I don't even think it's the people hearing the message who are the problem. It's the people speaking what they THINK people want to hear. It's perception that we're sheep who will follow whatever they're saying, whatever lies they want to perpetuate. I'm still in shock about Paul Ryan's verifiable lies from last week, and the fact that the party doesn't care that he told HUGE LIES to millions of people, with cheers following every sentence. Where is their sense of embarrassment? Of feeling cheated? Honest leadership apparently isn't important anymore, so it's refreshing to hear someone come on stage and give a speech like Michelle Obamas where sincerity and integrity were ingrained in every word. That kind of speech shouldn't be refreshing, it should be the norm!
His statement is set in such stark terms that it can't stand. Not all politicians lie, and of those that do, it is to different degrees and amounts. As to the voting populace, not all of "us" want to hear certain things, and we certainly don't all want to hear the same things. There is no one way to examine or explain the circumstances, and it is surprising that, even in a casual format like a tweet, he allows himself such a thin and unsupportable utterance.
__________________
Ink and water don't mix.
2 users agreed. You should agree too, c'mon, you know you want to. (click it, click it now!)
We get the sort of politicians we tolerate. The Republicans winnowed their field down to one and then Romney rang in a ringer: Ryan. I just finished reading an editorial about Romney in The Economist that my husband recommended to me. The Economist describes Romney as so much of a flip-flopper that there's no telling what he might do if elected. But that's what it takes to win in the modern G.O.P.: you have to sound like an extreme conservative even if you're not.
Last night we were treated to a wonderful speech by a man who was honest about his politics--dishonest about sex and women. Obama is an honest politician, too. Who in the G.O.P.'s leadership is honest? I can't think of a Republican politician who is.
Then why not say that instead of putting the blame solely with the listener?
Because if that statement was written with qualifiers, then those who hear, believe and defend the lies*, won't think to look at whether they are encouraging the lies.
(* in most cases not actual lies, but promises which, for one reason or another, are unlikely to be kept fully)
So write it as:
Politicians say they will implement certain policies not because they're evil, but because they say what many voters want to hear. So it's those of us who uncritically support politicians on undeliverable policy who are encouraging them.
Because if that statement was written with qualifiers, then those who hear, believe and defend the lies*, won't think to look at whether they are encouraging the lies.
(* in most cases not actual lies, but promises which, for one reason or another, are unlikely to be kept fully)
So write it as:
Politicians say they will implement certain policies not because they're evil, but because they say what many voters want to hear. So it's those of us who uncritically support politicians on undeliverable policy who are encouraging them.
Hmm, lost it's impact there.
So it's strictly said for impact even if it's inaccurate?
It's technically inaccurate, even if my kneejerk reaction is to agree with it. And Tyson, though I like the guy, is no Sagan indeed. *hugs first edition of Cosmos*
Zor, this is what I was trying to say. Maybe I projected onto NDT's comment. Only I'm not saying its all the voters fault only that we share culpability
First off, he is NOT one of the smartest scientists, he is just someone who popularizes science, he didn't discover anything or win any Nobel Prize, he just has a big mouth.
And, I warned you about this guy. Never trust a fuckhead who hates Pluto.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cathiee McMillan
you get off the planet Bitch!
5 users laughed. The question is: Are they laughing with you, or at you?:
I swear, I keep tripping over his initials in this thread. In my career, NDT is Non-Destructive Testing. I would see it, read what was said surrounding NDT and think, "Wait. What?"
Carry on.
__________________
4 users laughed. The question is: Are they laughing with you, or at you?:
I'm also not surprised he is mouthing off about politics now, an area he is no more qualified to speak about than any of us. He is in love with his own opinions which he can't wait to share.
(I would hate him less if he were just another forum egotist like the rest of us.)
I meant Tyson not you... sorry Johnny. ^.^
Most of my questions in this thread are based on what he said and why he would say it. I have a very hard time wrapping my head around what he said.
We Who Are The Problem
Linear Mode
