DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
By trying to straddle the line. This could be the Obama's Waterloo.
Untruthfull and harmfull ads on this very cite!
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Good Luck
New member
You are also in favor of trying to influence those private owners in what they choose to display. That makes you a totalitarian - you only want what YOU perceive as truth to be available. You desire to nursemaid the public from expression you deem to be "harmful" solely based on its political message.
"I believe when an ad is a clear lie..." What YOU believe is NOT good reason for trying to influence how another chooses to use their media outlet when it comes to things like political messages. WE have ample precedent for what is legally considered harmful forms of expression. Worrying about the accuracy of claims in political advertising is not one of them no matter how you personally feel about it.
When YOU own a media outlet, YOU can decide what you allow and do not allow to be presented and I will support that right 100% no matter what I think of the content. You think you should have a say in what others present. That is wrong - it goes against the founding principles of this nation. But, it is also typical of the modern liberal.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Jarod there is no way you are a lawyer. You don't know the difference between sight, site and cite. You must be retarded.
I think you said that about the BP Spill!!?
So you are saying you agree with me?
cawacko
Well-known member
LOL... just curious how did you come to that conclusion?
Good Luck
New member
Because not only is he an idiot, he is a delusional idiot.
cawacko
Well-known member
Haha, random but reminded me of the time this girl spent like 3 or 4 minutes telling me how bad a person I was and how I sucked etc and I responded so are you saying you liked me? She was pissed! Point being I was using similar logic to Jarod.
We agree that the owner of a media outlet should be allowed to censor how he sees fit.
Clearly this is not Obama's Mosque, so the ad I was complaining about was a lie... I asked Damocles, the owner of this outlet to have it removed. He chose not to, and it was left at that, in fact I responded that I understood why he could not do anything about it.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Yes I did- good catch.
you tempt me, but how about a group of non-biased people that fact check political adds and if the ad does not tell the truth, a large bold print line would be added to the ad that said
this ad contains lies
or we could just assume that all political adds contain lies
Last edited:
cawacko
Well-known member
because so much of politics is right on the edge. If a group says tax cuts will help the economy and another group says it won't how will you determine if that is a "lie" or not until it happens?
If something is blatantly false then sure but partisans have an innate ability to say there are kernnels of truths in their statements thus they are not lies.
Good Luck
New member
First problem: try finding people who would be interested in fact checking political ads who are not biased. The existence of true, politically unbiased people is rare enough, and the source of their lack of bias would be an equal if not greater lack of interest.
Second, I already assume the latter, as should anyone with two or more functional connected neurons, and don't need obtrusive bold lettering to remind me. (ie: I don't need some "unbiased" group, nor the government, nor some totalitarian dweeb to hold my hand in deciding what is what in the world of politics.)
Good Luck
New member
Then why did you try to influence the owner of a media outlet on what he should allow on his site?
Yea, and then told him to bitch at Google for allowing the ad.
You still want to influence the media in a way advantageous to your way of thinking. You are not satisfied with simply pointing out to others the misinformation contained: you want it banned so others cannot make that decision for themselves.
And what if Damo DID have full control over the content? Would you have let it go?
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Don, may I suggest some reading material for you? George Orwell: 1984 It was written way back, I think the 30s or 40s maybe? About a futuristic world set in the year 1984. Orwell depicted this far-fetched reality, much like what you are describing. Where everything you read and absorbed was filtered by Big Brother... in fact, that's where this particular term comes from. Big Brother is Watching? I know you've probably heard that before, right? So anyway, in the story, the government does exactly as you say we should do now, I thought that was pretty amazing. Orwell was only off by a quarter century, huh?
read the book, saw the movie
i did not say they could not post the ad, but try more than one group with members from all parties
while i am tired of the lies, i think rove is the goebells of today
while orwel did 1984, hitler and goebells did the third reich
personally i would not want either, but as usual you distort my meaning
cawacko
Well-known member
well again almost every political ad would fall under that category. hell almost every commercial or ad period would fall in that category. I mean if I buy a certain new car am I really going to feel like I'm on top of the world? If I drink Bud Light am I really going to have hot girls come up to me? If I vote for Candidate X can I really be sure he/she is going to bring determination and a sense of fairness to office like they claim?