It can get tedious, however, to just be saying over and over that Politico or Buzzfeed leans left. Or, as they say at the right-leaning Breitbart promotes a left-wing agenda. Please. They are not that exciting. They are much more lame and flabby than that. Don't accidentally compliment them. Agenda! It sounds so officious.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines "agenda" as "A campaign, programme, or plan of action arising from a set of underlying principles or motives. Hence: the underlying intentions or motives of a particular person or group."
1976 Newsweek 19 Apr. 23/1 Their hope is that the party..would opt for youth and freshness. ‘Those folks who have their own agenda for Hubert underestimate Jerry Brown’, says one California politician....That's not a reference to Marilyn Monroe, by the way. After making an appearance in post #1 of the day, Marilyn would seem magical is she popped up here too, but Camille Paglia was talking about the William Kennedy Smith rape trial.
1991 C. Paglia Sex, Art, & Amer. Culture (1992) 73 That girl had her own agenda..trying to glom onto the Kennedy glamour!
And can you hide behind a "patina"? The OED defines "patina" as "A thin coating or layer; spec. an incrustation on the surface of metal or stone, usually as a result of an extended period of weathering or burial; a green or bluish-green film produced naturally or artificially by oxidation on the surface of bronze and copper, consisting mainly of basic copper sulphate."
1748 H. Walpole Let. 6 Oct. in Corr. (1974) XXXVII. 297, I wish you could see him making squibs.., and bronzed over with a patina of gunpowder.One must pick apart the rhetoric of others.
And speaking of neutrality and smacking in the face... the Althouse blog agenda is cruel neutrality.
पोस्ट्स
३२ टिप्पण्या:
And can you hide behind a "patina"?
For most metals, oxygen is the enemy. Growing a thin layer of oxide is called "passivation" and protects its inner bulk from attack. It's a bit like sacrificing your skin to your enemy in self defence.
Love that cruel neutrality. And the occasional fit of hysteria when cruel neutrality is overwhelmed by passion and emotion.
I'm afraid that "cruel neutrality" is viewed as radical right wing by the majority of the Democrats.
Television is amazingly effective at convincing people of things they want to be convinced of, treating gays with respect, civil rights, tax everybody but me to give me stuff because other people are selfish and I am not, etc, etc..
What they are not so good at is convincing people of stuff they do not want to be convinced of, yet the TV people believe in them earnestly, for instance that there is a Global Warming threat. They throw that crap into dramas and people just roll their eyes.
Cruel Neutrality ought to be the name of a race horse.
He probably should have said 'veneer,' but wouldn't that qualify as a cliche?
Playing fast and loose is a game that's fun for the whole family!
If Cruel Neutrality were a race horse, the Racing Secretary's union would insist on 1-ton weights.
Cruel Neutrality --
It's never my fault for decisions or opinions that I make because, shut up.
As Rush often says, he could three hours a day on this every day. The material is endless.
I could write up four or five or six examples from my own local newspaper every day, excluding the editorial pages, where at least they're honestly biased.
Liberals are the least sophisticated consumers of entertainment in the world. The simplest, most transparent efforts at manipulation in the media are invisible to them. Whether it's the "truth by repetition" method that even dogs are hip to, or the "everybody thinks X, so you must think X" second- grade peer pressure method, they fall for it hook, line and sinker. Jon Stewart's entire career is a study in this phenomenon.
@Tim in vermont
Television is strong for visual-and-feelings communication.
Written text is strong for thought-and-logic communication.
How does this affect your argument?
Would that affect your argument if TV news and opinion was stirring strong feelings against homosexual behavior, or against the concept of Global Warming?
"...the thought of that massive copper pudendum beneath [the statue of liberty's] great skirt of green patina must be terrifying to a certain type of juvenile constitution..."
Why you need The Quintessential Dictionay. Better examples.
I'm all for Ben Shapiro getting up in the Left's grill, especially when you can put a face to their madness. Politico and its ex-WaPo hacks should all burn in hell for their "haha" headline about the insider attack.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/11/politico-headline-reportedly-read-2-u-s-troops-killed-in-afghanistan-insider-attackhaha/
Cruel Neutrality ought to be the name of a race horse.
No, that would be Cruelly Neutered Lately.
SJ said...
Would that affect your argument if TV news and opinion was stirring strong feelings against homosexual behavior, or against the concept of Global Warming?
How about if half of the articles were pro, and the other half anti? That's what my beef is with the MSM. There's never any opposing view points other than from the left.
Yeah, sure, except liberals almost universally pride themselves on reading "real" journalism, and insist their "journalism" is "objective."
E.g, the now unkillable trope "Bush and Wall Street caused the '08 Great Recession," now believed by the masses as truth.
Someone has to keep reminding people there is nothing behind the curtain but lies and deceit.
Our one party journalism is the cheering section to the cannibalization of America.
I disagree with Paglia in regards to the William Kennedy Smith rape trial. Paglia writes that the girl was stupid to go to the Kennedy compound after dark. Maybe so, but stupidity on the part of the woman should not be a defense against rape, not then, not now, not ever.
Are we talking MSLSD?
They can be entertaining.
tim in vermont said...
Television is amazingly effective at convincing people of things they want to be convinced of, treating gays with respect, civil rights, tax everybody but me to give me stuff because other people are selfish and I am not, etc, etc..
Television is amazingly effective at convincing people of things they want to be convinced of, treating gays as sacrosanct, defining previously unacceptable practices as civil rights, tax everybody but me to give me stuff because other people are selfish and I am not, etc, etc..
FIFY
...the thought of that massive copper pudendum beneath [the statue of liberty's] great skirt of green patina must be terrifying to a certain type of juvenile constitution...
Copper is venusian but beneath Lady Liberty's skirt she's a cold wrought iron maiden.
All the talk of patina reminds me of the sequestration, invention, and the sad demise of Sir Humphry Davy
The statue of liberty wears bits of the old copper roof of Arnold Auditorium at the former Bell Labs these days.
A matching patina is hard to find.
chickelit said...
Copper is venusian but beneath Lady Liberty's skirt she's a cold wrought iron maiden.
Venereal, not venusian.
Venusian was coined because people were afraid references to Venus might be confused with references to social diseases.
Big Mike said...
I disagree with Paglia in regards to the William Kennedy Smith rape trial. Paglia writes that the girl was stupid to go to the Kennedy compound after dark. Maybe so, but stupidity on the part of the woman should not be a defense against rape, not then, not now, not ever.
You do understand that a girl can be both stupid and raped, right?
It's not an either/or.
Benjamin Shapiro is right about CNN too. Don't forget that their "Candy" rescued Obama from his Big Lie during the 2nd presidential debate when, acting as moderator/nose tackle, she became a left guard pulling and covering for him.
For those who forget the particulars, TAKE ONE LOOK at this image of Obama and how the DAGGERS CAME OUT the very moment he got called out for lying. On national TV.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XSb_bBYx7Pc/UJD-_SjakNI/AAAAAAAACYo/kIrstfxmFdY/s1600/Obama_Benghazi.jpg
And Obama WAS lying that night... and still is.
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/09/30/no-obama-didnt-call-benghazi-act-of-terror-in-speech/
But "Candy" and the horse she rode in on (one and the same?) came to the rescue! In a scene that seemed rehearsed, Obama asked "Candy" to pony up her day-after-Benghazi-attack Rose Garden transcript that she had "miraculously" stashed like a hot pocket in her hip pocket. And sadly, the rest is history... of a Benghazi cover-up that is STILL going on.
Funny how she had that right at hand, huh?
Venusian was coined because people were afraid references to Venus might be confused with references to social diseases.
Ah! That's exactly what I was seeking to avoid.
Hey, the Benghazi strategy worked, just like Fast and Furious, Obamacare lies, and all the rest.
The Strategy? Lie, then make up a new lie, and repeat until nobody wants to hear about it anymore. The media will help by calling the questions stupid, racist, Republican, etc.
What could be more dangerous and consequently more stupid than electing a President that will not be scrutinized by the press?
Didn't Breitbart recently run a fake story about Paul Krugman filing bankruptcy?
Perhaps it is best to wait a week since your own partisan hackery to proclaim oneself 'pure'.
I hate to break the eleventh commandment (thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican), but I think Ben Shapiro is... "hack" is too strong a word. "Overexuberant" might work better.
Anyway, I think he's tarnishing the Breitbart brand. There has definitely been a decrease in quality of BB's output since Andrew B's tragic passing, so much so that I don't read the blogs anymore. It seems that they'll print anything written by someone who has the intellectual candle power to put together a matching pair of gloves. Shapiro is definitely one of those guys, IMHO.
@SomeoneHasToSayIt, I thought that was my point. My reading of Paglia was that a woman who does something stupid deserves anything that happens to her. Obviously I disagree.
Big Mike,
I guess the point is: exactly how much protection from one's own stupidity does one deserve?
Sure, she doesn't deserve to get raped, no matter how stupid she was.
I don't deserve to get torn apart by lions just for being stupid, either. But if I apply my stupidity by deciding that lions are misunderstood and jump into the lion pen at the zoo, many people would say I deserved to get mauled.
"Deserved" is obviously still the wrong word. But put it this way: Actions have consequences. Decisions have consequences.
Expecting that you are exempt from the trends and tendencies of human psychology/behavior is a great way to experience lots of negative consequences. And while it should not mitigate the punishment of the crime, it should significantly reduce sympathy for the "victim". And I put "victim" in scare quotes because if you make yourself a victim by making poor choices, it does reduce my sympathy for you.
Nathan,
The Kennedys are, last I checked, human beings. Human beings don't instinctively rape or kill; we choose to rape and kill.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा