Say Anything Blog

Minuteman has saved the lives of illegals dumped by their coyotes. Many times they give their own water and food to these unfortunates. The focus should be on why these people are not allowed to have lives and homes in their own countries.

The leftist MSM will spare nothing to smear anything not connected with their ideology.  I was formerly a fan of “E-Ring”, which is the program with the Christian terrorists taking over a mosque.  This scenario, as well as the Minuteman one presented on NBC, is so unlikely as to be in the fantasy category.  It is the leftist fantasy that the Minutemen are vigilantes and that the “right-wing Christians” are going to take over the country.  All this because we win elections.  It’s enough to make you puke.

I worked with the Border Patrol back in May 2003 and was “priviledged” to review the video evidence of the investigating officers when they found the semi trailer with people who had been baking inside all day.

As soon as I saw this promo, it made me sick.  I was there when it REALLY happened and it was entirely due to some coyote (aka criminal) who fled the scene when he got spooked.

Sigh.......

Now why would ANY of this surprise you?

Pitch your idea to a TV producer; if they think it will sell advertising time, you bet they’ll put it on.

Can anyone find any links between NAMBLA and the DNC?

Actually, if a 14 year old can decide to get an abortion of her own free will, can’t a 14 year old boy decide to… well, you know.

Jesus Christ on a pogo stick, people, it’s a friggin television show.

Ok then, let’s do a show about the DNC being a cover for a kiddie porn ring.

Because, you know, it’s just a show.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Jesus Christ on a pogo stick, people, it’s a friggin television show.

MI:  It’s a friggin’ TV show that tells a convincing lie about the Minutemen.  It’s propaganda, pure and simple. The dangerous thing is that it masquerades as just another TV show.

DATE: 11/17/2005 02:11:02 PM

Fiction=lies, I believe.

So when I go to see a Shakespeare play, I’m listening to just one big pack of lies? 

Sigh . . .

Right, MI. And it is not reguired to give equal time to an opposing veiw. Yet you are all about reguiring Americans to present opposing veiws in equal time to reality. What is up with that shit?!?

MI? That map you keep throwing out here, does it break the vote down by district and county? If it does you will clearly see PA voted for Bush. Pyllie and Pittsburgh voted for Kerry. Oh, thats right. Reality does not intrude upon your DNC fantasy world. And no, I am not going to link to it. Why should I waste all our time with something you will just ignore?

Better to say nothing and have people think you are a fool than to open your mouth and prove them right.  Though that advice is probably wasted on you.

IT IS A WORK OF FICTION! 

Though, if you think Bush won Pennsylvania, I could see how this could be confusing.

Andrew, thats probably the smartest thing you have EVER posted.

keep it up, I see a big future for you.

So here’s a brain teaser for you: who is “Commander In Chief” preparing us for, Rice or Clinton?

MI:  I’m glad to see you agree that smearing the Minutemen for being murdering vigilantes is a work of fiction!  Fiction=lies, I believe.  The Minutemen are not fiction, but the story about them is fiction, so why lie about some real people?  Could it be....oh, let’s see; Propaganda?

MI:  Their intention is not to entertain, it’s to propagandize in favor of the Dem agenda, don’t you get it?

Shakespeare depicted plenty of real people, and there is a group active still today that disapproves of his portrayal of Richard III.

I don’t find NBC’s smearing of the Minutemen and Christianity to be entertaining.

And that’s fine, but it’s a matter of taste.  I don’t watch any of those shows, and now that Arrested Development is being cancelled, will be watching even less TV.  That’s a matter of my taste.  But the producers clearly think that these shows will entertain some people, enough so that they can optimize their advertising revenue.

I’ll try one more time, though the feeling of hopelessness is starting to overwhelm me:

Pgh and Philly are part of Pennsylvania.  The people in Pennsylvania who voted for Kerry outnumbered the people who voted for Bush.  Therefore, Pennsyvlania went to Kerry.

A map showing lots of red geographic space with smaller blue sections in an effort to show that a state leans one way or another is a specious argument.  The winner of the state is determined by the number of people who voted for a particular candidate, not by the number of counties or districts that went to one person or another.

MI:  Do you regard Shakespeare as being historically accurate?  Does he depict any real people?  Talent doesn’t obscure the essential nature of fiction, which is that it isn’t true.  Shakespeare wasn’t smearing any real people; he was telling stories to entertain us.  I don’t find NBC’s smearing of the Minutemen and Christianity to be entertaining.  They are lies intended to promote a particular political agenda at the expense of real people.

I BELIEVE!!!!! I believe you need to back off on the Oxys and beer.

Don:  Every statement you made is true and correct; the pity is, you don’t know it.  The polls are a creation of the lying MSM.  When the truth comes out, the numbers will go up.

MI:

We can’t be surprised that the angry junkies here are getting their panties in a bunch over a fictional teevee show. After all, they believe every fiction that comes out of the White House like it’s set in stone.

Just today, these folks have made some jaw-droppingly dumb claims: Iraq is almost completely pacified, Saddam realy did have WMDs in 2004, and corporate media conglomerates are really socialist cabals.

And the worst part is that they really, truly believe all of it---no matter what.

They think if they clap hard enough Dubya’s poll numbers will rise and the rest of the world will stop making fun of ‘em.

Clap harder, kids! Tinkerbelle needs you to BELIEVE!

r108, he gets it. He supports the veiw they are putting forward.

MI, you are the one who kept throwing that map out there. Now it is just partisan propaganda? Can you say"redefine the argument","move the goalposts”, or"bullshit"? I knew you could!

See what I mean, MI? These guys live in their own little fantasy world---a world where Dubya doesn’t lie, Iraq is a beacon of safety and democracy, and farts smell like candy.

Remember when Dan Quayle made an issue out of Murphy Brown?

Well, bob and 2 are exactly as smart as Dan Qualye.

‘Nuff said.

Why thank you. Dannie boy is one hell of a lot smarter than you. And he is a classy guy, also unlike you.

Don:  Dan was right about Murphy Brown.

Dan Quayle was the first baby boomer in the White House, and was ridiculed for it.  Contrast that to the treatment of Clinton as a boomer in the White House.  The media bias goes back a long way.

MI:

Check it out...in their fantasy world, Dan Quayle is smart! It was only “media bias” that made him look dumber than a post.

hee hee hee...you guys kill me!

Don Myers said, Check it out…in their fantasy world...

So condescending and yet so wrong because you didn’t even pay attention to what was actually said.

But what do you care? Keep on making your insulting claims and keep on ignoring the rebuttals.

Don:  Please stop lying.  I know it’s difficult, but please make the effort.  I said that Dan Quayle was right about Murphy Brown, and that the media used a double standard in covering Dan as a baby boomer vs Clinton as a baby boomer.  For Dan, it was a negative, but for Slick Willie, Shazam! it became a positive.  You may disagree with me on the facts, but lying about what I said is just typical liberal spin.

I don’t HAVE to spin this bob—since it’s only true in that pointy lil’ noggin of yours.

Insult. No substance.

And where you get the idea that lazy and dumb = honest I’ll never know…

Insult. No substance.

At least you’re consistent.

That might be a lie in your Bizarro World fantasy land, but out here in the real world it’s as plain as the nose on your face.

You talk about your percieved place in the “real world” (whatever that may be) so much that it seems you are trying to convince yourself that you live there.

Well, Don, you are entitled to your opinions on the relative merits of Dan and Bill.  I will take an honest man over a smart liar anytime.  What you spin around is what I actually said.  The MSM dissed Dan for being a baby boomer, while they praised Willie for being a baby boomer.  I didn’t mention anything else but the double standard on this issue.  Don’t try any more lies on me because I was around at the time and I remember it very well.  Dan was bashed for being a boomer before he spoke a word in public.  I know the facts don’t support you, so you choose to ignore them.  I’m here to hold your feet to the fire.

More lies, Don.  I remember the news coverage of Dan very well.  They considered him dumb because he told the truth and didn’t play politics.  In other words, according to the MSM, he was a naive baby boomer.  I guess since Clinton was a pathological liar who did nothing but play politics, the MSM admired him.  According to them, he was a good baby boomer:  cynical, like you.

The MSM dissed Dan for being a baby boomer, while they praised Willie for being a baby boomer.

I don’t HAVE to spin this bob---since it’s only true in that pointy lil’ noggin of yours.

And where you get the idea that lazy and dumb = honest I’ll never know…

...media used a double standard in covering Dan as a baby boomer vs Clinton as a baby boomer. For Dan, it was a negative, but for Slick Willie, Shazam! it became a positive. You may disagree with me on the facts, but lying about what I said is just typical liberal spin

I didn’t bother to answer that, bob, because to anyone in the REAL world, the difference between Quayle and Clinton isn’t “media spin.” It has nothing whatszoever to do with their ages.

It’s the fact that Clinton is hard working and smart, while Quayle is lazy and dumb.

That might be a lie in your Bizarro World fantasy land, but out here in the real world it’s as plain as the nose on your face.

Don, I’m reaching a point where I’m starting to feel responsible, that I’ve somehow failed my fellow man by not rolling up my sleeves and really trying to educate and reach people like 2H9 and lik. 

You know what I mean it sounds good and all but I just have to confront the fact that I really don’t like the people I’ve been talking about helping out. You know what I’m saying. I don’t like people period. I mean you guys are okay. I don’t know. I’m just trying to be honest about being a misanthrope.

The MSM smearing of Dan Quayle was no accident.  As a baby boomer, the left thought he belonged to them.  You know how they get when one of their “slaves"(blacks, Jews, gays, boomers) escapes from their plantation; they get hateful and testy.  They went after Dan because he didn’t fit into their stereotype.  All us boomers are supposed to be antiwar liberals, don’t you know?  They attack Republicans in general, but they get vicious when one of their “slaves” goes Republican.  We just don’t have that choice, according to them.  They treat us like heretics.  You can just tell they want to burn all conservatives at the stake.  The left is just so transparent.

Robert wrote:

Does (Shakespeare) depict any real people? Talent doesn’t obscure the essential nature of fiction, which is that it isn’t true. Shakespeare wasn’t smearing any real people; he was telling stories to entertain us.

Seriously, how can someone go through four years of high school and say something like that???

Any facts, Dave, or just smear?  Ho hum.  Of course, I was talking about storytelling fiction and contrasting it with agendized propaganda in the form of a TV show.  The other guy brought up Shakespeare.  Any fiction would have been just as illustrative.  Got it?  Now go back to your lying lessons.

Dave asked, Seriously, how can someone go through four years of high school and say something like that???

A lot of us caught up on sleep while our English teachers were busy telling us how great Shakespeare was while simultaneously telling us that we shouldn’t write like he did.

A lot of us caught up on sleep while our English teachers were busy telling us how great Shakespeare was while simultaneously telling us that we shouldn’t write like he did.

But not knowing that Shakespeare wrote about real people is simply inexcusable.

Well, you could be truthful and misanthropic at the same time.  Give it a try. No one here needs your help, since we have already rejected liberalism, but you might make a point occasionally if you stick to the truth.

MI, you are the one who kept throwing that map out there. Now it is just partisan propaganda? Can you say”redefine the argument”,”move the goalposts”, or”bullshit”? I knew you could!

What in god’s holy name are you talking about?  Please, can this just end it?

Here’s the election result map on USA Today; can we agree that that’s a neutral source of information?  PA is blue.  That means more people voted for Kerry than Bush in PA.  Nearly 130,000 more, in fact.  Can we just leave it at that?

But then, I’m not the one who compared an NBC smear TV show to Shakespeare.  I merely pointed out that what he did wasn’t equivalent to what NBC did. Try not to get lost.

But then, I’m not the one who compared an NBC smear TV show to Shakespeare. I merely pointed out that what he did wasn’t equivalent to what NBC did.

Don’t be so sure.  Most playwrights play the role of social critic from time to time, and Shakespeare definitely wrote some highly political plays.  The delightful romp “As You Like It” was written in the pastoral tradition, which his audience would have recognized as a vehicle for political critique.  The leading role is a woman playing the role of a man, at the same time that a woman, Queen Elizabeth I, was in the middle of a long reign of a country going through a renaissance.  Most modern audiences of the play regard it as light entertainment, and it certainly was in Shakespeare’s time, but his audiences were clued into the “court versus country” comparisons.

As I mentioned above, Shakespeare’s characterization of Richard III finds its vocal opponents even today.  The humpback warrior’s seemingly “motiveless malignancy”, as Coleridge called it, is seen by some as an unfair portrait of the man.

Of course these TV shows aren’t on the same level as Shakespeare.  They’ll be replayed until they are deemed to be unable to generate advertising revenue, and then they’ll be forgotten.  Which is exactly why it makes no sense to tilt at these windmills.

MI:  Thanks for the cogent analysis.  My only disagreement with you this time is in your last statement.  I don’t think a relentless search for the truth is equivalent to tilting at windmills.  Of course, I have alwsys had a fondness for the character of Don Quixote.

So, Shakespeare was an historian?  I think he wrote fiction based on some real people, which isn’t the same thing as writing history of real people.  You should know that.

MI wrote:

The humpback warrior’s seemingly “motiveless malignancy”, as Coleridge called it, is seen by some as an unfair portrait of the man.

Coleridge’s “motiveless malignancy” line was actually in reference to Iago, the villain in Othello.

By some amazingly unlikely coincidence, earlier today in the library I read that exact essay in which the phrase was use! What the hell are the odds of that!

modern instances said, Don, I’m reaching a point where I’m starting to feel responsible, that I’ve somehow failed my fellow man by not rolling up my sleeves and really trying to educate and reach people like 2H9 and lik.

We’re not equal, but you could at least try to treat people as equals once in a while. This constant condescension and insulting nature ensures that you’ll never “educate and reach” us.

MI, you keep saying how much you dislike this blog and all who comment here. My question for you is, why don’t you go away? We said we would leave you alone. All you got to do is not come back. I understand this is a complicated proposition but you are a bright guy. I am confident you will figure it out.

I have your map right here. Lets us do some geographizing. Now, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11. 11 counties are blue. The rest of the state is red. This is the map you keep touting as the final tally of the voter’s will. Point taken, thanks.

Coleridge’s “motiveless malignancy” line was actually in reference to Iago, the villain in Othello.

By some amazingly unlikely coincidence, earlier today in the library I read that exact essay in which the phrase was use! What the hell are the odds of that!

Yes, thank you for the correction, although the same phrase might be used about Richard.  His relentless pursuit of the throne is certainly a motivation, but hacking through multiple family member to get to it is a bit hard to swallow.  About four years ago I saw the complete Henry VI-Richard III tetralogy performed by the RSC; quite an experience, all three Henry’s on Saturday, R3 on Sunday.

Is it A.C. Bradley’s lecture you just finished?  There was a book written in the 70’s dealing with various approaches to Iago’s motivation, including “latent homosexual” (more of an insight into perceptions of sexuality in the 1970s than Iago).  Can’t remember the name of it now.

Amen.

Amen.

Well, ok then.  If you feel that way can you maybe understand why I’d be concerned about a thinly veiled hit-piece on the Minutemen on a show as popular as Law & Order?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Maybe all this wouldn’t be such a concern if so many people weren’t largely informed about current events from fictional movies and television programming.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I understand, but I think that the greater problem is that people accept as fact what they see in fictional entertainment.

MI:  Knowing that, why not be more responsible in what you present in your fictional entertainment, if you’re NBC?
What I find outrageous is that, given a large, worldwide organization like Al Qaeda, which has killed thousands of people in terrorist attacks, NBC chooses to portray(on “E-Ring") a Christian terrorist group invading a mosque.  This has never happened, by the way.  It is, in the fevered imagination of the left, a very possible scenario, so it gets presented as “fictional entertainment”.  Well, it is fictional, in more ways than one.

a Christian terrorist group invading a mosque. This has never happened, by the way.

Exactly!!! It’s fiction!!!

The way to fix the problem of people believing fiction to be fact is not to be more worried about the show’s content, but addressing whatever is making them believe it.

Continuing my Shakespeare term paper: His audience did not walk home thinking, “Well, so that’s what Henry V was like; I always pictured him fatter.” Why do we think that modern audiences do that now?

Really?  Who here has advocated for any sort of censorship?  I certainly haven’t.

Rather, I’m criticizing some television programming I think is both harmful and stupid.

Criticism does not equal censorship.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

MI:  It’s anti-Christian propaganda!!!  Get it?

The way to fix the problem of people believing fiction to be fact is not to be more worried about the show’s content, but addressing whatever is making them believe it.

Isn’t that sort of what the critics of this stuff are trying to do?  The critics you’ve been maligning this entire thread?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I was expecting someone to notice this by now, but the whole “misanthrope” paragraph was from “Dazed and Confused.” My stoner friends laugh when I recite it.

Isn’t that sort of what the critics of this stuff are trying to do?

No, what the critics here want to do is change or prohibit certain content from being broadcast.

Were you going to respond, MI, or just accuse us all of want us censorship and then run away?

Maybe you think we stupid, neanderthal conservatives should just shut up and watch whatever Hollywood tells us to.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

It is one thing for Hollywood to make propaganda films to keep up American spirits when fighting against an external enemy, as was done during WWII.  It is quite another when the propaganda films are made to favor one political faction over another one.  The truth is, films which show the truth about Islamofascism wouldn’t even be propaganda, but would show support for out troops and our foreign policy. Making anti-conservative and anti-Christian “entertainment vehicles” only injures all of us as a nation.

MI:  The content is the entire issue.  What else is there besides the content?  Are you repeating the leftist mantra that NBC had good intentions, so they shouldn’t be judged on the results of their actions?

Watched the rest of the football game, went to dinner and a movie.  There is a life beyond.

I started by saying:

The way to fix the problem of people believing fiction to be fact is not to be more worried about the show’s content, but addressing whatever is making them believe it.

You said:

Isn’t that sort of what the critics of this stuff are trying to do?

My argument is that the focus should not be on the show’s content; rather, if we address whatever is causing people to believe that fictional content is actual fact, then we don’t have to worry about what the content is.  The criticism of this stuff is on the content.  So, it’s not really what critics of this stuff are trying to do, as it focuses on exactly what I argue is of lesser concern.

By focusing the criticism on the content, what real purpose is served?  What object is pursued?

The content is the entire issue. What else is there besides the content?

Voila!

In your previous post, you said not to pay attention to the content.  Which is it, or are you trying to wriggle out of it now?

I maintain we have every right to dissent about the content of those two shows on NBC.

MI wrote:

Yes, thank you for the correction, although the same phrase might be used about Richard. His relentless pursuit of the throne is certainly a motivation, but hacking through multiple family member to get to it is a bit hard to swallow.

Well, I think Coleridge is wrong either way--both Richard III and Iago are far too complex and have such myriad motives that, to me, it’s simply ludircrous to say malignancy is “motiveless"--basically calling them “stock villains.” Virtually no serious literary critic from the past two centuries agrees with Coleridge’s assessment of Iago.

I guess I’d still like an explanation for the censorship comment from MI.  I’m probably not going to get it though.

By focusing the criticism on the content, what real purpose is served? What object is pursued?

How about alerting people to the truth of a matter, thus exemplifying why it is stupid to believe everything you see on fictional television shows?  Is that good enough?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Great, dissent to your heart’s content.  I still maintain that it leaves the basic issue unaddressed.

Hm, yes, it’s easy to dismiss, but are there not real human beings who are motiveless?  Some people just act badly for no good reason.

How about alerting people to the truth of a matter, thus exemplifying why it is stupid to believe everything you see on fictional television shows?

Yeah, sure, treat the symptoms, but until you change the basic condition (not that this or that show is inaccurate, but that fictional programs are not portrayals of actual truth), you’re talking about content, as robert points out above.  The value of the content, one way or another, pales in comparison with the basic premise that people are confusing fiction with reality.

Yeah, sure, treat the symptoms, but until you change the basic condition (not that this or that show is inaccurate, but that fictional programs are not portrayals of actual truth), you’re talking about content, as robert points out above. The value of the content, one way or another, pales in comparison with the basic premise that people are confusing fiction with reality.

Ok, that’s at least an honest point.  You started out this thread by implying that we shouldn’t even be complaining about the content of the show.  As though we should all just shut up because we’re a bunch of dumb right-wingers, etc., etc.

The more people learn about the stupidity of what they’re watching the less likely it is that they’ll believe it.  Perhaps there are more effective ways of doing this, but be that as it may I don’t see where it should prohibit people like me from criticizing this stupidity when we see it.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

All of this seems like just so much sophistry to me.  No matter how educated the populace is, what they see portrayed in movies and on TV looks real, purposely.  Some will consider it likely, no matter how purely fictional it is.  When what you show on TV portrays a total distortion of any possible truth, like the two NBC shows do, and when that just happens to agree with the agenda of the left, something more is going on than an intellectual exercise.  Aren’t TV and movie people responsible, not only for the content of their product, but for its effects on society?  They want the money, so they should accept the consequences of what they do to get that money.

When what you show on TV portrays a total distortion of any possible truth, like the two NBC shows do, and when that just happens to agree with the agenda of the left, something more is going on than an intellectual exercise.

Was it a nighttime soapopera or a mini-series based on Revelations?

Night-time soap opera, I suppose, though a mini-series based on the Book of Revelations would be very interesting.

It got quite a bit of media attention when it premiered; I’m rather surprised you didn’t hear about it.

Dave: Ever since Peter Jennings, at the end of a piece about Jesus Christ, labeled him not a spiritual leader so much as a social reformer, I no longer watch anything on the MSM which purports to be about anything to do with Christianity.  I find it offensive to the extreme.

I no longer watch anything on the MSM which purports to be about anything to do with Christianity. I find it offensive to the extreme.

I watch The Simpsons, Malcolm, and Arrested Development. Oh, and PBS. Got a kid? you can’t help but be in the room when PBS is on.

No paradox, Dave, refer to the part about Peter Jennings comment.

Robert108, it’s impossible to be offended by something you don’t see.

Dave:  I was offended by what I did see:  the Peter Jennings piece.  Get it?

So you then decided that every program that would ever be aired in the MSM about Christianity would offend you. I really don’t like that “logic.”

Dave: It’s good I don’t care about what you like or don’t like.  I guess it’s all about feelings with you.  I saw enough to convince me that the MSM is anti-Christian.  The Jennings thing wasn’t the only example, just the last straw for me.