Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

Cobra Commander · 2005-04-19 07:50:24

Never mind (deleted previous comments in this post; inserted this). I reiterated something you said clearly (regarding political manipulation).

The subtleties of the constant political manipulation that constantly occur can never really be stated clearly, it's all too fuzzy and ever-changing. Orwellian in a sense.

Which leads to some grasping that and using it to attack whoever is in office at the time, thus totally missing the point and falling for political manipulation.

Black and white exist only to those whose vision is not properly attuned to distinguish shades of grey, but not everyone who speaks of black and white sees in such a manner.

Which is to say whatever you wrote initially, I'm sure it had some merit. If possible reduncy where cause enough to cut a post this entire thread would cease to exist.

Palomar · 2005-04-19 08:46:29

Which is to say whatever you wrote initially, I'm sure it had some merit. If possible reduncy where cause enough to cut a post this entire thread would cease to exist.

*It was a few comments about political manipulation. You already mentioned it, so it seemed redundant. Frankly, I think that's a lot of it. There are some threats, sure; and 9/11 unnerved me completely. We went from repeated high-profile, "can't ignore it" warnings and systems of warning to crickets chirping in the background, seemingly overnight. :laugh: Such a dire threat status couldn't diminish that abruptly.

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2005-04-19 09:04:54

We went from repeated high-profile, "can't ignore it" warnings and systems of warning to crickets chirping in the background, seemingly overnight. Such a dire threat status couldn't diminish that abruptly.

Ah, but the threat status didn't diminish, only our perception of it. Our focus has wandered to other things and in so doing we perceive that the threat is reduced, and from there deduce it was on some level false to start with. When our minds and senses are clear and objective throughout we see much smaller, more gradual changes.

:hm: Okay, that came across a little too "Sensei Cobra" there, let me take another run at it.

We had threats and actual terrorist attacks before 9/11 but didn't give them as much attention as they warranted. Then 9/11 happens and we collectively crap ourselves and go into shock as though it came out of nowhere. Then for awhile our alertness was artificially high in relation to the threat. Then when nothing happens, we get more relaxed. The Super Bowl becomes more important than what terrorists might be up to. Our alertness becomes artificially low in relation to the threat. The fact is that for the last ten years or so the objective real threat of terrorism has been roughly constant with a few spikes. Only our response and awareness has gone through drastic changes, from ignoring it to abject panic and now to a peripheral awareness that something might happen, but not to me in keeping with the average American's mindset.

Politicians manipulate the perception of the threat rather than the threat itself. A threat has to exist before it can be effectively used for purposes of manipulation.

Ian Flint · 2005-04-19 09:07:34

9/11 unnerved me completely

I don't know. Maybe I'm just wired diferently than you, but I remember thinking on the day of the attack that this was something that couldn't be repeated easily. I figured that airports and public transportation would simply tighten its security and prevent more of this sort of terrorism on its own.

Did it really freak you out? Like did you go buy a shotgun and a gasmask and all that?

Ian Flint · 2005-04-19 09:09:52

Politicians manipulate the perception of the threat rather than the threat itself.

I think that is what she was getting at. Right, cindy?

Palomar · 2005-04-19 09:13:26

9/11 unnerved me completely
I don't know. Maybe I'm just wired diferently than you, but I remember thinking on the day of the attack that this was something that couldn't be repeated easily. I figured that airports and public transportation would simply tighten its security and prevent more of this sort of terrorism on its own.
Did it really freak you out? Like did you go buy a shotgun and a gasmask and all that?

*Hi. No, didn't buy a gas mask or stock up on food and water, etc.

I -was- greatly concerned a similar event would happen within a few days of 9/11; the terrorist cells in the U.S. had already attacked of course and I wasn't sure how quickly control could be gotten over trains and etc. Then all the anthrax scares.

9/11 hit me hard emotionally, basically. I felt like I'd been physically beaten for days. I was still a bit uptight about it for a year after, then things started feeling more back to normal and I began ignoring the "alerts."

--Cindy

Palomar · 2005-04-19 09:14:08

Politicians manipulate the perception of the threat rather than the threat itself.
I think that is what she was getting at. Right, cindy?

*Yes.

Cobra Commander · 2005-04-19 09:24:43

Quote (Ian Flint @ April 19 2005, 11:09)
Quote
Politicians manipulate the perception of the threat rather than the threat itself.

I think that is what she was getting at. Right, cindy?
*Yes.

And with that I see a need to clarify further. By "manipulate the perception" I don't mean a simple "play up the threat and look like we can beat it better than anyone else" though that can be a part of it. What I really mean is a process along these lines. Threat exists and the public becomes aware of it, they demand action. Politicians fall all over themselves to look like they are on the ball. At this point two angles play in, on the one hand you have the politicians who are perceived as better able to meet the threat trying to keep it on people's minds while those perceived as less adept at it try to distract them with something else. The other side is that they can't manufacture perception themselves, they can only respond to and try to channel the perceptions of the population. They manipulate the perception of themselves in relation to the perception of the threat, which must be real in some degree for the perception to last long enough to be worth manipulating.

In short, there are no masterminds molding the thoughts of the unwashed masses, everyone is winging it and trying to "blame" one faction or another for trying to use public perception for their own ends is a rather silly exercise.

Not that anyone here is necesarily trying to do that, of course.

Palomar · 2005-04-19 10:08:35

*Overall, I agree with you Cobra. America is caught up in such a vicious cycle of Hype...it's nearing pathology, IMO. Is that deliberate (vex and confuse and wear down the patience of people until they give up and give in) or just the nature of the beast? Probably a combination of things. Cable TV is to blame for a lot of this. I remember when people used to bemoan ABC, NBC and CBS as the "only" TV media outlets out there. I dunno, bigger/more (nowadays) is not always better (circus).

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s … dc]Keeping an eye on Putin

This is interesting. Read or heard a news report a month or so ago, concerning Putin's alleged increasingly taking more and more power. It's an odd sort of "flashback" (to the Cold War days) to see "fear of Kremlin power" back in the news.

If Putin does become dictator (if he's not already, but I mean officially), what will other nations do?

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2005-04-19 10:44:55

Cable TV is to blame for a lot of this. I remember when people used to bemoan ABC, NBC and CBS as the "only" TV media outlets out there. I dunno, bigger/more (nowadays) is not always better (circus).

I prefer more outlets of information. It makes it harder to get away with spinning things, there's always someone there to say "hey, what about this."

But then I've always thought that the "big media" has a disproportionate number of people adhering to a particular political "faith" which I don't adhere to. Now we can watch CNN for Left-leaning interpretation, FOX for a Right-leaning view and maybe get closer to the truth.

Unless I get that Fascist news network going, then you only need station. "Your one voice for news."

If Putin does become dictator (if he's not already, but I mean officially), what will other nations do?

Look around nervously and kick themselves for thinking old Commies can learn new tricks.

But in a way, a strong Russian government under Putin could be good for our interests from a short-term perspective. Putin isn't looney, he won't do anything suicidal. If he can keep his country's arsenal in check it's better for us than unguarded stockpiles of old nukes. It will be awhile before Russia can regain its past might regardless.

And a strong Russia is as much a thorn in the side of China as the US, if not more.

And on a totally unrelated note, I just won the Pope pool.

Edited By Cobra Commander on 1113930795

Palomar · 2005-04-19 10:52:24

Cable TV is to blame for a lot of this. I remember when people used to bemoan ABC, NBC and CBS as the "only" TV media outlets out there. I dunno, bigger/more (nowadays) is not always better (circus).
I prefer more outlets of information. It makes it harder to get away with spinning things, there's always someone there to say "hey, what about this."
But then I've always thought that the "big media" has a disproportionate number of people adhering to a particular political "faith" which I don't adhere to. Now we can watch CNN for Left-leaning interpretation, FOX for a Right-leaning view and maybe get closer to the truth.
Unless I get that Fascist news network going, then you only need station. "Your one voice for news."
If Putin does become dictator (if he's not already, but I mean officially), what will other nations do?
Look around nervously and kick themselves for thinking old Commies can learn new tricks.
But in a way, a strong Russian government under Putin could be good for our interests from a short-term perspective. Putin isn't looney, he won't do anything suicidal. If he can keep his country's arsenal in check it's better for us than unguarded stockpiles of old nukes. It will be awhile before Russia can regain it's past might regardless.
And a strong Russia is as much a thorn in the side of China as the US, if not more.
And on a totally unrelated note, I just won the Pope pool.

*Just checked Yahoo! news again (last checked it 1/2 hour ago)...Ratzinger, huh? I thought so too.

Well, I see your points about the current media situation...to a point. My biggest complaints about it are a) they seem to have served to drive a wedge in this nation and seriously inflamed "right vs left" sentiments and b) a lot of their "programming" is more flash than substance, more about celebrity (the anchors themselves) than the story.

There's more loss in this than gain, IMO.

--Cindy

Grypd · 2005-04-19 14:56:32

On the 14th of April, Kamil Bourgass 31years was sentenced to 17 years old for being a member of Al-Qaeda and of being concerned in the production of Ricin. Bourgass was already serving a life sentence for his murder of detective constable Stephen Oakes during his arrest. The other accused in the trial where found not quilty but as they are of algerian descent they are to be thrown out of the UK.

This did not make the papers as it had been black flagged by the courts and the restrictions removed on wednesday so that the accused would recieve a fair trial.

This is the UKs first Al-Qaeda trial and shows that they are still out there and getting stronger. Bourgass had recieved training in various "terror training camps" and was actively involved in a well known mosque in London. Still lessons learned was Bourgas was an illegal immigrant and asylum seeker who had been lost by the goverment like many others. Still all ammo for an election year.

And if we catch one what else do we have. Ricin is a very dangerous substance made from castor beans it is famous as the substance that was used to kill the Bulgarian disident, Georgi Markov. It is not a WMD as it is hard to utilise as a vector agent. Still it is a poison with no cure.

Thought id pop this one in just as a warning to those who think Al-Qaeda has gone.

BWhite · 2005-04-20 13:33:06

Tom Delay disrespects the http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s … s]internet:

"Absolutely. We've got Justice Kennedy writing decisions based upon international law, not the Constitution of the United States? That's just outrageous," DeLay told Fox News Radio on Tuesday. "And not only that, but he said in session that he does his own research on the Internet? That is just incredibly outrageous."

:band: :band:

Cobra Commander · 2005-04-20 13:39:52

I read it on the internet so it must be true.

But this, along with recent experience makes one thing very clear. With the internet allowing people access to information so readily, if we could just streamline the legal system and enact sensible, easily understood laws. . . we wouldn't lawyers anymore. :laugh:

Present company excepted of course. :;):

Edited By Cobra Commander on 1114026163

BWhite · 2005-04-20 13:41:43

I read it on the internet so it must be true.

No, FOX radio. . .

Cobra Commander · 2005-04-20 13:44:40

No, FOX radio. . .

BWhite · 2005-04-20 14:03:39

I am http://www.misspoppy.com/catalog/xcart/ … speechless - - and that is very rare. :;):

Grypd · 2005-04-20 15:55:50

I am http://www.misspoppy.com/catalog/xcart/ … speechless - - and that is very rare. :;):

OMG

That is just...actually I dont know.

Palomar · 2005-04-20 16:09:45

I am http://www.misspoppy.com/catalog/xcart/ … speechless - - and that is very rare. :;):
OMG
That is just...actually I dont know.

*My thoughts exactly, Grypd.

If it's a joke, it's in extremely poor taste (understatement). I didn't check the web site overall, just that page.

On a different note: A Vietnam vet spit on Jane Fonda today, at a book signing (her new autobiography). She did apologize for some of her actions from that era; her apologies began in the 1980s. Guess not everyone is accepting her apologies; of course, no one has to.

I don't know much about the Fonda/Vietnam war situation, though (overall).

Ms. Fonda has said (more than once) that she'll take those regrets to her grave. At least she's had the courage to go to VFW centers and apologize in person. How many people would do that? Not many, if my experience in life is any indication.

--Cindy

Grypd · 2005-04-20 16:50:44

Im a glutton for punishment. I did review the site and there is actually worse. Anybody for a lock'n'load Jesus figure or postcard.

BWhite · 2005-04-20 18:25:44

More http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s … punishment except the lemmings will sweep it under the rug, again. ???

Cobra Commander · 2005-04-21 05:09:04

am speechless - - and that is very rare.

Uhhhh... What... the... fu... ???

More punishment except the lemmings will sweep it under the rug, again.

Lemmings?

It does cry out for reform of our justice system though. Not necessarily ending the death penalty mind you, just fixing the process of conviction.

BWhite · 2005-04-21 14:30:50

I am sick and tired of a bunch of people trying to tell me that God wants a bunch of conservative judges on the court and that's why we have to change the rules of the United States Senate... John Kerry

clark · 2005-04-21 15:12:13

Oh tie a yellow ribbon
'Round the old oak tree
It's been three long years
Do you still want me
If I don't see a yellow ribbon
'Round the old oak tree
I'll stay on the bus, forget about us
Put the blame on me
If I don't see a yellow ribbon
'Round the old oak tree

I don't see what any can complain about, you get to show your support, demonstrate your personal beliefs, and part of the cost goes to help wounded vets.

[shrug] We are ostenibly promoting "tolerance" in these countries, we should try keeping our own while we're at it. Just a thought. :laugh:

BWhite · 2005-04-21 21:43:40

Now this is http://www.judicialwatch.org/printer_5286.shtml]bizarre

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#51 2005-04-19 07:50:24

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#52 2005-04-19 08:46:29

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#53 2005-04-19 09:04:54

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#54 2005-04-19 09:07:34

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#55 2005-04-19 09:09:52

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#56 2005-04-19 09:13:26

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#57 2005-04-19 09:14:08

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#58 2005-04-19 09:24:43

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#59 2005-04-19 10:08:35

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#60 2005-04-19 10:44:55

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#61 2005-04-19 10:52:24

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#62 2005-04-19 14:56:32

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#63 2005-04-20 13:33:06

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#64 2005-04-20 13:39:52

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#65 2005-04-20 13:41:43

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#66 2005-04-20 13:44:40

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#67 2005-04-20 14:03:39

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#68 2005-04-20 15:55:50

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#69 2005-04-20 16:09:45

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#70 2005-04-20 16:50:44

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#71 2005-04-20 18:25:44

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#72 2005-04-21 05:09:04

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#73 2005-04-21 14:30:50

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#74 2005-04-21 15:12:13

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#75 2005-04-21 21:43:40

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

Board footer