George Orwell's '1984' Tops Amazon's Bestseller List (theguardian.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

George Orwell's '1984' Tops Amazon's Bestseller List (theguardian.com)

Posted by BeauHD on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @10:00PM from the alternative-facts dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Sales of George Orwell's dystopian drama 1984 have soared after Kellyanne Conway, adviser to the reality-TV-star-turned-president, Donald Trump, used the phrase "alternative facts" in an interview. As of Tuesday, the book was the sixth best-selling book on Amazon. Comparisons were made with the term "newspeak" used in the 1949 novel, which was used to signal a fictional language that aims at eliminating personal thought and also "doublethink." In the book Orwell writes that it "means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them." The connection was initially made on CNN's Reliable Sources. "Alternative facts is a George Orwell phrase," said Washington Post reporter Karen Tumulty. Conway's use of the term was in reference to White House press secretary Sean Spicer's comments about last week's inauguration attracting "the largest audience ever". Her interview was widely criticized and she was sub-tweeted by Merriam-Webster dictionary with a definition of the word fact. In 1984, a superstate wields extreme control over the people and persecutes any form of independent thought. UPDATE 1/24/17 6:56PM PST: Orwell's dystopian novel is now the #1 Best Seller in Books on Amazon.

36 of 659 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

"Alternative Facts" = "Lived Experience" by poity · 2017-01-24 22:27 · Score: 2, Insightful

The right has now usurped what was once the sole domain of the left -- Relativism.

--
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Re:Who's buying? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-24 22:29 · Score: 2, Insightful

Their campaign used concepts from books like Trust Me, I'm Lying to great success; why change now? The agenda appears to be a libertarian one - elites have been put in charge of departments they have a direct interest in destroying. The future is probably closer to this kind of crazy. We live in hope they do all fuck off and leave non-sociopathic humans alone.
I really hope... by SharpFang · 2017-01-24 22:33 · Score: 5, Insightful

I really hope SJWs will realize their fight to purge the language of "bad words" is in fact persecution of thoughtcrime.
If you ban "Uncle Tom's Cabin" from schools "because it uses the 'n' word and that's offensive", you're doing precisely what 1984 warns about.

--
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
1. Re:I really hope... by aevan · 2017-01-24 22:44 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  No, they aren't. Otherwise they wouldn't have whined at the military for 'chink in the armour'. Thank you though for demonstrating 'alternative facts' though, your interpretation of the last few years has been noted.
2. Re:I really hope... by Mashiki · 2017-01-25 00:02 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Uh no. This is the bullshit that social justice has created. People are screaming "SJW" because social justice warriors are the ones pushing the bullshit claiming that kimono's are cultural appropriation. Or wearing Halloween costumes are racist/sexist/misogyny or some other bullshit. They're the ones lining up to try and ban people from making speeches, and saying that people who don't follow the group think need to be banned. You know, like Peter Tatchell or Germaine Greer. You are authoritarians, you are engaging in authoritarian behavior. You think you're the good guys and you're not. You're everything you claim to fight.
  
  --
  Om, nomnomnom...
3. Re:I really hope... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-25 01:13 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Ah, yes, but screaming "racist!" at people who point these things out is just an attempt to silence them as well.
  As usual, the truth lays in the middle. You have racists who try to deflect criticism with shouting 'SJW', but you also have SJW'ers who shout 'racist' to deflect any criticism.
  The main point of the parent poster, however, namely that SJW'ers try to purge 'bad words' is correct, and that doesn't change by claiming that racists too, try to deflect things. The latter is certainly true, but so is the former. And, no, they're not targeting racism itself, but rather the words. That's why, even if you would say it in the context of 'free speech' (and not being racist), SWJ'ers would still try to silence you if you used words like 'n igger'. That's also why a scientific paper many years ago, who gave indications blacks had lower IQ's got a *huge* amount of flack, not on a scientific basis, but on an emotional one. that's also why criticism on Islam gets you branded racist, or criticism on Israel 'antisemitism'. Or, when criticizing certain feminists, you're a sexist or a misogynist pig from the patriarchate, as thunderfoot has experienced. In my own city, they (the left, no surprise) want to ban the word 'allochtoon' (foreigner, in the sense of immigrants). As if then the problem will go away!
  Note, that in all those cases, the perceived or real racism isn't tackled at all, but only the expression of the words is. In the best case, SJW'ers only combat the symptoms, and in the worst case actually undermining free speech and impose PC-talk on everyone. Since trying to suppress free speech evokes a counter-reaction, and since the underlying problem isn't actually dealt with by SJW'ers, this is exactly the reason Trump won. It's a mixture of libertarians getting fed up by SJW'ers for having to be careful for every word they utter lest they be accused of racist, sexist, antisemitist, misogynist, etc., and the actual racists, who still think what they think - since SJW'ers don't combat the root causes of racism - but have no other venue to express it now - since SJW'ers combat every expression of it. so of course they'll all vote for a man who openly dares to say the things they don't dare anymore. And of course you get a turn to the (more extreme) right that way.
  IMHO, exceptions not withstanding, most of the SJW'ers actually provide a DISservice to society by their obsessive zeal and their focus on words and how things are expressed, instead of actually addressing the points raised.
  Edit: proof in case: I can't use the word n igger here neither, even though I'm not using it in a racist context.
4. Re:I really hope... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-25 01:35 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  Authoritarianism without power is impotent yelling. SJW have never had any actual power, yet white males still see them as threatening and trot out all kinds of false equivalence to back themselves up. As a white male, I don't know the privilege I have, except that my wife in the same exact field with more experience makes a third less than I do and I've gotten out of every speeding ticket I've ever rightfully earned.
5. Re:I really hope... by AmiMoJo · 2017-01-25 01:37 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  According to some people's logic you're already racist because you're white but can't be racist if you're not.
  I've noticed that this logic is mostly applied by white people looking to enhance their sense of victimhood.
  I agree about the use of "nazi". It's become almost like "ninja" just means someone who is good at something or a bit sneaky. The sad fact is that we now have actual Nazis in the US government and whispering in the president's ear.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
6. Re:I really hope... by Mashiki · 2017-01-25 02:20 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  SJW have never had any actual power, yet white males still see them as threatening and trot out all kinds of false equivalence to back themselves up.
  Gee. I guess that explains all those events that have been cancelled because of their violent threats and backlashes right? Or their attacks, doxing and so on against people who have a different ideological pov. Or university administrations that follow their lines of bullshit? How about when they throw a hissyfit and get advertisements pulled because it hurts their feelings. Or try to get people fired(sometimes successfully) for daring to have a different position. Nope, no power there at all. That's why none of that's happened right?
  Good thing I'm not a "white male" then isn't it.
  
  --
  Om, nomnomnom...
7. Re:I really hope... by elrous0 · 2017-01-25 02:45 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  SJW have never had any actual power
  Tell that to all the conservatives on college campuses who are under siege right now from "powerless" SJW's. Tell that to all the conservatives getting banned from social media, getting doxxed, getting fired from their jobs for having the "wrong" ideas, getting physically attacked just for daring to speak at rallies, etc. For a "powerless" lot, SJW's sure seem to wield quite a bit of power these days in the media, on college campuses, in Hollywood--pretty much everywhere save direct politics (where mainstream Americans still thankfully vote them down).
  It's gotten pretty bad when an old-school liberal like myself fears Donald Trump and the Republican Party less than what the Democratic Party has become. As a former Democrat, all I can say is that the new left had better wake up and realize that SJW's are a cancer that will ultimately kill the host. They've already chased away the working class, and turned several blue states red. Just keep going down that path and see how many more states turn red in 2020.
  
  --
  SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
8. Re: I really hope... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-25 05:09 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  The fact is that chink in the context of crack/fissure/weakness has been around for hundreds of years longer than the pejorative reference to those of Chinese descent. You are in fact advocating for Newspeak, the and the dumbing down of personal thought and expressiveness.
9. Re:I really hope... by meta-monkey · 2017-01-25 06:35 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  As a former Democrat, all I can say is that the new left had better wake up and realize that SJW's are a cancer that will ultimately kill the host.
  And there are certainly crazies on the right. The difference is the center-right ignores them or disavows them and does not give them a platform. No one would ever hear a single idea of David Duke or Richard Spencer if the left and corporate-left media didn't promote them. You will never hear Sean Hannity welcoming "friend of the show Richard Spencer" onto his TV or radio show. You will never see even Ann Coulter citing the "scholarly work of Dr. David Duke." No one wants anything to do with these people. But the liberal college professors let the SJWs run amok on campus and the Democrats parade illegal aliens and various nutjobs out on stage at their national convention.
  This is severely off-putting to normal people, and the Democrats are doomed unless they start punching left. Their biggest enemy is not Donald Trump. It's the pink haired landwhales literally shitting on the streets as a "political statement," the antifa thugs beating the hell out of trash bins (must have found Adolf Binler, the most evil racist trash bin of all time) and the illegal immigrants waving Mexican flags while they throw eggs at Republican voters.
  
  --
  We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Trump's vantage point by iTrawl · 2017-01-24 22:57 · Score: 2, Insightful

I saw a picture of the crowd from Trump's podium. From there the empty patches were not easily evident. From his angle it looked like there were people covering every patch of concrete if you didn't look carefully enough. And since it looks that way from where he way (literally) standing, the media must be lying - simple logic I guess.

--
"Everybody's naked underneath" -- The Doctor
Re:Who's buying? by tekkahtek · 2017-01-24 23:01 · Score: 1, Insightful

First we should make sure it's not the Trump administration buying these. They might be mistaken for operating manuals.
We've heard Trump's inauguration speech with echoes of the villain Bane from the Dark Knight Rises, followed by the censorship of government agencies communicating actual science, and suffered through the administration's validation of "alternative facts." I think it is safe to say that the Trump's administration's use of 1984 as an operating manual is not a mistake, though the emotional maturity appears to be more in line with Lord of the Flies.
Re:More Fake News And Drama From The Left by Freischutz · 2017-01-24 23:40 · Score: 3, Insightful

As the CNN megapixel graphic showed, the Trump crowd was larger than reported. This seems a silly thing to fight over, since Trump's supporters are less likely to attend an inauguration than a rally anyway.
You do know that according to the alt-right everything the mainstream media publishes is lies, lies and more lies, a stack of lies all the way down! So if CNN, a load bearing pillar of the main stream media, published a megapixel picture that seems to prove Trump's inauguration crowd was much larger than reported, by alt-right logic, that claim must be a baldfaced bloody lie. That picture must be a Photoshop manipulation and positive proof that Trump's inauguration crowd must indeed have been tiny. But all sarcasm aside crowd size is indeed a silly thing to fight over, especially after listening to Sean Spicer step onto a podium and tell a room full of reporters:

"Photographs of the inaugural proceedings were intentionally framed in a way, in one particular tweet, to minimise the enormous support that had gathered on the national Mall. Inaccurate numbers involving crowd size were also tweeted. No one had numbers, because the national park service, which controls the national mall, does not put any out. This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration period!

How is it possible to claim Trump's inauguration crowd was the largest in history if nobody had any numbers? The real irony here is that we would not be talking about this if Trump hadn't made such a big deal about it and if the entire right wing spin machine hadn't jumped on board to help him. Somebody should acquaint the White House press secretary and his team with the Streisand effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Re:Wrong Book? by locofungus · 2017-01-24 23:40 · Score: 4, Insightful

Also Animal Farm. I think the people are going to be very disappointed to discover that the elites have been replaced with the elites which, of course, will all be the fault of the elites.

--
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
Nah... by denzacar · 2017-01-24 23:42 · Score: 3, Insightful

It's much simpler than that.
They are lying cause their boss, who has handpicked them, is a liar and a sociopath.
A liar and a sociopath who has handpicked people who don't mind being told lies nor do they mind telling lies to reach their goal.
They are lying cause they are liars and sociopaths. Also... idiots who don't mind being lied to.

--
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
1. Re: Nah... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-25 01:41 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Cute. It's like you've never paid attention to politics before now. All politicians lie. You really think Hillary keeps hot sauce in her bag? It's pandering to a base to get elected. From there, it's achieve what you can within reason before your base goes to someone else. Please read some history and you'll see that every election has had sour grapes and people thinking the world would end. The sun will rise tomorrow and you will be fine.
2. Re: Nah... by un1nsp1red · 2017-01-25 07:40 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The weird shit is the nature of the many lies he's told. It's one thing to make vague claims to further a political agenda (e.g., WMDs in Iraq, 'Obama was born in Kenya and is muslim,' 'if you like your insurance, you can keep it, etc...). It's another thing entirely to deny you said something last week, when there's video and audio of you saying that thing. It's like these petty, childish lies for no reason other than lying. It's bizarre that so many people were ok with that. If it was your six year-old child, you'd tell them how ridiculous it is to lie about something when the people you're lying to know it's obviously a lie.
Re:Who's buying? by Mashiki · 2017-01-24 23:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

We've heard Trump's inauguration speech with echoes of the villain Bane from the Dark Knight Rises
Oh boy, we've got someone pulling out their fake news. There was a single sentence that had a basic resemblance to Bane's speech. That single sentence: "We're giving power back to the people." That's it.

followed by the censorship of government agencies communicating actual science, and suffered through the administration's validation of "alternative facts."
Except the part where you read the "update" and find out that didn't happen. You enjoying the purveyors(buzzfeed and WAPO) of fake news telling you stuff yet? No? Just like the "russia is hacking the electrical grid" story that had to be retracted. Or maybe you're just in it for the confirmation bias.

I think it is safe to say that the Trump's administration's use of 1984 as an operating manual is not a mistake, though the emotional maturity appears to be more in line with Lord of the Flies.
Yes, that's why we've got all those leftists out there pushing no-platforming(aka shutting down dissenting views). Claims of "safe spaces" to shut down view points they don't like/want to hear/etc. Making claims that discussions on things like "college rape" are triggering and misogyny. Attacking people violently if they have different views. Trying to get viewpoints they don't like banned. But it's Trump that's doing it...really. I bet he's living rent free in their heads as well.

--
Om, nomnomnom...
Re:Who's buying? by mwvdlee · 2017-01-25 00:29 · Score: 5, Insightful

We've heard Trump's inauguration speech with echoes of the villain Bane from the Dark Knight Rises
Oh boy, we've got someone pulling out their fake news. There was a single sentence that had a basic resemblance to Bane's speech. That single sentence: "We're giving power back to the people." That's it.
Then it's not fake news, now is it?
If may be insignificant and not newsworthy, but it is not fake.

--
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Re:Not even close. by swb · 2017-01-25 00:48 · Score: 5, Insightful

Legalized drugs: Widespread use of anti-depressants and tranquilizers is a lot like soma.
Sorting people into classes based on intelligence: Socioeconomic pecking order based on which degree you got, which college you went to, your SAT scores, your GPA, etc.
Purely centralized economy: Federal reserve monetary policy, Wall Street, investment banking, transnational corporations, Davos, private equity, regulatory capture. I'll cede that this is a weak comparison, but all of those organizations tend to be incestuous in membership and switching between organizations is common.
Procreation: In-vitro fertilization, genetic screening, scheduled c-sections. We're not yet decanting our offspring, but among the moneyed classes the reproductive process is industrializing.
Perhaps as a whole the real world isn't a literal comparison to BNW, but I think the metaphorical comparisons are striking.
Re:Who's buying? by Fragnet · 2017-01-25 01:02 · Score: 3, Insightful

Am I fucking missing something there?

The left have spent the last 10 years changing the meaning of words like "male" and "female" so they no longer relate to biology, trying to enforce speech codes, making use of certain words and phrases criminal and now people are buying 1984?

This is truly the most retarded thing that's happened in 2017 so far. It's only January.
Re:Doublethink? Try watching the interview before by allcoolnameswheretak · 2017-01-25 01:05 · Score: 4, Insightful

And let's not forget that rational, intelligent people can disagree on matters of import, the significance of facts, and so forth without ceasing to be rational.
Are you sure you're not talking about opinions? Isn't the definition of a "fact" that it is a non-debatable, unambiguous truth? Such as the fact that Obama is christian and was born in the United States? If you are trying to soften up facts and put them up to debate, you are already by your knees in that Orwellian universe the White House would like to have us.
Re: And here we go again... by JWW · 2017-01-25 01:08 · Score: 3, Insightful

Not one iota, not a smidgen of lying in Obama's administration....
Obama: The attack on Benghazi was because of a YouTube video...
Press: Ok, sure, we believe it.
Trump: Lots of people saw my inauguration.
Press: LIAR!!!!
Re:Who's buying? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-25 01:35 · Score: 2, Insightful

What happen with the USDA and EPA, and the subsequent retraction wasn't what you think it was. My opinion is that someone hamfist'd a policy decision by the administration and just blurted out the plan instead of being clever about it. What you will see after the "retraction" is a slow implementation of a full gag policy over a suitably long period of time. Maybe coordinate new gag moves with outrageous statements by Trump, that way no one notices.
I live in Canada, if the Canadian public will tolerate gagging of scientist under Stephen Harper, the US will tolerate it under trump. They'll just be more circumspect about it next time.
How quickly people forget by SteWhite · 2017-01-25 01:44 · Score: 3, Insightful

Amazing that people are willing to buy this from Amazon, even the SlashDot crowd seem to have forgotten this incident:
https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
Re:Who's buying? by Xyrus · 2017-01-25 02:36 · Score: 2, Insightful

Oh boy, we've got someone pulling out their fake news. There was a single sentence that had a basic resemblance to Bane's speech. That single sentence: "We're giving power back to the people." That's it.
Are you idiot or are you being deliberately dense? His speech, mirrored the same sentiment as Bane's speech, which in turn mirrors the speeches of various dictators who rose to power through lying and populism. Go read Hitler's and Mussolini's speeches. Where do think they got the inspiration for Bane's speech to begin with?

Except the part where you read the "update" and find out that didn't happen. You enjoying the purveyors(buzzfeed and WAPO) of fake news telling you stuff yet? No? Just like the "russia is hacking the electrical grid" story that had to be retracted. Or maybe you're just in it for the confirmation bias.
Where's the White House pages on climate change?
And no, it isn't fake news. The memos asking for lists of scientists and supporters. The orders to remove climate information and silence social media in regards to environment and climate. Removal of the press core. Modernizing the old Nazi slang for the free press.
You're part of a cult though, so no matter what Furor Oompa Loompa does you'll rush to defend him.

Yes, that's why we've got all those leftists out there pushing no-platforming(aka shutting down dissenting views). Claims of "safe spaces" to shut down view points they don't like/want to hear/etc. Making claims that discussions on things like "college rape" are triggering and misogyny. Attacking people violently if they have different views. Trying to get viewpoints they don't like banned. But it's Trump that's doing it...really. I bet he's living rent free in their heads as well.
Lugenpresse! Alternative facts! Pussy grabbing isn't assault! Threatening to lock up opposition is freedom!
Right...okay. Yeah it's definitely the left. The rise of neo-fascism throughout western democracies is entirely due to the left. Have fun in your new cult.

--
~X~
Re:Who's buying? by kilfarsnar · 2017-01-25 02:55 · Score: 1, Insightful

Am I fucking missing something there? The left have spent the last 10 years changing the meaning of words like "male" and "female" so they no longer relate to biology, trying to enforce speech codes, making use of certain words and phrases criminal and now people are buying 1984? This is truly the most retarded thing that's happened in 2017 so far. It's only January.
What speech codes? Like treating people with respect? And which words or phrases are now criminalized?

--
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
Re:Who's buying? by meta-monkey · 2017-01-25 04:27 · Score: 3, Insightful

If may be insignificant and not newsworthy, but it is not fake.
The fact is true. The context is fake. This is how media propaganda works. They choose what they want the person experiencing it to believe when they're finished, and then play up certain facts while completely omitting others. People think in narratives, not facts, so you provide the narrative ("Trump is a dark villain") and then provide facts that confirm that narrative ("This one common line of rhetoric about giving power to people was also once used by a dark villain.") True fact. Phoney narrative.
Immediately after Trump's victory the media was trying to paint a picture of Trump supporters committing violence against poor minorities and such because the sky is falling now that evil Trump has won. Tons of "hate crimes" loudly reported...about all of which turned out to be hoaxes. However the coverage of the "hate crime" was front and center at the top of their website in 48-point font. The story a week later when police investigated and found out it was made up or a false flag was either not reported, or a tiny link at the bottom of the page.
Or, case in point, there was a video on social media that CNN picked up about an anti-Trump protestor being tackled off a flight of stairs (I think at OSU). You can see in the video the guy speaking, and then you hear someone with what sounds like a speech impediment yell "You are so stupid!!!" and lays the guy out with a flying tackle. CNN headline: "Anti-Trump protestor attacked." They show the video, they talk about how dark and scary things are now, about a rash of "Trump-related violence" around the country. At no point do they let you know the attacker was actually an autistic (literally) Hillary supporter who got socially confused and thought the speaker was pro-Trump, and was attacking him for that reason. It was an isolated incident of mistaken identity by a person with developmental disabilities. But anyone seeing the headline or even reading the story is left with the impression that violent Trump supporters are attacking peaceful dissenters. The video was fact! The context was completely fake.

--
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Re:And here we go again... by tbannist · 2017-01-25 04:54 · Score: 4, Insightful

The Obama administration never lied about anything?
Obviously, if anyone can find one false statement from Obama, it excuses an infinite number of deliberate lies from Trump. Right?

--
Fanatically anti-fanatical
Re:Who's buying? by wyHunter · 2017-01-25 05:20 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yeah these creatures are just amazing aren't they? Trump won because the elistist creeps who have run this nation into the ground since BIll Clinton's presidency have FINALLY woken up the people of the USA. Will he change things ? Who knows. Are people tired of living standards falling, the quality of life in the country going down, and so on? Yes. Mrs. Clinton's "Deplorables" comment is what sealed her demise. She couldn't even BOTHER TO VISIT her "safe" blue wall states - and guess what? She LOST.
Re:And here we go again... by MightyMartian · 2017-01-25 05:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

I don't really recall them asserting that lies could be recoined as "alternate facts". That politicians and their minions lie is a given, that they would so obstinately declare outright falsehoods and then try to recast the obvious falsehoods as some variant on "facts" is a new one to me, at least in the West. This is indeed more a trick of authoritarians.
And for what exactly? Because the Mall wasn't nearly as filled for Trump's inauguration as for Obama's 2008 inauguration? Why would that matter? Even further, to claim Hillary Clinton's popular vote win was made up of fraudulent votes? Why would that matter? What counts is the Electoral College, not popular votes? It strikes me as completely idiotic, a squandering of what little political capital Trump has actually entered the White House with on moronic side issues that have no bearing on governance whatsoever.
I had begun to believe the claim that Trump's bluster was some sort of clever ploy, a strategic type of hyperbole. Now I'm beginning the man really is a fucking moron. The first rule of lying is don't lie when you can get easily caught, and don't lie when there's no advantage conferred. What the hell was the point of inauguration attendance claim? What is the point of the three million vote fraud claim? These lies are not only stupid and easily debunked, they do nothing to aid Trump's administration.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Re: And here we go again... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-25 05:41 · Score: 0, Insightful

I love the fact that the administrations initial mislabeling of the Benghazi incident is the best scandal partisans have been able to get to stick to the Obama administration. It really speaks to just how cleanly they ran everything.
Re: And here we go again... by bryanbrunton · 2017-01-25 06:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

That's it? That's all you got? Benghazi.
Trump is mentally ill. He is fcking insane. Lost touch with reality. Major parts of every speech he has given has shown to packed full of lies.
And the best you got is Benghazi?
Re:Who's buying? by DamnOregonian · 2017-01-25 06:19 · Score: 3, Insightful

It's the very definition of Fake News.
I finally get why you fine people are labeling every single inconvenient fact you encounter "fake".
In newspeak, fake means...
Can you do me a favor, just for my own personal enjoyment, call it double-plus un-good news?

From the Fake News peddlers:

A line from President Donald Trump's inauguration speech on Friday eerily echoed the Batman villain Bane.

Not exactly the same, but it's close to what Bane, played by Tom Hardy, says of Gotham when he holds the city hostage and removes its police and powerful officials.

Certainly, Trump did not intend to quote Bane, but "give it back to you, the people" is a line that will have some staying power after Inauguration Day.
The only thing fake here is your definition of the word fake. Carry on subverting reality by removing all literal meaning from our fucking language, you fuck.