Brit/pol/ #1: second attempt edition

[Johnny Barleycorn]

Anything Milo says can be ripped apart in five minutes, just like that other spouting twat Katie Hopkins. Honestly, if you want to get your information from those sources and think you're getting something from them knock yerself out. I'll keep my sources to things which at least attemp to be factual instead of having a child like simplicity where their thinking on a subject stops at the point where the subject makes sense to them. The man is an idiot, but granted a very convincing idiot.

I don’t disagree with you about Milo. I think he’s a gobshite, but is it surprising that some are turning to people like him when you have, for example, C4 News senior news anchor turning up at Glastonbury shouting “f*** the Tories”? Now, you can agree with him or not, but the fact remains he masquerades as an unbiased senior journalist where it is apparent he is anything but. Is it surprising they look elsewhere when they see Cathy Newman, presented to us as a brilliant cutting edge journalist, shredded by a laconic Canadian chap who dealt with Newman’s towering intellect as if he was playing Pong with an infant.

If trusted news sources are compromised, if they give Remain a ten point advantage on the day before the Brexit vote, or report that Hillary Clinton has a 98% likelihood of winning the Presidency on the day of the election that’s beyond getting your numbers wrong, that’s the very cusp of deliberate falsehood.

 

[bhops]

I don’t disagree with you about Milo. I think he’s a gobshite, but is it surprising that some are turning to people like him when you have, for example, C4 News senior news anchor turning up at Glastonbury shouting “f*** the Tories”? Now, you can agree with him or not, but the fact remains he masquerades as an unbiased senior journalist where it is apparent he is anything but. Is it surprising they look elsewhere when they see Cathy Newman, presented to us as a brilliant cutting edge journalist, shredded by a laconic Canadian chap who dealt with Newman’s towering intellect as if he was playing Pong with an infant.

If trusted news sources are compromised, if they give Remain a ten point advantage on the day before the Brexit vote, or report that Hillary Clinton has a 98% likelihood of winning the Presidency on the day of the election that’s beyond getting your numbers wrong, that’s the very cusp of deliberate falsehood.

Exactly! Because ‘trusted’ news sources have been getting it soooooooo right lately

 

[bhops]

At what point is it acceptable to stop paying attention to somebody after you've realized they're an idiot? Straight away, never?

Is there any point in watching those links when I have no context with which to watch them? I can tell by the front of both of them that I have no idea what the original stories are. Aside from knowing Milo, like every other time I've heard him talk will leave much of the subject to one side to suit his own narrative and not budge one inch from where he started.

I think I'm fairly central to be honest, I just don't care for shit talking half truth idiots. For the same reason I don't bother with Breitbart, I don't bother with the Daily Mail, The Sun, The Mirror, ITV News, Fox, I'm sure you get the point. I do read the Times though which is probably right leaning but has all things covered.

Anything Milo says can be ripped apart in five minutes, just like that other spouting twat Katie Hopkins. Honestly, if you want to get your information from those sources and think you're getting something from them knock yerself out. I'll keep my sources to things which at least attemp to be factual instead of having a child like simplicity where their thinking on a subject stops at the point where the subject makes sense to them. The man is an idiot, but granted a very convincing idiot.

Context? One is about Oprah’s speech at the Globes and the other is about how the MSM is framing the Peterson/Newman mauling. How much more context do you need????

AND both pieces are really excellent restrained (IMHO) analysis but you for some bizarre reason refuse to watch them. This is where I really struggle with progressives, I’m asking you to have a look at them so WE can debate the merits, but apparently this is an abhorrent shocking request and one you can’t possbly acquiesce to. As I say, strange.

 

[Johnny Barleycorn]

Exactly! Because ‘trusted’ news sources have been getting it soooooooo right lately

Gove is still ridiculed to this day about his “no such thing as experts” quote but had he been allowed to finish his point rather than being interrupted by Kamel Ahmed and having the rest of his sentence lost, he then said that people have had enough of experts who get it wrong. That seems to me to be an accurate appraisal of the situation. Hardly any financial experts foresaw the crash, for example, despite the divining of such things being pretty damn central to their role.

Political experts on television, paid hundreds of thousands and sometimes millions a year to tell we mere plebs what is happening missed both Brexit and Trump, but both outcomes seemed entirely feasible to me. I won money on both. On Brexit I just spoke to an awful lot of people about it, and was increasingly surprised by the divergence between what the media was telling me and what people I met were telling me. By the time Cameron called a press conference a week out with thirty minutes notice it was plain s9mething was going badly wrong. The Saturday before the vote I sat outside my local M&S for forty-five minutes watching the trestle tables manned on one side of the road by Leave and on the other by Remain. The Remain side were busy touting for business on their side while the Leave table was two and three deep at times. Something didn’t quite add up.

As for Trump you really only had to listen and compare. It’s unusual for any candidate to land a blow in a Presidential debate, but “You’d be in jail.” was pretty devastating. The audience reaction alone told you Hillary had a problem. I watched both candidates live throughout the last week of campaigning and frankly Trump wiped the floor with her on ideas and policies. I don’t mean what those policies were. I just mean he had some. While she was busying herself trying to knit together small interest groups into a winning margin he was talking on broader terms to more people.

 

[Charlie Cheswick]

I don’t disagree with you about Milo. I think he’s a gobshite, but is it surprising that some are turning to people like him when you have, for example, C4 News senior news anchor turning up at Glastonbury shouting “f*** the Tories”? Now, you can agree with him or not, but the fact remains he masquerades as an unbiased senior journalist where it is apparent he is anything but. Is it surprising they look elsewhere when they see Cathy Newman, presented to us as a brilliant cutting edge journalist, shredded by a laconic Canadian chap who dealt with Newman’s towering intellect as if he was playing Pong with an infant.

If trusted news sources are compromised, if they give Remain a ten point advantage on the day before the Brexit vote, or report that Hillary Clinton has a 98% likelihood of winning the Presidency on the day of the election that’s beyond getting your numbers wrong, that’s the very cusp of deliberate falsehood.

I don't watch any News channels to be honest so it's all lost on me. I think something was lost when things went 24/7 from reporting news events to there just being a dirge of propaganda and rather than want to throw my shoe at the telly every time the News was on I just sacked it off. Strangely it brings great clarity not bothering with it, if a piece of news is big enough you find out about it anyway and can read more, if not it just passes you by. It's about the only piece of good advice Morrissey has given for years although I beat him to it by several years.

 

[Charlie Cheswick]

Context? One is about Oprah’s speech at the Globes and the other is about how the MSM is framing the Peterson/Newman mauling. How much more context do you need????

AND both pieces are really excellent restrained (IMHO) analysis but you for some bizarre reason refuse to watch them. This is where I really struggle with progressives, I’m asking you to have a look at them so WE can debate the merits, but apparently this is an abhorrent shocking request and one you can’t possbly acquiesce to. As I say, strange.

Sorry, I seem to be a much worse person for bypassing celebrity gossip and so have no f***ing idea about the stories that you're talking about and to bother watching your favoured idiot I would need to first find out about those stories. To be honest I can't be bothered with either celebrity tittle tattle or listening to the f***ing moron that you appear to hang on.

 

[Charlie Cheswick]

Gove is still ridiculed to this day about his “no such thing as experts” quote

The problem here for Gove was that he absolutely ignored all expert advice while in his post as Education Minister so even a misquote is going to be used to hang him because he proved to be completely inept thanks to being too dogmatic and ignoring all good advice. It's a problem we have throughout our main political parties at the moment, if either of them stopped being dogmatic and started being practical they'd start to be a lot less shit, or a shit alternative option.

 

[bhops]

Sorry, I seem to be a much worse person for bypassing celebrity gossip and so have no f***ing idea about the stories that you're talking about and to bother watching your favoured idiot I would need to first find out about those stories. To be honest I can't be bothered with either celebrity tittle tattle or listening to the f***ing moron that you appear to hang on.

'Celebrity Gossip???" Oprah's speech was headline news around the world and even had some members of press postulating as to whether this was the start of her run for president of the Unites States of America. As for the Jordan Peterson interview, Peterson is an intellectual heavyweight that entered into substantive debate around women's' rights, gender equality with Cathy Newman in an interview that quickly went viral. Now I know as you've stated you apparently don't watch the news (which I find interesting as you have a lot to say around current world and political affairs) but suggest that to frame either the Oprah speech or the Peterson interview as 'celebrity gossip' seems to me to be wilful ignorance more than anything else.

And then you move on to the passive aggressive attacks; where I have I EVER said that Milo is 'my favourite idiot? Or my favourite anything for that matter. And where I have I EVER said I 'hang' on anything Milo has said? All I said was I found his analysis on both these matters quite interesting and worthy of discussion.

 

[Charlie Cheswick]

'Celebrity Gossip???" Oprah's speech was headline news around the world and even had some members of press postulating as to whether this was the start of her run for president of the Unites States of America. As for the Jordan Peterson interview, Peterson is an intellectual heavyweight that entered into substantive debate around women's' rights, gender equality with Cathy Newman in an interview that quickly went viral. Now I know as you've stated you apparently don't watch the news (which I find interesting as you have a lot to say around current world and political affairs) but suggest that to frame either the Oprah speech or the Peterson interview as 'celebrity gossip' seems to me to be wilful ignorance more than anything else.

And then you move on to the passive aggressive attacks; where I have I EVER said that Milo is 'my favourite idiot? Or my favourite anything for that matter. And where I have I EVER said I 'hang' on anything Milo has said? All I said was I found his analysis on both these matters quite interesting and worthy of discussion.

Yep, and I said he was an idiot. Would you like me to repeatedly tell you that somebody you find to be an idiot is really an insightful person that you must listen to? Probably not.

 

[bhops]

Yep, and I said he was an idiot. Would you like me to repeatedly tell you that somebody you find to be an idiot is really an insightful person that you must listen to? Probably not.

Well I have enough intellectual curiosity about things that if you sent me a link saying ‘check this out’ I would put my preconceived notions aside and give it a go. I’ve personally found its been the best way to broaden my knowledge and understanding of life.

And just to be clear I NEVER that you MUST listen to him, I merely linked 2 10 minute YT videos which I suggested you check out as I found them quite thought provoking and erudite in their analysis. Two. I find that you are drawing an enormously long bow to suggest that sending you TWO links is some kind of plea that you now MUST listen to every utterance from Milo.

 

[Charlie Cheswick]

Well I have enough intellectual curiosity about things that if you sent me a link saying ‘check this out’ I would put my preconceived notions aside and give it a go. I’ve personally found its been the best way to broaden my knowledge and understanding of life.

And just to be clear I NEVER that you MUST listen to him, I merely linked 2 10 minute YT videos which I suggested you check out as I found them quite thought provoking and erudite in their analysis. Two. I find that you are drawing an enormously long bow to suggest that sending you TWO links is some kind of plea that you now MUST listen to every utterance from Milo.

You don't seem to be able to grasp that I haven't just dismissed him, I've listened to his bollocks more times than I can remember. The bloke is a twat.

It's up to you if you want to think otherwise, that's your lookout, please stop with this shit, especially the intellectualism part, that's especially silly when talking about Milo.

In short, stop telling me Milo is interesting, I've listened to him many times, thought what he said through after and realized the man is an idiot. I don't need to watch more of his shit and have to do a load of reading about things that I have no interest in to find that out.