War Room Lounge v136: I Have No Mouth And I Must Ooof

[Fawlty]

Are you taking unnecessary pauses and looking intensely at your conversational partner? Cue angsty rock music.

No, I'm just in the bedroom and that story is absolutely true. Motivation is a very personal thing, tonni.

 

[Wet Blanket]

No even soy sauce?

Bruh

I don't get that drunk anymore.

Also I have a lot more food in the fridge nowadays.

 

[MMAisGod]

I understand what you're saying, but I'm saying that your approach determines your conclusion. If you assume that it's all narratives and truth doesn't exist, and that there are two dimensions only, you're going to conclude that drawing accusations of bias from both sides is proof that an organization is not biased. There's no other possible conclusion if that's how you're looking at it. But I'm saying that that's not a reasonable way to look at it. If you assume that there are claims that are truer than others in an objective sense, then you have to do the work of figuring out what it is, and you identify bias by any systematic deviation from that truth. And I'd argue then (for example), that reporting that suggests that deficits are always bad (and that politicians who complain about deficits when they're out of power are sincere), is biased even if when it's politically neutral (though that's an issue that at least from 2008 to 2016, wasn't even covered in a neutral way by the MSM).

I argue that depending on the subject, bias is somewhat, or massively present, and the subject itself is usually aligned with political position. The deficit part of your post makes sense, but these things are spun both ways depending on topic which is where the "both sides" comes from. It means both sides do it for their own gain, and their own manipulation of public opinion. We are in the middle of a global pandemic. The most obvious example in the history of examples, is having your MSNBC type stations condemn protesters who wanted gyms/stores/hair salons/etc daily on their outlet, but go radio silent in regards to contamination risks when hundreds of thousands gathered elbow to elbow to protest injustice. This is no different than the OANN types condemning mass social justice protests, but going radio silent when mass gatherings occured to protest the lockdown. It's the exact same topic, almost in the exact same way, but the condemnation/support is completely dependent on the outlet and the political position. This would be like, the actual textbook definition of Cognitive Dissonance, displayed directly by our news outlets to us. While people argue the other is wrong.

Again, if you assume that there's little difference and that they're exactly as skewed in their approach (both opinion shows, of course), then, yes, anyone who thinks one is less biased than the other is himself biased (and note then that your "conclusion" is really just an assumption). If you accept the possibility that one could be less biased than the other, then you have to look into it, and find that maybe that possibility is realized, maybe it isn't.

As a whole, there is little difference. On specific topics however, there could be big differences. If one circumstance dictates one host is by default less bias due to being on the right side of the information, they will appear less bias because the other one has to super spin to try to argue. Then next week, it's reverse, with the other making a semi-decent point vs the other super spinning. And both of them will bash anyone who disagrees with them, refusing open dialogue, and then try to play the moral high ground. We could probably get more people from the WR to be objective on topics than them. They're opinion shows yes, we know this, but they have incredibly large fanbases because millions of people are locked in to how amazing these types of people are, when all they are really doing is feeding us more divisiveness. And worst part of all, the people themselves cannot see the similarities, which increases the divisiveness that much more.

 

[tonni]

No, I'm just in the bedroom and that story is absolutely true. Motivation is a very personal thing, tonni.

Alright I'm sorry that happened to you. Next time, treat yourself more caringly.

 

[Prokofievian]

That man looks extremely Finnish. Is he Finnish?

Yes. It's a skit from a sketch comedy show called Kummeli, which is actually not bad.



The guy orders a coffee, and it costs 8 markka (the old currency), and he gives a 1000 markka bill, and gets not nearly enough change back. The rest of the skit is him just asking ''it was a 1000!?'' and the guy staring at him.

 

[Trotsky]

@Sycho Sid What the hell is going on with the Kentucky primary?

 

[Sketch]

My roommate listens to his podcast non stop.

Like, there’s things about Jocko that I find interesting. Him talking with the other guy on his show about training BJJ and stuff like that. But a lot of the rest I’m indifferent on.

The most annoying is my roommate goes on and on about being disciplined in like diet and he works out like every day and shit because “that’s what Jocko does”.... but then he lets his 4 year old run around screaming facing zero consequences for acting like a little shit.

How are you actually taking anything the guy says and implementing it then?

Have you tried running around screaming in the apartment yet? Sometimes two wrongs produce a right.

 

[Sketch]

Alright I'm sorry that happened to you. Next time, treat yourself more caringly.

What about the Pistachio Story did you learn today?

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

 

[JDragon]

First haircut in months. There is an older man wearing a mask while having his hair cut.

Here it is mandatory for all parties.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

We used to destroy the beaver dams that on the various surrounding rivers and were really raising the water level on the lake my father's land surrounded up north. We used to tell guests that the beavers could attack so be careful.

Looking back it (dam destroying) feels like it was the wrong thing tot do.

You’re a monster!

But nit really, beaver damns can5 be problematic due to flooding and even dangerous by spreading disease

 

[HockeyBjj]

It's really, really disappointing that there isn't a way to catalog and deny medical services to the people who openly refused to obey lockdown restrictions because muh freedom and hoax. It was always going to end up being those morons who disproportionately got sick first, took up medical resources, and then endangered persons who did take precautions but were later infected.

If so, the protesters who gathered by the thousands better also be on that list

But yes, I completely understand the sentiment and frustration. Wife and I are being as safe as possible with her pregnant, but the more the % of the community infected goes up due to people protesting or going to bars or having in person church etc. the more we become at risk from me still just working my job or her outside walks or clinic checkups

 

[Sketch]

Here it is mandatory for all parties.

Nice.

 

[tonni]

What about the Pistachio Story did you learn today?

Sometimes you try really hard because you wanna be a tough guy and you get hurt and it's absolutely not worth it.

 

[Sketch]

Sometimes you try really hard because you wanna be a tough guy and you get hurt and it's absolutely not worth it.

That is an interesting takeaway. It's like a pickle Jar. Everybody wants to be the guy who can open the pickle jar.

 

[tonni]

That is an interesting takeaway. It's like a pickle Jar. Everybody wants to be the guy who can open the pickle jar.

I don't twist it, I just peal it off.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I argue that depending on the subject, bias is somewhat, or massively present, and the subject itself is usually aligned with political position. The deficit part of your post makes sense, but these things are spun both ways depending on topic which is where the "both sides" comes from. It means both sides do it for their own gain, and their own manipulation of public opinion.

I don't think that first sentence really means anything. People are biased on every topic? OK. There's still an underlying reality in discussions. Climate is changing as a result of our activity or it isn't, y'know?

We are in the middle of a global pandemic. The most obvious example in the history of examples, is having your MSNBC type stations condemn protesters who wanted gyms/stores/hair salons/etc daily on their outlet, but go radio silent in regards to contamination risks when hundreds of thousands gathered elbow to elbow to protest injustice. This is no different than the OANN types condemning mass social justice protests, but going radio silent when mass gatherings occured to protest the lockdown. It's the exact same topic, almost in the exact same way, but the condemnation/support is completely dependent on the outlet and the political position. This would be like, the actual textbook definition of Cognitive Dissonance, displayed directly by our news outlets to us. While people argue the other is wrong.

Well, outside gatherings are less risky than inside gathering, but with that quibble aside, sure. But that's one issue. Ideally, we'd look at it on an issue-by-issue basis, but if you do that enough, you see a pattern.

As a whole, there is little difference. On specific topics however, there could be big differences. If one circumstance dictates one host is by default less bias due to being on the right side of the information, they will appear less bias because the other one has to super spin to try to argue. Then next week, it's reverse, with the other making a semi-decent point vs the other super spinning. And both of them will bash anyone who disagrees with them, refusing open dialogue, and then try to play the moral high ground. We could probably get more people from the WR to be objective on topics than them. They're opinion shows yes, we know this, but they have incredibly large fanbases because millions of people are locked in to how amazing these types of people are, when all they are really doing is feeding us more divisiveness. And worst part of all, the people themselves cannot see the similarities, which increases the divisiveness that much more.

But again, your thinking is just that Lemon is on the left and Hannity is a Republican, and so they logically must be the same. You're assuming you know the answer and anyone who disagrees is just showing their own bias. If you believe that you have to examine the facts to get the answer, you're going to have a different conclusion. If you watch them both, I don't see how you can fail to see a massive difference. Hannity is on the phone with the president almost daily and sees his mission as promoting the GOP's interests. Lemon tries to be pretty much down the middle, though he leans left. He's a guy expressing his own views.

 

[tonni]

@Trotsky It's ear hair season for sure, jesus christ.

 

[Trotsky]

If so, the protesters who gathered by the thousands better also be on that list

But yes, I completely understand the sentiment and frustration. Wife and I are being as safe as possible with her pregnant, but the more the % of the community infected goes up due to people protesting or going to bars or having in person church etc. the more we become at risk from me still just working my job or her outside walks or clinic checkups

Protesters wearing masks while protesting government murder is a heck of a lot different than Margaret McDumbfuck going to Tupperware parties and refusing to wear a mask or obey guidelines while grocery shopping.

(That's seriously a post I saw on Facebook by a woman from my hometown, which got 100+ likes, refusing to obey Walmart's rules about one-way aisle shopping where each aisle has one direction so people don't meet head-on)

 

[HockeyBjj]

Protesters wearing masks while protesting government murder is a heck of a lot different than Margaret McDumbfuck going to Tupperware parties and refusing to wear a mask or obey guidelines while grocery shopping.

(That's seriously a post I saw on Facebook by a woman from my hometown, which got 100+ likes, refusing to obey Walmart's rules about one-way aisle shopping where each aisle has one direction so people don't meet head-on)

You’re using anecdotes and what you think is worth the risk to try and shift everything else though. Just own it and say you think the increased Covid cases from protests is worth it, but not for other people not following rules for other reasons. But don’t purely but the increased case blame on one group. The majority, but not all, mask usage by protesters and being outside definitely lowered the rate one spread their disease to another, but they were packed together which increased the opportunities by a factor of a hundred even if outside and some mask usage decreased it by that same hundred.

Also in news, Florida shuts down bars