America: The Farewell Tour

ridski said:

dave23 said:

lord_pabulum said:
 I think I may watch the film Brazil again.

 The name's Buttle.

 Salt?

 Not yet.

LOST said:

DaveSchmidt said:
Well I’ll try to watch Chris one day, but my time gets so damn pressed
That it may not be till Monday, once I take mtierney’s test
I ain’t ready for Nekrasov, but I do agree it’s fine
When these MOL threads sure can be a grind

 She's giving a test or taking a test?
Who is Nekrasov? Is that part of the test?

LOST never did get nothing from the Nan din
That we didn’t, didn’t all rend in half

(Nekrasov is a Russian director who figures prominently in the Bill Browder thread. The test was the Facebook challenge from The Times, which mtierney posted.)

dave23 said:

ridski said:

dave23 said:

lord_pabulum said:
 I think I may watch the film Brazil again.

 The name's Buttle.

 Salt?

 Not yet.

 Oh.

Salt?

DaveSchmidt said:

LOST said:

DaveSchmidt said:
Well I’ll try to watch Chris one day, but my time gets so damn pressed
That it may not be till Monday, once I take mtierney’s test
I ain’t ready for Nekrasov, but I do agree it’s fine
When these MOL threads sure can be a grind

 She's giving a test or taking a test?
Who is Nekrasov? Is that part of the test?

LOST never did get nothing from the Nan din
That we didn’t, didn’t all rend in half
(Nekrasov is a Russian director who figures prominently in the Bill Browder thread. The test was the Facebook challenge from The Times, which mtierney posted.)

 Ok, just checking--  do you believe Browder's story?    Yes or no?

nan said:

DaveSchmidt said:

LOST said:

DaveSchmidt said:
Well I’ll try to watch Chris one day, but my time gets so damn pressed
That it may not be till Monday, once I take mtierney’s test
I ain’t ready for Nekrasov, but I do agree it’s fine
When these MOL threads sure can be a grind

 She's giving a test or taking a test?
Who is Nekrasov? Is that part of the test?

LOST never did get nothing from the Nan din
That we didn’t, didn’t all rend in half
(Nekrasov is a Russian director who figures prominently in the Bill Browder thread. The test was the Facebook challenge from The Times, which mtierney posted.)

 Ok, just checking--  do you believe Browder's story?    Yes or no?

 oh please don't pollute this thread with Browder.

drummerboy said:

nan said:
Ok, just checking--  do you believe Browder's story?    Yes or no?

 oh please don't pollute this thread with Browder.

 Stop before the thread gets wished into the cornfield.

nan said:You can just watch about 30 minutes to hear him speak before questions.

I think it is interesting that you and some others don't consider this valid unless there are solutions offered.  It reminds me of when I worked in the corporate world where the culture demanded that anyone informing anyone of a problem had to also include suggested solutions.  Not having the thing at least half-way solved by the time of omission meant you were just dumping your problems on someone else and not taking responsibility and making more work for your boss who already had enough on his plate. 
 
But, the corporate world is not the real world where nature and oppression don't give a crap what you have to say about anything. It's all just meaningless chatter.  So, yeah, Chris Hedges just dumps doomsday at our door and whether we like it or not he might be right.  You can't say he is wrong just because there is no solution. He does encourage people to fight back, but the resistance he is talking about is much different than Any Blue Will Do fighting back or voter shaming.  

 That's a terrible analogy and a faulty justification for what Hedges is doing.  This isn't a situation where someone says, "This seems concerning, I think we should look at ways to fix this."  Sure, if someone spots a problem they shouldn't feel they have to keep quiet unless they also know the solution.

That's not what's going on here.  This isn't a one-time meeting.  Hedges WROTE AND IS SELLING A FREAKIN' BOOK (excuse the all-caps).  He styles himself as a public intellectual.  If he's going to lay out what the problems are, and warn of danger if things don't change, it's not to much to ask him to think about solutions (or, at least, to suggest where to look for solutions).  

This is especially true because Hedges is not shy about telling others that they're "doing it wrong".  According to Hedges, we were "doing it wrong" in 2016 by voting for the Democratic nominee against Trump (he endorsed Stein).  If he's so confident that others are wrong, it's not too much to ask him what his alternative is.

Also, you wrote this in your first post -

nan said:
He wants to jolt people into action. 

 As I noted, he is not shy about telling people what "action" he doesn't approve of.  It sounds like he has something in mind, since you write: "He does encourage people to fight back, but the resistance he is talking about is much different than Any Blue Will Do fighting back or voter shaming." This insulting way of describing what people ARE doing, means it's not wrong to ask, "Okay, what's your suggestion, then?"

You also write, "You can't say he is wrong just because there is no solution." That's the nihilism I mentioned.  I'd rather spend my time reading and listening to people who enunciate some actions as well as list problems.

I need to stick up for nan here: RT has some excellent programming, but yeah, it is a state sponsored network and one needs to take that into account. So if they do a story on Crimea, I expect a certain bias. But Ed Schultz claimed he was given more independence by RT America to say what he wanted then he was given at MSNBC.  I have a strong feeling the Chris Hedges, bummer that he sometimes is, would say the same things on US network TV, given a chance.

I would be similarly careful about the BBC reporting on Ulster or Deutsche Welle reporting on the refugee issue in Germany....

Factotum said:
I need to stick up for nan here: RT has some excellent programming, but yeah, it is a state sponsored network and one needs to take that into account. So if they do a story on Crimea, I expect a certain bias. But Ed Schultz claimed he was given more independence by RT America to say what he wanted then he was given at MSNBC.  I have a strong feeling the Chris Hedges, bummer that he sometimes is, would say the same things on US network TV, given a chance.
I would be similarly careful about the BBC reporting on Ulster or Deutsche Welle reporting on the refugee issue in Germany....

 Okay, but RT and Sputnik are usually cited on this site for their Russia-related material.

drummerboy said:

nan said:

DaveSchmidt said:

LOST said:

DaveSchmidt said:
Well I’ll try to watch Chris one day, but my time gets so damn pressed
That it may not be till Monday, once I take mtierney’s test
I ain’t ready for Nekrasov, but I do agree it’s fine
When these MOL threads sure can be a grind

 She's giving a test or taking a test?
Who is Nekrasov? Is that part of the test?

LOST never did get nothing from the Nan din
That we didn’t, didn’t all rend in half
(Nekrasov is a Russian director who figures prominently in the Bill Browder thread. The test was the Facebook challenge from The Times, which mtierney posted.)

 Ok, just checking--  do you believe Browder's story?    Yes or no?

 oh please don't pollute this thread with Browder.

 I agree there is no need to mention Bill Browder in this thread.  For some reason LOST decided to stick in a dig about cutting my evidence in half, which is a falsehood.  LOST has presented no evidence to support Browder's fake story or to dispute mine. I'm asking him to state his public support for Browder, which he evidently has so I can then ask him what he bases that on.  Cause none of that got said in the thread where he supposedly destroyed my evidence. So I agree--don't pollute--talk about Browder in the Browder thread.  

nohero said:

nan said:You can just watch about 30 minutes to hear him speak before questions.

I think it is interesting that you and some others don't consider this valid unless there are solutions offered.  It reminds me of when I worked in the corporate world where the culture demanded that anyone informing anyone of a problem had to also include suggested solutions.  Not having the thing at least half-way solved by the time of omission meant you were just dumping your problems on someone else and not taking responsibility and making more work for your boss who already had enough on his plate. 
 
But, the corporate world is not the real world where nature and oppression don't give a crap what you have to say about anything. It's all just meaningless chatter.  So, yeah, Chris Hedges just dumps doomsday at our door and whether we like it or not he might be right.  You can't say he is wrong just because there is no solution. He does encourage people to fight back, but the resistance he is talking about is much different than Any Blue Will Do fighting back or voter shaming.  

 That's a terrible analogy and a faulty justification for what Hedges is doing.  This isn't a situation where someone says, "This seems concerning, I think we should look at ways to fix this."  Sure, if someone spots a problem they shouldn't feel they have to keep quiet unless they also know the solution.
That's not what's going on here.  This isn't a one-time meeting.  Hedges WROTE AND IS SELLING A FREAKIN' BOOK (excuse the all-caps).  He styles himself as a public intellectual.  If he's going to lay out what the problems are, and warn of danger if things don't change, it's not to much to ask him to think about solutions (or, at least, to suggest where to look for solutions).  
This is especially true because Hedges is not shy about telling others that they're "doing it wrong".  According to Hedges, we were "doing it wrong" in 2016 by voting for the Democratic nominee against Trump (he endorsed Stein).  If he's so confident that others are wrong, it's not too much to ask him what his alternative is.
Also, you wrote this in your first post -

nan said:
He wants to jolt people into action. 

 As I noted, he is not shy about telling people what "action" he doesn't approve of.  It sounds like he has something in mind, since you write: "He does encourage people to fight back, but the resistance he is talking about is much different than Any Blue Will Do fighting back or voter shaming." This insulting way of describing what people ARE doing, means it's not wrong to ask, "Okay, what's your suggestion, then?"
You also write, "You can't say he is wrong just because there is no solution." That's the nihilism I mentioned.  I'd rather spend my time reading and listening to people who enunciate some actions as well as list problems.

 You seem to be a part of the "magical thinking" that Hedges lists a characteristic of end stage times.  When someone tells you that you have advanced terminal cancer with less than two weeks to live, you don't dismiss them because they did not give you a solution.  Or you might because you can't face the truth.  

Of course he endorsed Jill Stein, because Hillary and Bill Clinton are part of the reason we are in this dire situation.  He specifically calls out Bill's policies such as NAFTA as causing great misery.  Hillary never renounced NAFTA as a mistake.  He finds the whole system rotten and beyond redemption, and he has been saying this for years.  I used to disagree with him on that, but after watching the behavior of the DNC , before, during and after the 2016 election I don't see much hope for change either.  

I totally get why you would want to watch something else more cheerful and hopeful, however, that does not mean we are not all doomed.  You have not disputed any of his points, other than to once again ***** that he did not vote for Hillary.  

nohero said:

Factotum said:
I need to stick up for nan here: RT has some excellent programming, but yeah, it is a state sponsored network and one needs to take that into account. So if they do a story on Crimea, I expect a certain bias. But Ed Schultz claimed he was given more independence by RT America to say what he wanted then he was given at MSNBC.  I have a strong feeling the Chris Hedges, bummer that he sometimes is, would say the same things on US network TV, given a chance.
I would be similarly careful about the BBC reporting on Ulster or Deutsche Welle reporting on the refugee issue in Germany....

 Okay, but RT and Sputnik are usually cited on this site for their Russia-related material.

 This thread is not about Russia-related material, and yet I got cited for using those sources from the get go.  Also, most of the Sputnik-related references I posted were interviews with Americans or non-Russians (or anti-Putin Russians) and the reporters themselves were Americans with long histories of expressing the same views. 

nan said:You seem to be a part of the "magical thinking" that Hedges lists a characteristic of end stage times.  When someone tells you that you have advanced terminal cancer with less than two weeks to live, you don't dismiss them because they did not give you a solution.  Or you might because you can't face the truth.  

I'll reject the really stupid comeback, "Oh, that's just magical thinking".  I couldn't care less about Hedges' nihilism, which I think I've already written here.

In light of your dismissal of what I wrote, could you explain what is meant by your statements that I previously quoted?

nan said:
He wants to jolt people into action. 

nan said:"He does encourage people to fight back, but the resistance he is talking about is much different than Any Blue Will Do fighting back or voter shaming."

 Is it "magical thinking" to "want to jolt people into action" or "encourage people to fight back"?  Either he has something in mind for that "advanced terminal cancer with less than two weeks to live", or he doesn't.  And if he doesn't, I'm not interested in hearing his opinions about the actions of people who ARE doing something.

nan said:
I agree there is no need to mention Bill Browder in this thread.  For some reason LOST decided to stick in a dig about cutting my evidence in half, which is a falsehood.

It wasn't LOST. It was me, taking liberties with a song lyric while answering LOST's questions. The reason: to have a little fun.

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:
I agree there is no need to mention Bill Browder in this thread.  For some reason LOST decided to stick in a dig about cutting my evidence in half, which is a falsehood.

It wasn't LOST. It was me, taking liberties with a song lyric while answering LOST's questions. The reason: to have a little fun.

 Not fun.   But sorry to LOST for accusing him of something he did not do.

nan said:

nohero said:

nan said:You can just watch about 30 minutes to hear him speak before questions.

I think it is interesting that you and some others don't consider this valid unless there are solutions offered.  It reminds me of when I worked in the corporate world where the culture demanded that anyone informing anyone of a problem had to also include suggested solutions.  Not having the thing at least half-way solved by the time of omission meant you were just dumping your problems on someone else and not taking responsibility and making more work for your boss who already had enough on his plate. 
 
But, the corporate world is not the real world where nature and oppression don't give a crap what you have to say about anything. It's all just meaningless chatter.  So, yeah, Chris Hedges just dumps doomsday at our door and whether we like it or not he might be right.  You can't say he is wrong just because there is no solution. He does encourage people to fight back, but the resistance he is talking about is much different than Any Blue Will Do fighting back or voter shaming.  

 That's a terrible analogy and a faulty justification for what Hedges is doing.  This isn't a situation where someone says, "This seems concerning, I think we should look at ways to fix this."  Sure, if someone spots a problem they shouldn't feel they have to keep quiet unless they also know the solution.
That's not what's going on here.  This isn't a one-time meeting.  Hedges WROTE AND IS SELLING A FREAKIN' BOOK (excuse the all-caps).  He styles himself as a public intellectual.  If he's going to lay out what the problems are, and warn of danger if things don't change, it's not to much to ask him to think about solutions (or, at least, to suggest where to look for solutions).  
This is especially true because Hedges is not shy about telling others that they're "doing it wrong".  According to Hedges, we were "doing it wrong" in 2016 by voting for the Democratic nominee against Trump (he endorsed Stein).  If he's so confident that others are wrong, it's not too much to ask him what his alternative is.
Also, you wrote this in your first post -

nan said:
He wants to jolt people into action. 

 As I noted, he is not shy about telling people what "action" he doesn't approve of.  It sounds like he has something in mind, since you write: "He does encourage people to fight back, but the resistance he is talking about is much different than Any Blue Will Do fighting back or voter shaming." This insulting way of describing what people ARE doing, means it's not wrong to ask, "Okay, what's your suggestion, then?"
You also write, "You can't say he is wrong just because there is no solution." That's the nihilism I mentioned.  I'd rather spend my time reading and listening to people who enunciate some actions as well as list problems.

 You seem to be a part of the "magical thinking" that Hedges lists a characteristic of end stage times.  When someone tells you that you have advanced terminal cancer with less than two weeks to live, you don't dismiss them because they did not give you a solution.  Or you might because you can't face the truth.  
Of course he endorsed Jill Stein, because Hillary and Bill Clinton are part of the reason we are in this dire situation.  He specifically calls out Bill's policies such as NAFTA as causing great misery.  Hillary never renounced NAFTA as a mistake.  He finds the whole system rotten and beyond redemption, and he has been saying this for years.  I used to disagree with him on that, but after watching the behavior of the DNC , before, during and after the 2016 election I don't see much hope for change either.  
I totally get why you would want to watch something else more cheerful and hopeful, however, that does not mean we are not all doomed.  You have not disputed any of his points, other than to once again ***** that he did not vote for Hillary.  

I was surprised to see that MSNBC had Chris Hedges on to talk about his book.  

Here’s the two-week-old Hedges interview on MSNBC without Kyle Kulinski’s expression of surprise and further commentary.

nan said:
I was surprised to see that MSNBC had Chris Hedges on to talk about his book.  

 Why? Does it affect your “msm things-THEY-don’t-want-you-to-hear” narrative when this happens?

ridski said:

nan said:
I was surprised to see that MSNBC had Chris Hedges on to talk about his book.  

 Why? Does it affect your “msm things-THEY-don’t-want-you-to-hear” narrative when this happens?

 Yes, I'm surprised they covered it, even if it was just a short skeptical interview.  I give them credit for that, although I wish they spent more time and took it more seriously.  But they deserve credit for at least mentioning it.  I could not find any CNN coverage.

Chris Hedges gets interviewed about his book on his show. 

Anytime a RT or Sputnik video is used - it will go into the Russia subforum.

jamie said:
Anytime a RT or Sputnik video is used - it will go into the Russia subforum.

 Chris Hedges does not belong in the Russian subforum.  His book (and this thread) is about America.  He used to work for the New York Times until he refused to lie about the war in Iraq.  He has an excellent show on RT called, "On Contact."

jamie said:
Anytime a RT or Sputnik video is used - it will go into the Russia subforum.

The clarity of this cracked me up, in a relief-from-banging-my-head-on-a-wall kind of way. Thanks for that, Jamie.

Chris exactly the type of personality and rhetoric that RT and you wish to promote - sorry not on my main forum.

You may want to start a forum on RT.

jamie said:
Chris exactly the type of personality and rhetoric that RT and you wish to promote - sorry not on my main forum.
You may want to start a forum on RT.

 Make sure you watch this video and then lets have a discussion about propaganda:

are u intending to post this on every thread?

nan said:

jamie said:
Chris exactly the type of personality and rhetoric that RT and you wish to promote - sorry not on my main forum.
You may want to start a forum on RT.

 Make sure you watch this video and then lets have a discussion about propaganda:

 After watching a bit of it - I completely agree that the video is propaganda.  What is there to discuss?

nan said:
I was surprised to see that MSNBC had Chris Hedges on to talk about his book.  

 MSNBC trying to destroy our democracy,

jamie said:

nan said:

jamie said:
Chris exactly the type of personality and rhetoric that RT and you wish to promote - sorry not on my main forum.
You may want to start a forum on RT.

 Make sure you watch this video and then lets have a discussion about propaganda:

 After watching a bit of it - I completely agree that the video is propaganda.  What is there to discuss?

 Yes, when presented with evidence that challenges your views, you watch for a couple of minutes, then stop and furiously Google until you find some negative press on the source. Case closed. Mind also closed. And thread sent to Russian sub-basement, even if it has nothing to do with Russia.