Wow justice may be blind but it sure loves money. Amazing how theft of millions of dollars is essentially rewarded but if you're an average Joe caught stealing pop from McDonalds, or even worse, with a joint your hand, your life is basically ruined by jail time and a criminal record.

ouch... not entirely fun working for them now...

You work for Morgan Stanley?

>> ^G-bar:

ouch... not entirely fun working for them now...

You'll do it anyways.

>> ^G-bar:

ouch... not entirely fun working for them now...

Urge to piss on a Morgan Stanley Execs head...Rising!

vote republicrat = get republicrat

>> ^G-bar:

ouch... not entirely fun working for them now...



I quit a very well paying job at a major financial institution because of shit like this and have slept better every night since.

Just sayin'.

I'm always conflicted when I see videos like this. I react positively since it supports my view, yet when a video comes with a view I disagree with and a tone similar to Cenk - WAKE UP SHEEPLE! - I react with disgust and disdain..how could someone believe in something so stupid?? Then I imagine a conservative me who reacts in exactly the same way, just to the opposite video.

There must be a better way to communicate my beliefs to others. When did Cenk become the liberal Rush Limbaugh? Seriously, watch the video again but imagine its Rush and not Cenk. Fits too well. Too much ranting.

Good experiment. I did what you suggested and watched it again pretending it was Rush Limbaugh speaking, and here's what I was felt:

I noticed that their ranting tones and vocal styles are quite similar, and that I wasn't bothered by that. I noticed how I trusted that what Cenk was telling me was factual and balanced because Cenk prizes his image of being honest and fair. His arguments were so obvious that I didn't feel he was manipulating anything to fit an agenda. I also felt this because he almost never does so, and when he does, he admits it first. In this video, I felt he was genuinely worked up, and was delivering the pertinent details and venting like a person who was actually pissed off. In the last year or so that I've been watching a lot of TYT, I have rarely thought like he was telling people what to believe or speaking to his audience like sheeple (his often repeated assertion that women and gays who support the Republican party are either stupid or ignorant is the exception I'm thinking of), and I feel like if I were to talk to him, there'd be room for discussion on any topic, as long as I was bringing fact to the table.

This is mostly in contrast to how I perceive Limbaugh. The feeling I get from him is that he's a blowhard who succeeds by being loud, resolute, prejudiced, black-and-white in his opinions, spoonfeeding his audience an opinion (any opinion will do as long as they can repeat it at work), backing it up with bullshit or manipulation, and by directing his audience to grouphate an "other" that he invented. I think a better comparison for a lib Limbaugh would be Keith Olbermann. Again, I mostly agreed with Keith's views on things, but the way he went about voicing them was hateful, rude and divisive, and designed so the payoff was not of being better informed, but of enjoying a dig at the evil "other".

If you don't like Cenk, I think it's either you're picking up something else that's going over my head, or Cenk's tone is triggering associations with Limbaugh's (and Olbermann's) hateful and insulting rhetorical style.>> ^Shakesify:

I'm always conflicted when I see videos like this. I react positively since it supports my view, yet when a video comes with a view I disagree with and a tone similar to Cenk - WAKE UP SHEEPLE! - I react with disgust and disdain..how could someone believe in something so stupid?? Then I imagine a conservative me who reacts in exactly the same way, just to the opposite video.
There must be a better way to communicate my beliefs to others. When did Cenk become the liberal Rush Limbaugh? Seriously, watch the video again but imagine its Rush and not Cenk. Fits too well. Too much ranting.

perhaps in need of some cheese with his whine.

>> ^criticalthud:

perhaps in need of some cheese with his whine.

Oh wow, you come up with that yourself just now? Good stuff. Next thing we know you'll tell us something about the "world's smallest violin".


So are you sticking up for Morgan Stanley or just critiquing the presentation?

For the most part I agree with you. I'd say that maybe, for me at least, I haven't been enjoying the TYT as much recently specifically because of the tone; it gets an almost knee-jerk reaction from me.

>> ^messenger:

Good experiment. I did what you suggested and watched it again pretending it was Rush Limbaugh speaking, and here's what I was felt:
I noticed that their ranting tones and vocal styles are quite similar, and that I wasn't bothered by that. I noticed how I trusted that what Cenk was telling me was factual and balanced because Cenk prizes his image of being honest and fair. His arguments were so obvious that I didn't feel he was manipulating anything to fit an agenda. I also felt this because he almost never does so, and when he does, he admits it first. In this video, I felt he was genuinely worked up, and was delivering the pertinent details and venting like a person who was actually pissed off. In the last year or so that I've been watching a lot of TYT, I have rarely thought like he was telling people what to believe or speaking to his audience like sheeple (his often repeated assertion that women and gays who support the Republican party are either stupid or ignorant is the exception I'm thinking of), and I feel like if I were to talk to him, there'd be room for discussion on any topic, as long as I was bringing fact to the table.
This is mostly in contrast to how I perceive Limbaugh. The feeling I get from him is that he's a blowhard who succeeds by being loud, resolute, prejudiced, black-and-white in his opinions, spoonfeeding his audience an opinion (any opinion will do as long as they can repeat it at work), backing it up with bullshit or manipulation, and by directing his audience to grouphate an "other" that he invented. I think a better comparison for a lib Limbaugh would be Keith Olbermann. Again, I mostly agreed with Keith's views on things, but the way he went about voicing them was hateful, rude and divisive, and designed so the payoff was not of being better informed, but of enjoying a dig at the evil "other".
If you don't like Cenk, I think it's either you're picking up something else that's going over my head, or Cenk's tone is triggering associations with Limbaugh's (and Olbermann's) hateful and insulting rhetorical style.>> ^Shakesify:
I'm always conflicted when I see videos like this. I react positively since it supports my view, yet when a video comes with a view I disagree with and a tone similar to Cenk - WAKE UP SHEEPLE! - I react with disgust and disdain..how could someone believe in something so stupid?? Then I imagine a conservative me who reacts in exactly the same way, just to the opposite video.
There must be a better way to communicate my beliefs to others. When did Cenk become the liberal Rush Limbaugh? Seriously, watch the video again but imagine its Rush and not Cenk. Fits too well. Too much ranting.

And on second watch I'm actually enjoying it more than the first time. I would say it's after the first minute or so where I lose interest.

>> ^Truckchase:

>> ^criticalthud:
perhaps in need of some cheese with his whine.

Oh wow, you come up with that yourself just now? Good stuff. Next thing we know you'll tell us something about the "world's smallest violin".

So are you sticking up for Morgan Stanley or just critiquing the presentation?


no i'm agreeing with the sentiments expressed above and critiquing dipshits like you and him, who just can't seem to not make reactionary diatribe without thinking it through.

listen hippy, your image and how you present yourself is completely connected to how you will be perceived and how far your message will travel.
the same goes for any occupy moron banging a cowbell or wearing a guy falkes mask.

>> ^criticalthud:

>> ^criticalthud:
perhaps in need of some cheese with his whine.

listen me, your image and how you present yourself is completely connected to how you will be perceived and how far your message will travel.
the same goes for any occupy moron banging a cowbell or wearing a Freud mask.
See what I did there? I almost corrected your punctuation but I figured the poor sentence structure would help underscore the "reactionary diatribe without thinking through it".
I'm frustrated by these efforts to tear down others that try to affect change and then turn around and claim to agree with those they have just assailed. If you think it can be done better than show us. Help spread the word in what you clearly understand to be a better way.
So here's my point: How about we stick to discussion of the issues rather than shooting the messenger eh?

All of this shit is just hilariously unsurprising. I read a book in junior high school that outlined this corruption pretty accurately, and there're plenty of speculative history books that our current way of being is right on track with. And everyone that gives a crap and wants a better world is a crazy person -- there's a book about that too.

Meanwhile, under-educated fuckers pouring over the brim with nationalism and over-educated fuckers with self interest in the system involve themselves needlessly in party line bickering and shameless plugs for the issue of the month, as the planet and our civilization is exploited with impetuous.

We're like the banana republic of freedom.

Something something reactionary diatribe without thinking something how you present yourself something something how you will be perceived something moron something glass houses.>> ^criticalthud:

>> ^Truckchase:
>> ^criticalthud:
perhaps in need of some cheese with his whine.

Oh wow, you come up with that yourself just now? Good stuff. Next thing we know you'll tell us something about the "world's smallest violin".
So are you sticking up for Morgan Stanley or just critiquing the presentation?

no i'm agreeing with the sentiments expressed above and critiquing dipshits like you and him, who just can't seem to not make reactionary diatribe without thinking it through.
listen hippy, your image and how you present yourself is completely connected to how you will be perceived and how far your message will travel.
the same goes for any occupy moron banging a cowbell or wearing a guy falkes mask.

Yeh, please don't shoot me.>> ^Truckchase:
So here's my point: How about we stick to discussion of the issues rather than shooting the messenger eh?

>> ^messenger:

Yeh, please don't shoot me.>> ^Truckchase:
So here's my point: How about we stick to discussion of the issues rather than shooting the messenger eh?



because, the methodology used in the delivery of information IS the issue here.

this bank shit happens all the time. the game is rigged. there's no surprise here for anyone who is in the least bit in the know.

however, the methodology in how you present this information needs to be substantially refined.

if rationality is going to succeed, we probably need to appeal to people's rational side, rather than their reactional and emotional tendencies.

plus the whining is just fucking annoying.
yes we get it cenk, you're really upset, and for some reason, you think we care. but we don't. you're not special. move on.

>> ^Truckchase:

>> ^criticalthud:
>> ^criticalthud:
perhaps in need of some cheese with his whine.

listen me, your image and how you present yourself is completely connected to how you will be perceived and how far your message will travel.
the same goes for any occupy moron banging a cowbell or wearing a Freud mask.
See what I did there? I almost corrected your punctuation but I figured the poor sentence structure would help underscore the "reactionary diatribe without thinking through it".
I'm frustrated by these efforts to tear down others that try to affect change and then turn around and claim to agree with those they have just assailed. If you think it can be done better than show us. Help spread the word in what you clearly understand to be a better way.
So here's my point: How about we stick to discussion of the issues rather than shooting the messenger eh?


clever too. my...what gifts.

>> ^messenger:

Something something reactionary diatribe without thinking something how you present yourself something something how you will be perceived something moron something glass houses.>> ^criticalthud:
>> ^Truckchase:
>> ^criticalthud:
perhaps in need of some cheese with his whine.

Oh wow, you come up with that yourself just now? Good stuff. Next thing we know you'll tell us something about the "world's smallest violin".
So are you sticking up for Morgan Stanley or just critiquing the presentation?

no i'm agreeing with the sentiments expressed above and critiquing dipshits like you and him, who just can't seem to not make reactionary diatribe without thinking it through.
listen hippy, your image and how you present yourself is completely connected to how you will be perceived and how far your message will travel.
the same goes for any occupy moron banging a cowbell or wearing a guy falkes mask.



in fairness i deadpanned the whole thing. plus i'm vociferously agreeing with you. for fuck's sake.

but interestingly, yes on image and i hate my name here, it assumes i'm critiquing something. meh. i'll change it.
t-minos tomato, at your service.
i do music
www.soundcloud.com/t-minos
and work with spines
www.ncrtheory.org
and i'm part of cirque du cliche

You find Cenk's tone annoying? OK. We get it. He's not special to you. Move on.>> ^criticalthud:

plus the whining is just fucking annoying.
yes we get it cenk, you're really upset, and for some reason, you think we care. but we don't. you're not special. move on.

It's not the content of your message (well, it's that too), but in how you present it: "dipshits like you", "Listen hippy", "moron". It affects how people receive the content of your message. You were vociferous alright, but you sound like an argumentative, angry blowhard with a chip on his shoulder, so that's how much attention I gave your content.>> ^criticalthud:
in fairness i deadpanned the whole thing. plus i'm vociferously agreeing with you. for fuck's sake.

>> ^messenger:

You find Cenk's tone annoying? OK. We get it. He's not special to you. Move on.>> ^criticalthud:
plus the whining is just fucking annoying.
yes we get it cenk, you're really upset, and for some reason, you think we care. but we don't. you're not special. move on.



actually i find your tone annoying.

This isn't my tone. It's yours. You do realize that I'm mirroring your tone back to you, right? Anyway, there's the "ignore" button.>> ^criticalthud:

>> ^messenger:
You find Cenk's tone annoying? OK. We get it. He's not special to you. Move on.>> ^criticalthud:
plus the whining is just fucking annoying.
yes we get it cenk, you're really upset, and for some reason, you think we care. but we don't. you're not special. move on.


actually i find your tone annoying.

>> ^messenger:

This isn't my tone. It's yours. You do realize that I'm mirroring your tone back to you, right? Anyway, there's the "ignore" button.>> ^criticalthud:
>> ^messenger:
You find Cenk's tone annoying? OK. We get it. He's not special to you. Move on.>> ^criticalthud:
plus the whining is just fucking annoying.
yes we get it cenk, you're really upset, and for some reason, you think we care. but we don't. you're not special. move on.


actually i find your tone annoying.



of course, the question is whether you point that mirror back at yourself.
"messenger"? why don't you just be the "just sayin" guy for the ultimate cop out on taking any responsibility for the things you spew.
look at your jerk-all-over-yourself experiment you posted above, for something that could be summarized in a sentence or less. really? how seriously do we take ourselves? i know you are but what am i? boring.

but oh the mirror. ah yes, i'm so abrasive. dear me.
only that you're missing the point. i'm not delivering the news. Cenk Ungar is. I don't need to reach people, Cenk Ungar does. in fact, i couldn't care less. see the difference?