Slashdot Mirror
PR Firm Behind Al Gore YouTube Spoof?
mytrip writes to tell us ABC News is reporting that a supposed amateur video posted to YouTube.com may have actually been designed and posted by a Republican public relations firm called DCI. From the article: "Public relations firms have long used computer technology to create bogus grassroots campaigns, which are called 'Astroturf.' Now these firms are being hired to push illusions on the Internet to create the false impression of real people blogging, e-mailing and making films."
Well, considering how much propoganda comes out, especially from the left (I mean seriously Michael Moore movies are nothing but lies and propaganda), does it really matter if it's from the GOP or not. Sounds to me like another news story trying to be cool by bashing the GOP and trying to dig up any dirt they can find.
But regardless, if you think it's funny, then watch it. If you don't agree, then point your browser somewhere else, but don't bitch 24/7 about it being propganda or from the GOP.
Klingon Software is not released, it escapes, inflicting terrible damage onto the enemy as it does
... shove it somewhere I think you ought to find uncomfortable, because I wish you harm. But I come in peace and desire universal good.
... something. ... something. ... something. ... something.
... remind me what your point was again?
*whining*
Life is unfair! Some other dude got stuff I don't think he deserves!
1. Continuation of life is predicated on the availability of infinite energy; the universe is bound to run out of steam eventually, thus life is either evil or impossible. Maybe even both.
2. People are stupid and greedy, thus creating harm; therefore,
3. People are lazier than expected, thus creating harm; therefore,
4. People are lazy; things are more difficult than we would like, thus they are impossible, but we think they are necessary, therefore
5. People are self-centered, therefore they sometimes do things I don't like; thus creating harm, therefore,
Also, please read a book by a person with letters after their name, because people with letters after their name are always right. In fact, I'm sure you couldn't possibly find an academic with similar letters after his or her name who agrees with your obviously flawed point of view. All academics agree with me.
Republicans brought an end to slavery in America.
If you think that's evil, we clearly have different systems of morality.
Democrats let 1,000,000 Rwandans die.
If you think that's good, we clearly have different systems of morality.
My point isn't that the opposite of what you say it true; Republicans have certainly had their share of fuckups.
My point is that neither side has a monopoly on being good or being evil.
Thought excerise: If you're a corrupt politican, which party are you going to align with? Answer: whichever one is more expedient to your purposes. People are corrupt, not parties.
And if you're saying "no, no, the other party doesn't agree with me on ____", you should find out why. If you can't find a reason why someone disagrees with you, save they're evil, you really need to open your mind.
My two cents,
-Bill
SlashSig Karma: Excellent (mostly affected by moderatio
The Republicans, ie the Mercantilist faction, were protecting their revenues, i.e. tariffs levied on the Southern states which they used to pay for pork projects in the North. Lincoln was backed by the railway lobby for this specific purpose. The abolition of slavery was a convenient way for the Mercantilists to get the public and the reformists buy into a war whose main benefit was to contractors (sound familiar?)
...but he couldn't do it, because despite the vast powers he assumed (which really gave 'big federal government' its current shape) he needed to bring at least some of the rank-and-file on board.
"If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it"
--Lincoln (letter to Horace Greeley, I think)
Notice, if you will, how very very very little has changed.
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
Let me translate your post, Mr. Eichmann: "It's okay, I like it when propaganda is used to convince people that the Jews [replace with: environmentalists, Arabs, gays, whatever the right hates for no reason today] should be murdered in massive numbers, because I'm a Bush voter".
If you haven't foed me yet, what are you waiting for?
Yeah, you're probably right. I was using my personal perspective of the last 20 years of travelling all over the world. The situation has deteriorated rapidly since the God Squad stole the 2000 election, and somehow enabled/allowed the 9/11 event (aka "Reichstag Fire - The Sequel") to occur. Not a ranting conspiracy-theory, just asking the question "Who benefitted from all this?" Follow the money....
Interesting.
So you consider "An Inconvenient Truth" to be an 'up front presentation', why? Because it agrees with your personal beliefs?
I, on the other hand, would say that it's loaded with begged questions, dubious science, and is presented not-coincidentally by a PURELY political animal, Mr. Gore.
How would you feel about Dick Cheney doing an 'informational film' about the need for a stronger Defense establishment in 2010? In what essential way is that different from what Gore presents (leaving aside the self-imputed 'righteousness' of environmentalism)?
What is so characteristic about your post is that (presumeably because I'm questioning your sacred cow) you immediately launch into a personal attack, calling me 'stupid' or 'morally bankrupt'. It's apparently inconceivable to you that a rational person could look at the facts and come to a different conclusion?
I'd love to live in a world of such certainty. The last people I knew that did so were glassy-eyed missionaries that were headed out to the jungle to 'enlighten' some poor brown people to the 'word of Jesus'. They responded precisely the same way you did when I asked pointed questions expressing my disbelief in the beliefs they also held with religious fervor.
Coincidence, I'm sure.
-Styopa