Great....so now when producers edit audio to change what's actually been said, they can add video of the person saying the made up phrases. That was one way I determined if what I'm watching is real or edited....when they would splice audio together to create a monologue/dialogue, they had to cut away from the speakers face so you wouldn't notice the 1975 kungfu level dubbing....now they can convincingly fake both....in real time? We're totally fucked. Reality just became obsolete.

I'm going to Mars.

The phrase is certainly Orwellian, but it doesn't appear in 1984.

They need an activation phrase - such as when a maniac angrily yells something about god being great in a particular language.

Then they could spread deploy them all over the place, and they would wait dormant until activated.

That would be a horror movie alright

I might Upvote if not for the blowhard douching narrator.
No surprise the leftist pundits are overblowing Trump's rhetoric, after 8 years of competing with right-wing pundits.....and losing. I see that as short sighted, there is already plenty to complain about, with more coming daily, no need to use hyperbole and exaggeration. That only gives your detractors ammunition to discredit you with.

That said, I'm certain there was more than one direct Hitler quote in the speech, Trump has famously studied Hitler thoroughly, claiming to sleep with a book of Hitler speeches on his nightstand at one point if I recall correctly. It would be odd if a few phrases didn't enter his lexicon if he actually reads the books he keep at hand.

Phrasing!

OMG that was AWFUL! I mean astoundingly bad.
Something hilariously unaware about an entertainer singing "I'm not here for your entertainment" and other phrases meant to indicate she's not just a sex object while wearing skin tight spandex and group pelvic thrusting, though, so there was an ironic redeeming quality in there somewhere.

Of course they can't, because after a suitable period of mourning the troup attempted to eat the corpse. Hence the evolution of the phrase "waste not want not".

@bareboards2
pure and utter sophistry.

and i resent the fact that you slyly attempt to imply that i will just sit back and remain silent to injustice.

when i feel quite confident my records on this site prove the exact opposite.i have vociferously and aggressively taken on those who would bully,berate and belittle anyone who would voice their opinion.

i believe i have come to YOUR defense on more than one occasion.

what i found disturbing in your comment and maybe i should clarify is this "As Homeland Security says, if you see something, say something."

this is LITERALLY what was posted on almost every open venue in east germany.

and for you to tacitly excuse this statement by dismissively stating that "the stasi operated in secret".as somehow being evidence of your own righteousness belies an ignorance of just how oppressive and fearful those people were living in those conditions.

so you are morally superior because you openly called to out,and i quote "benevolent dictator with a light touch",and did not do so in private?
THIS is your justification?
THIS is the evidence you present to me to...what? exactly?

if you truly feel that you have somehow struck a blow for justice and taken a stand for moral integrity,then i submit that you have no clue what free speech really entales,nor do you understand the implications when we,as a community,start calling in the big daddy in the sky every time someone writes an offensive potty/racist or bigoted word.

and just LOOK how you consumed @gorillaman 's comment.
you made no reference to his salient point,but rather focused on ONE thing:nigger prince.

now was this appropriate?
taken singularly i would have to agree with you.
no..it is not appropriate.

but when we take our understandings of @gorillaman,who has been a contributing sifter for over 10 years,and consider his humor..which is dark and incredibly dry (like sahara dry),then with this context added to the mix,we can conclude that he was probably making a joke...you are certainly within your rights to find that joke in poor taste,and with this community,you are also within your rights (and even encouraged) to take @gorillaman to task for his poor taste.

but instead you called for big daddy in the sky to bring the hammer of justice down,and punish this dirt potty mouthed racist.his crime?
racist verbiage.

no consideration of who was writing it.
no consideration of his history on this site,which you openly admitted is a community.
you just..focused..on..the..word.

and then you preen like a peacock thinking somehow you have struck a blow of righteousness?

please sister.....you accomplished nothing except to put dag in an awkward position,and came across as a self righteous moralizer.

when you simply could have done what other sifters here actually DID.
you downvote his comment.
and if you felt so inclined,and it appears you ARE so inclined,directly call @gorillaman out for his poor choice of verbiage.

look BB,
i actually find you to be a sweetheart,with a huuuuge propensity for empathy and compassion,but every time i engage with you my sphincter tightens up like it is preparing for a colonoscopy.there is this ever-present apprehension that my words will not be taken with humanity that they are written,or the open honesty i am trying to convey.

i am sure that if we were actually sitting in a cafe,sipping that delicious coffee you guys are so proud of, i would not experience this anxiety when engaging with you,but it seems EVERY time i disagree with something you post,or an opinion i may take issue with,i offend you in some manner.

you ..and i am sure this is not done on purpose..make it incredibly difficult to disagree with something you post,because i always feel i have hurt your feelings somehow.

real or imagined...i am just being honest here.i always approach any interaction with you as if i am walking on eggshells,underlined with landmines.

i am simply disagreeing with you here.
calling for a ban on gorillaman because of a joke made in poor taste,while simultaneously disregarding his contributions to this site,and taking his personality into consideration,is simply an over-zealous reaction and in no way deserves the attention of dag.

because if gorillaman deserves to be banned for an offensive phrase,than i should be banned as well.

free speech is just that...free.
of course we are free to ridicule that speech.
yaaay free speech!

Nice promote @eric3579

I try to keep the torch alive on this one by incorporating the song (specifically this cover) into English classes for my high school age students in Thailand. Made a worksheet where students try to fill in the blanks, order phrases in the chorus in the right sequence, etc.

The Thai students usually enjoy it -- even the ones that are generally more into Lady Gaga / Justin Bieber. After filling in the worksheet I play the Tool original, but the students find it much easier to hear and identify the words in this cover.

Suddenly accuracy and detail become popular, and all it took was for the worst developed world leadership candidate in modern history to win the presidency of the US.

Do the words horse, stable and bolted mean anything to anyone?

We're about 10 years into post truth politics by now, and it seems a strange thing to me to start the fight-back here, on individual comments made by people beholden to themselves. Rather than opinion-shaping mass media printing literal lies.

Let he who did not engage in hyperbole during Trump's campaign cast the first stone. Everyone's suddenly twice the pedantic nerd I ever am when the phrase "post truth" becomes en vogue.

I don't want to be a dick or anything, but look at the backlash to all this policing of PC language. People were happy to give a potential president of the US the leeway to be sexist and xenophobic because of political correctness fatigue. Do you really want to do the same thing but with FACTS? Because that's where this ends...

2024 -- "Oh you can't say anything these days without being sure you're 100% correct and accurate and can't be misconstrued! So what if the president's opinion on climate change doesn't involve facts? It's about time someone spoke their mind without the fact-checking police getting involved!"

I genuinely don't want to be a dick about it. But if I am one, I'm pretty sure I do also have a good point.

There were categorically no facts in his post (see the key phrases "I think" and "they seem").

There was no logic or arguments either. Logic and argument come from reasoning based on presented facts.

This might sound petty (it does to me and I'm writing it), but when Post Truth Politics caused Brexit and Trump, words like "facts", "logic" and "reasonable arguments" cannot be thrown around.

Regardless of whether I agree with @Spacedog79 (which I mostly do), what he presented was "opinion", not fact, logic or argument.

Look, democrats are obstructionist, sure, but what you're saying is that a guy who speeds to get to work is as bad as a drunk driver who speeds through school zones because they're both basically just disobeying traffic laws. There's a world of difference and conflating the two is simply inappropriate.

I notice from your sentence length, grammar, and use of buzz phrases that you don't have an especially good grasp on any of this, so I'll leave it at that. Add in your aversion to actually being forced to think about your positions and I know all I need to about you.

If you'd paid any attention to me, you wouldn't have made any of the obvious factual mistakes you have here, so it's apparent there's no means of getting through to you, except, perhaps, life experience and/or more education than you have at the moment (though I suspect you'd reject that too).

Your arguments are the same kind used by black lung / coal miner or cancer / smoking skeptics. Sure, it seems like when we control for every other factor in longitudinal studies that these factors are strong predictors. But you can't guarantee that all coal miner will get black lung or a smoker will get cancer. So it must be some other lifestyle factor.

Same with climate change. Your right wing blogs / websites argue that just because you can't create a model with perfect certainty, the inexorable trend isn't obvious. No thanks, I'd rather go with a 97% scientific consensus that has convinced most scientific organisations, large multinational companies (without a countervailing interest) and national governments from America to China.

If you're so certain that the science is wrong, why not publish a countervailing journal article? Oh wait, no, you almost certainly don't have training in the field or actual understanding of the science, and are just copy pasting fancy phrases like "decadal scale oscillations" because it makes you sound more credible.

I thought maybe it was a code phrase that meant he had illicit footage of him riding actual cows, and that footage was about to be deployed.