yes, it's an "attack" ad in the sense that it doesn't cover anything except the character of the targeted candidate. however, i think the message is relevant. the candidates have differences in platform but over the last decade or so, i find i value their character more than their positions. we have a hard time getting business done in washington because we have too many people of poor character who would rather play political games than pass serious legislation.

i don't want a president or congressman who is completely disinterested in the views of others, who is hostile to discussion, or who absolutely refuses to revise his own opinions. in fact, i want to vote these assholes out regardless of their positions on issues. i want people who are willing to compromise, who understand that not everyone agrees and who will seek common ground, who are more interested in progress than preening. an ad like this tells me something about the targeted candidate, and i can appreciate that it is not just the standard vitriolic screed or godwin invocation.

of course, it didn't tell me anything i didn't already know. i would not work for mittens if he owned a business, and i would not even want to put him in charge of a bingo game.

It seems like an awful waste to write so much in service of complaining about someone like Romney being taken out of context, or having strawmen created in his image. I mean, this is the guy who has taken the President out of context and based an entire nominating convention on it. I'm in Nevada, and I get two mailers a week and they both use this fallacious "gaffe" out of context.

It's really hard to have any sympathy for him here.

But with all that being said, although I think this doesn't rate much (if any) attention, what people are saying is generally true. If you've grown up in the western world, you generally know how a reference to Hitler is going to turn out and almost everyone uses it either in a strictly historical sense, or to demonize someone else. He used it in the historical sense, but I think most of us would have had the good sense to not be compelled to point out that the great idea we're talking about came from Nazis. He practically invoked Godwin on himself.

Shit like this is why he's got his foot in his mouth to the knee. I'm glad I'm not a Republican anymore - those who aren't embarrassed by this candidate are utterly indoctrinated.

Does not the application of Godwin's Law now automatically re-elect Obama?

>> ^Fletch:

>> ^luxury_pie:
We have a "post-privacy" movement in Germany (I'm sure this exists in other countries, too).
They stand for full identification in any interaction on the web.
here is a statement from the CCC which sums up their case pretty accurately.
I don't like it.

Godwin? Are you in here?


Well, now he is. HITLER!

>> ^luxury_pie:

We have a "post-privacy" movement in Germany (I'm sure this exists in other countries, too).
They stand for full identification in any interaction on the web.
here is a statement from the CCC which sums up their case pretty accurately.
I don't like it.


Godwin? Are you in here?

Godwin = 1 (elapsed time: 1d4h24m)

Where do math battles rank in comparison to Goodwin's Law?

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

A good old fashioned math battle. Feels good to be back.

In reply to this comment by dag:
Mainly trying not to step in a big pile of Godwin.
In reply to this comment by Fletch:
In reply to this comment by dag:
^Shiny makes a good point - Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot - the biggest baddies of the 20th, we're all atheists. Might it be that extremist ideologies of any kind are the problem?
Lol. Are you moderating this thread?


Too late.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Mainly trying not to step in a big pile of Godwin.
In reply to this comment by Fletch:
In reply to this comment by dag:
^Shiny makes a good point - Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot - the biggest baddies of the 20th, we're all atheists. Might it be that extremist ideologies of any kind are the problem?
Lol. Are you moderating this thread?

No. I didn't miss anything. You didn't hear what Cenk said. He said that some Republicans were trying to convince voters that a) Obama has been ignoring domestic energy, and b) that's the reason gas prices are high. Cenk put paid to both of these ideas because neither is true. It's the Republicans that Cenk quotes who are saying that oil drilling in the US counts as Domestic Energy, and that it would affect gas prices.

I don't watch any American TV news except what pops up on the Sift, which is almost all Fox News, so I can't compare. I can tell you that Fox is the worst journalism that I have ever seen, so much so that it's not really journalism to me, but shoving opinions down people's throats and still calling it news. If CNN and the rest are the same way, then that's a shame.

FWIW, Fox News viewers consistently poll as among the most misinformed of news consumers, often coming in lower than people who don't watch the news at all.

Also, I've never understood when the word "liberal" became a swear word. It just means "open-mminded." I think being able to receive and process new information and change long-held ideas in the face of such information is a strength rather than a weakness. But if you enjoy believing whatever you believe just because you believe it and like having others tell you that you're right even if it's incorrect, then have at it.>> ^ptrcklgrs:

Ok, you clearly didn't understand what i said because you responded exactly how I warned.
"Oil Production" does not equal "Domestic Energy"
"Oil Production" does not equal "Domestic Energy"
Solar power doesn't fuel my car. We could triple our "domestic energy" production with nuclear power plants, but that wouldn't do shit for my car and gas prices. Do you not understand that? He is responding intentionally with misleading points.
I'm sorry you are such a hater of Fox News and that you don't understand that all Fox News did was match CNN, MSNBC, NY Times and every other liberal media with conservative media. You ever heard the phrase "liberal media" its been around for almost 100 years. But the first Conservative media pops up and you all start crying.
Hell there have been so many cover up of democratic representive.
Example: Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] was on a council that was awarding all military contracts to a company her husband was the primary share holder in. (Illegal) Once someone found this out, she resigned and the media refused to write on it.

>> ^messenger:
You've got to be kidding me. In his opening statement, Cenk says (1)Republicans are accusing Obama of ignoring domestic energy production, and (2)they are publicly linking this failure with increased gas prices. Cenk then responds that not only is Obama doing more domestic energy production than Bush (point 1), but there isn't even a causal relationship between the two stats (point 2). That's good journalism, as long as his opening statement is true about what Republicans are saying. If he had only said, "We're not drilling enough!! (without mentioning domestic energy) and then gone on with the domestic energy fact as a counterpoint, that would be misleading.
Even if he had fudged it like that --which he does on rare occasion, but not here-- comparing him with FOX is the news integrity equivalent of Godwin's Law. Fox are so bad, so reprehensible, so intentionally misleading, so ideologically driven that Cenk on his worst day couldn't even approach their level of deceit. [Edit: to your second point, without doing the background research, I'll just accept that you're right, and say this IS one of the times that Cenk fudges things a wee bit. But seriously, if the worst you can say about him is that he tars all Republicans with the same brush, that's not that serious.]
But if you still think you're right, if you can remember any time TYT did anything as corrupt as some of Fox's worst moments --and remember that they've been caught intentionally manipulating stories-- tell us about it here, even if you can't find the link. I bet you've got nothing. Check your hyperbole.>> ^ptrcklgrs:
TYT is a manipulative as Fox News. On 2 Counts
1: He says "Fact we are at a 8 year high for domestic energy production in this country". Ok, I believe that fact but its a stat based on domestic energy production. Not domestic oil drilling. Oil is one piece of energy. We've gone nuts in the last few years with solar, wind, fracking energy as going green. So that stat looks quite misleading.
2: When he says "Republicans" yes there is a hand full of republicans pushing this point. But by the vast majority it is held as not true. Why doesn't he name names. He is just finding any issue he can to dig deeper trenches between lines and make his money.
TYT = Fox News Opionists

Ok, you clearly didn't understand what i said because you responded exactly how I warned.

"Oil Production" does not equal "Domestic Energy"
"Oil Production" does not equal "Domestic Energy"

Solar power doesn't fuel my car. We could triple our "domestic energy" production with nuclear power plants, but that wouldn't do shit for my car and gas prices. Do you not understand that? He is responding intentionally with misleading points.

I'm sorry you are such a hater of Fox News and that you don't understand that all Fox News did was match CNN, MSNBC, NY Times and every other liberal media with conservative media. You ever heard the phrase "liberal media" its been around for almost 100 years. But the first Conservative media pops up and you all start crying.

Hell there have been so many cover up of democratic representive.

Example: Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] was on a council that was awarding all military contracts to a company her husband was the primary share holder in. (Illegal) Once someone found this out, she resigned and the media refused to write on it.


>> ^messenger:

You've got to be kidding me. In his opening statement, Cenk says (1)Republicans are accusing Obama of ignoring domestic energy production, and (2)they are publicly linking this failure with increased gas prices. Cenk then responds that not only is Obama doing more domestic energy production than Bush (point 1), but there isn't even a causal relationship between the two stats (point 2). That's good journalism, as long as his opening statement is true about what Republicans are saying. If he had only said, "We're not drilling enough!! (without mentioning domestic energy) and then gone on with the domestic energy fact as a counterpoint, that would be misleading.
Even if he had fudged it like that --which he does on rare occasion, but not here-- comparing him with FOX is the news integrity equivalent of Godwin's Law. Fox are so bad, so reprehensible, so intentionally misleading, so ideologically driven that Cenk on his worst day couldn't even approach their level of deceit. [Edit: to your second point, without doing the background research, I'll just accept that you're right, and say this IS one of the times that Cenk fudges things a wee bit. But seriously, if the worst you can say about him is that he tars all Republicans with the same brush, that's not that serious.]
But if you still think you're right, if you can remember any time TYT did anything as corrupt as some of Fox's worst moments --and remember that they've been caught intentionally manipulating stories-- tell us about it here, even if you can't find the link. I bet you've got nothing. Check your hyperbole.>> ^ptrcklgrs:
TYT is a manipulative as Fox News. On 2 Counts
1: He says "Fact we are at a 8 year high for domestic energy production in this country". Ok, I believe that fact but its a stat based on domestic energy production. Not domestic oil drilling. Oil is one piece of energy. We've gone nuts in the last few years with solar, wind, fracking energy as going green. So that stat looks quite misleading.
2: When he says "Republicans" yes there is a hand full of republicans pushing this point. But by the vast majority it is held as not true. Why doesn't he name names. He is just finding any issue he can to dig deeper trenches between lines and make his money.
TYT = Fox News Opionists

You've got to be kidding me. In his opening statement, Cenk says (1)Republicans are accusing Obama of ignoring domestic energy production, and (2)they are publicly linking this failure with increased gas prices. Cenk then responds that not only is Obama doing more domestic energy production than Bush (point 1), but there isn't even a causal relationship between the two stats (point 2). That's good journalism, as long as his opening statement is true about what Republicans are saying. If he had only said, "We're not drilling enough!! (without mentioning domestic energy) and then gone on with the domestic energy fact as a counterpoint, that would be misleading.

Even if he had fudged it like that --which he does on rare occasion, but not here-- comparing him with FOX is the news integrity equivalent of Godwin's Law. Fox are so bad, so reprehensible, so intentionally misleading, so ideologically driven that Cenk on his worst day couldn't even approach their level of deceit. [Edit: to your second point, without doing the background research, I'll just accept that you're right, and say this IS one of the times that Cenk fudges things a wee bit. But seriously, if the worst you can say about him is that he tars all Republicans with the same brush, that's not that serious.]

But if you still think you're right, if you can remember any time TYT did anything as corrupt as some of Fox's worst moments --and remember that they've been caught intentionally manipulating stories-- tell us about it here, even if you can't find the link. I bet you've got nothing. Check your hyperbole.>> ^ptrcklgrs:

TYT is a manipulative as Fox News. On 2 Counts
1: He says "Fact we are at a 8 year high for domestic energy production in this country". Ok, I believe that fact but its a stat based on domestic energy production. Not domestic oil drilling. Oil is one piece of energy. We've gone nuts in the last few years with solar, wind, fracking energy as going green. So that stat looks quite misleading.
2: When he says "Republicans" yes there is a hand full of republicans pushing this point. But by the vast majority it is held as not true. Why doesn't he name names. He is just finding any issue he can to dig deeper trenches between lines and make his money.
TYT = Fox News Opionists

Sigh.... Godwined...

>> ^luxury_pie:


So @packo decides for whom we can feel bad. Finally, I was looking for you all around!
And suddenly I don't have to feel bad for molested children, because there are children out there who have it much worse and starve to death, yaaaay logic.


Your logic fails as badly as the wingsuit. If we follow your synaptic misfires, the children would be jumping on your dick (you, playing the role of gravity/a non functioning wingsuit don't actually do anything, you're just there) of their own volition and incur injury, possibly even STD's, because of their poor choices...

ie. Choosing to fuck someone is not the same as being raped/molested. But kudos on your Godwin-esque attempt to somehow link some twit jumping off a bridge and hurting himself with a child being raped. You must be so proud... /eyeroll