces of shit on this and every other forum*

 

[PrinceofWands]

It should be obvious to even someone of your stature that while a large portion of the population believes in some form of religion, only a small minority of those are going to be offended and only a small minority within that small minority are going to be so offended that they will stop watching NBC.

Fears by execs and advertisers about some sort of major and long-lived backlash over this are, more often than not, as unfounded and ridiculous as fears by lots of reactionary people about things like climate change, oil exhaustion, etc.

This * eleventy-billion.