MSNBC

[Res Ipsa]

OK, the video is from O’Keefe Media. He’s been caught out so many times pushing edited and out of context videos that watching yet another is, in my opinion, a waste of time.

I thought this had happened before, and it has. If you don’t know who O’Keefe is and what he does, here you go: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/p ... 235036748/

[ceeboo]

Ceeboo, I can't avoid pointing out your posting brings about the consequences you view as pushing you away. From the evolution discussions to the Prager videos to the threads the last few weeks, the trend is the same. You post something that is absolutely blind to the way folks view an issue that you claim to want to discuss, then avoid listening when the reactions don't align with your preconception of how a sincere person would engage. If you aren't willing to engage in actual discussion but want civil engagement, maybe consider listening actively instead of handwaving away the responses as group think. You appear to want people to follow a narrow set of reactions to your posts that don't support your self image of being a nice guy.

I think among other things, like having an enormous ego, and an incredible view of yourself, and a selective memory, you also have a reading comprehension problem.

For example - The evolution threads: I discussed them a ton - I posted on them a ton, so much so that I created very fond memories with a few board members (that a few other members of the cabal here have used to mock me with victorious glee) surrounding a whale and a raccoon. You, like usual, have mistakenly concluded that I didn't benefit from them - If I had to guess, I would guess that there were at least a few other people that benefited by them as well.

And even if they didn't, who freaking cares. Who are you to make determinations about what threads I started? The level of hubris you must have to think that you are the one who can confidently point to parts of my rather long resume here and assign your grade to it - to decide if it was worthy of your precious eyes. It's as if you are absolutely certain in all of your positions and you, and you alone, poses the perspectives that all should value.

And, you end your post with "my self image of being a nice guy". That's NOT what I said - Do you think I care what you, or anyone on this board, thinks about me being a nice guy or not? I do not. What I said was that I am a believer - meaning, I believe every human being is made in the image of God and has extreme value. In addition, as a believer, I try to treat people with dignity and respect (I fail often but I try) I try to bring light to the world.

In short, it's not about you, honor. It is about me and the expectations I place on myself.

[canpakes]

As far as your (and others) continued claim about my passive aggressive veneer, all I can say is that I am getting very close to reaching an end with tolerating the constant attacks, and bullying that happens as a organized group around here.

I’m not seeing an ‘attack’ if someone calls BS on something you or I might post here.

Here’s three recent examples:

- You’ve claimed that there’s a ‘war on fossil fuels’ being waged by the Biden-Harris Administration, yet the US currently pumps more oil out of the ground than it ever did during the Trump Administration.

- You claim that 20 million illegal immigrants have crossed the border since Trump left office, when even the most partisan right-wing sources don’t claim even half that number.

- You’ve suggested that FEMA’s response to areas affected by Helene has been disastrous.

If you’re challenged on your claims, are you motivated to dig deeper into what you posted to see how well it stands up to facts? Or would you simply repeat the same BS later?

Ceeboo, you and any other person can be wonderful in so many ways. You (in the royal, collective sense here and to follow) can be an excellent father to your family, a great and caring grandfather, help your kids with their homework, and do animal rescue on weekends. You might help your elderly neighbor with her housework sometimes. You might pack food for homeless families during church activities. You might contribute to good charities. All of that, and it’s great. What, then, is the purpose of going online to spread falsehoods? It fosters misunderstanding. It creates division. And that damage can multiply a hundredfold when perpetuated through social media (which is why so many of your media sources are in the business that they are). And that might seem harmless to you, but it endangers the livelihood of normal people and injures the efforts of others who are trying to make a difference, like - as example - doctors and nurses caught in the crossfire of Megyn Kelly’s anti-vax rantings, or the many thousands of people working now to help the victims of Helene.

You say that you don’t see any problem in being partisan, but claim that being ‘divisive’ is a problem. There isn’t much of a line between ‘partisan’ and ‘divisive’. Trying to hide the kinds of claims you’ve made above behind the former while pretending you’re not engaging in the latter doesn’t work. You end up being the person that you claim is doing the damage to our civil and social cohesion.

If that’s where you want to be, then that’s where you’ll rationalize yourself into being. As you say, YMMV. Just sayin’ that when others call out that behavior, they may not be the baddies in that conversation.

[Moksha]

I posted it because I saw it Megyn Kelly (I am a huge Kelly fan and watch much of her content) to see what anyone thought - if they were interested in watching and wanted to share.

I want to see Megyn putting on blackface and telling us how MSNBC and the liberals are trying to eliminate Christmas and substitute it with paganism that denigrates the true Trump.

[Jersey Girl]

Ceeboo...a guy is getting tanked in a bar on a date and trying to impress some chick. He makes claims.

What is the evidence for those claims? Because some guy said so? HOW is MSNBC trying to get Harris-Walz elected? Does MSNBC shoot lies about Trump out into the newsphere to defame him? Are they unethical in their reporting?

That's what would make for an actual discussion here.

One reason I was originally not going to reply to this thread was that it was started by a person who posted about Climate Change as Trump was including it in his rally rants ahead of Helene's predicted impacts. That ceebs included Trump's false claims about the government response in this thread further reinforced he's either ignorant or blatantly disingenuous when it comes to how the information sources he consumes are pushing Trump's message of the day.

Concerned about division and partisanship, my ass.

You mean the alleged gov't's "failed" response to Hurricane Helene disaster victims re: FEMA? I must have missed that.

I think I actually mentioned that false claim in a previous post. I might have scrubbed that part though.

I ask for evidence that support claims/assertions. Preferrably from primary sources. Apparently evidence isn't important or something or whatever.

And neither is truth.

I'm admittedly not the most knowledgeable on these types of thread. At least I'm self aware enough to know it.

[honorentheos]

One reason I was originally not going to reply to this thread was that it was started by a person who posted about Climate Change as Trump was including it in his rally rants ahead of Helene's predicted impacts. That ceebs included Trump's false claims about the government response in this thread further reinforced he's either ignorant or blatantly disingenuous when it comes to how the information sources he consumes are pushing Trump's message of the day.

Concerned about division and partisanship, my ass.

You mean the alleged gov't's "failed" response to Hurricane Helene disaster victims re: FEMA? I must have missed that.

Sorry, that was ambiguous. I was referring to the thread last weekend about climate change predictions that happened to show up as Trump was denying climate change reality before Helene hit. Here's one report on it:

https://climatepower.us/news/Trump-embr ... ome-state/

[honorentheos]

Ceeboo, I can't avoid pointing out your posting brings about the consequences you view as pushing you away. From the evolution discussions to the Prager videos to the threads the last few weeks, the trend is the same. You post something that is absolutely blind to the way folks view an issue that you claim to want to discuss, then avoid listening when the reactions don't align with your preconception of how a sincere person would engage. If you aren't willing to engage in actual discussion but want civil engagement, maybe consider listening actively instead of handwaving away the responses as group think. You appear to want people to follow a narrow set of reactions to your posts that don't support your self image of being a nice guy.

I think among other things, like having an enormous ego, and an incredible view of yourself, and a selective memory, you also have a reading comprehension problem.

For example - The evolution threads: I discussed them a ton - I posted on them a ton, so much so that I created very fond memories with a few board members (that a few other members of the cabal here have used to mock me with victorious glee) surrounding a whale and a raccoon. You, like usual, have mistakenly concluded that I didn't benefit from them - If I had to guess, I would guess that there were at least a few other people that benefited by them as well.

And even if they didn't, who freaking cares. Who are you to make determinations about what threads I started? The level of hubris you must have to think that you are the one who can confidently point to parts of my rather long resume here and assign your grade to it - to decide if it was worthy of your precious eyes. It's as if you are absolutely certain in all of your positions and you, and you alone, poses the perspectives that all should value.

And, you end your post with "my self image of being a nice guy". That's NOT what I said - Do you think I care what you, or anyone on this board, thinks about me being a nice guy or not? I do not. What I said was that I am a believer - meaning, I believe every human being is made in the image of God and has extreme value. In addition, as a believer, I try to treat people with dignity and respect (I fail often but I try) I try to bring light to the world.

In short, it's not about you, honor. It is about me and the expectations I place on myself.

We agree, your stance here is always about you. Funny how we see it yet interpret the effects of that differently, isn't it?

The posts you share followed by how you engage the information is ultimately the most sincere expression of you that I consider. Believer or whatever else you want to call it.

[Res Ipsa]

cp, I agree that calling bs isn’t bullying. In fact, being willing to call bs on each other and responding to such a call by stopping and making sure we aren’t engaging in bs would be a great way of getting closer to an accurate picture of reality.

But what often happens here goes way beyond that. We have a new but already forgotten rule about attacking the motive of an OP. How many responses did we get in before we broke the rule in this thread? Beyond that, the relentless personal attacks (more like group muggings) sure look like online bullying from where I sit.

[Marcus]

...The level of hubris you must have to think that you are the one who can confidently point to parts of my rather long resume here and assign your grade to it...

Huh.

[Jersey Girl]

You mean the alleged gov't's "failed" response to Hurricane Helene disaster victims re: FEMA? I must have missed that.

Sorry, that was ambiguous. I was referring to the thread last weekend about climate change predictions that happened to show up as Trump was denying climate change reality before Helene hit. Here's one report on it:

https://climatepower.us/news/Trump-embr ... ome-state/

Thanks honor.