The insane social justice thread

[jamil]

It's not just the mainstream media. Media in general sucks. You have to look at numerous sources and try to find the right of it in the middle, according to your best guess and trying to eliminate one's inherent bias.

It boils down to figuring out if we believe what we believe because it's what we want to believe.

Over the holidays my sister in law went on a Donald Trump rant about how he mocked a "special needs" reporter. She has a special needs child. So that really resonated with her. She literally hates Trump. I think at this point, if I tried to make the case to her that Trump likely didn't even know the reporter was disabled, it would likely just **** her off because I'm trying to deprive her of her righteous indignation. She wants to believe every negative thing about Trump, true or not. She won't have any of it not being true even if it's false.

How many more are like her?

 

[5.56'aholic]

It boils down to figuring out if we believe what we believe because it's what we want to believe.

Over the holidays my sister in law went on a Donald Trump rant about how he mocked a "special needs" reporter. She has a special needs child. So that really resonated with her. She literally hates Trump. I think at this point, if I tried to make the case to her that Trump likely didn't even know the reporter was disabled, it would likely just **** her off because I'm trying to deprive her of her righteous indignation. She wants to believe every negative thing about Trump, true or not. She won't have any of it not being true even if it's false.

How many more are like her?

Pretty sure there are several movements currently based entirely on falsely held beliefs and misinformation.

 

[jamil]

Pretty sure there are several movements currently based entirely on falsely held beliefs and misinformation.

Sure. My sister-in-law is literally a soccer mom. She's not part of any political movement. She's just a consumer and believer in mainstream news. She brags that she only gets her news from PBS/NPR, because they're "unbiased".

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

It boils down to figuring out if we believe what we believe because it's what we want to believe.

Over the holidays my sister in law went on a Donald Trump rant about how he mocked a "special needs" reporter. She has a special needs child. So that really resonated with her. She literally hates Trump. I think at this point, if I tried to make the case to her that Trump likely didn't even know the reporter was disabled, it would likely just **** her off because I'm trying to deprive her of her righteous indignation. She wants to believe every negative thing about Trump, true or not. She won't have any of it not being true even if it's false.

How many more are like her?

If you showed her the clip of Obama making that off-the-cuff quip about bowling like he was retarded (of whatever it was along those lines) does she have the same reaction?

 

[Bill of Rights]

I make no excuses for the MSM, nor for the people who believe them. I can imagine, however, that one reason is probably that they do have "correspondents" everywhere, or can put one somewhere if need be, and let's be honest: I can't be in Washington to see for myself what is going on. I can't be simultaneously in Indianapolis to verify the facts for myself. The media we have are the ones who can be places, and have the ability to tell us what they see. Note that I said the ability, not the will to do so.

Where it all falls apart is that they can only tell us what information they are given, if they decide to be truthful and apply no "spin" to the story, and if they do not, they are another level at which things are filtered or more accurately, adulterated.

When I first learned sterile technique, I learned about handwashing and what direction the hands need to be held, what needed to not be present, how long to scrub, etc. I also learned how to open a sterile pack and what not to do when one was open, how far in was considered non-sterile even at that, and at what height the tray was supposed to be, among other things. Any violation at any point in that process means the tray is no longer sterile, and technically, must be replaced for the procedure, if all goes as it's supposed to. Given that, and taking for granted that my instructors were taught correctly,

If my instructors taught me incorrectly at any point
If I failed to assimilate the information correctly
If I fail to recall the information correctly
If I don't wash correctly
If I don't open the packaging correctly
If I don't put on my sterile gloves sterilely
If I don't keep the tray at the right height
If I don't keep the tray under constant observation
If I allow something to cross the field
If I ignore some seen adulteration
If I fail to report the above
or if I don't correct an error myself

A break in technique occurs. That break could introduce bacteria into a patient.

Those are only the breaks (and probably not all of them) for which I am responsible. Others involved are the people who maintain the autoclaves or who package the prepackaged kits, the doctor using the instruments, and the patient him- or herself. I also have to instruct the patient how to keep the area clean to prevent that.

So why does all this matter?

At any point, the pure, clean product could be adulterated, and modified to become pathogenic, and most of the reasons it could are innocuous. No one would be trying to infect a patient. At some points, the breaks are intentional (say if the doc sees a break, but chooses to simply avoid using the instrument that was affected. Technically, the tray isn't sterile anymore, but he makes the judgment call whether or not that will matter.) And if someone is really intent on causing harm, as I once saw on some TV show, where a doc intentionally introduced a pathogen directly onto a product that was then used to perform a heart cath or some procedure, the act becomes one of malice.

Likewise, the news we receive could be adulterated innocuously, just as a matter of perspective, say, like a game of "telephone". No one is intentionally swaying the story, they're just reporting it as best they can. This can happen at any/many levels.
Someone can intentionally tell the reporter in the field false or incomplete information by mistake or by intent, again for many reasons ("We didn't release that detail to the public. It would compromise blahblahblahblah")
The reporter could put their own spin on the story, much like when you and I have told the story of 4/19/1775: We are careful to get the facts as best we can, but when telling it, the word choices we use make a difference to some of the students/shooters. It's not malicious to fail to report that Dr. Warren was returning from courting, for example, that detail may or may not be important.
The editor could edit the story. 'nuff said.
The guy making the teleprompter text for the news anchors could be drunk.
The anchors themselves could Dan Rather a story.

But what choice do we have, other than to go everywhere and try to verify data for ourselves? Anything we get has to come through someone else's filter first.
I don't think it's so much that they have credibility left. I think it's more that they're our only source of info, and we just need to remember that they are not unbiased, any of them.

Blessings,
Bill

I still wonder, why don't more folks who realize this ignore the mainstream media and press for the deceptive agenda pushers they've proven themselves to be?

What sliver of credibility still lingers in anyone's mind?

 

[Kutnupe14]

If you showed her the clip of Obama making that off-the-cuff quip about bowling like he was retarded (of whatever it was along those lines) does she have the same reaction?

Special Olympics.... Not that it's any better for a president to be saying.

 

[jamil]

If you showed her the clip of Obama making that off-the-cuff quip about bowling like he was retarded (of whatever it was along those lines) does she have the same reaction?

I doubt it. She really kinda adores Obama. She'd make whatever excuses are necessary not to have to believe negative things about him that are true. I just wonder how many people out there are like that. I suspect it's most. Trumpers be like that. Moonies be like that. Centrists be like that. I think it's just a default human reaction and many people, especially in media and politics have realized that, and they're exploiting it.

I've been reading a lot about Russell Conjugation. I dunno. Maybe because I find it interesting, I'm now seeing it everywhere, even where it isn't.

I am predisposed to a more conservative viewpoint. You are biased. She is a ****ing Obama lover.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I see this idiot is going the Amy Schumer route... seeking attention by screaming "PAY ATTENTION TO MY VAGINA."

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I doubt it. She really kinda adores Obama. She'd make whatever excuses are necessary not to have to believe negative things about him that are true. I just wonder how many people out there are like that. I suspect it's most. Trumpers be like that. Moonies be like that. Centrists be like that. I think it's just a default human reaction and many people, especially in media and politics have realized that, and they're exploiting it.

I've been reading a lot about Russell Conjugation. I dunno. Maybe because I find it interesting, I'm now seeing it everywhere, even where it isn't.

I am predisposed to a more conservative viewpoint. You are biased. She is a ****ing Obama lover.

And you increased my vocabulary by 1 term today.

 

[ATM]

...and they're exploiting it...

Why wouldn't we? It works.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I see this idiot is going the Amy Schumer route... seeking attention by screaming "PAY ATTENTION TO MY VAGINA."

I think I just found some guys who are equipped to pay the required kind of attention.

[video=youtube;T1WPFZlJD90]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1WPFZlJD90[/video]

 

[historian]

I see this idiot is going the Amy Schumer route... seeking attention by screaming "PAY ATTENTION TO MY VAGINA."

I'm more worried that she may be late by 13 days...

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Surprised I missed this trash.

NYT complains that Super Mario Run is sexist.

https://archive.is/ZOy3w

 

[actaeon277]

Surprised I missed this trash.

NYT complains that Super Mario Run is sexist.

https://archive.is/ZOy3w

And yet, people are buying it. It's popular.

 

[Vigilant]

I'm more worried that she may be late by 13 days...

Then sir, you should have used better protection?

 

[actaeon277]

Maybe her body is just tired of her brain, and trying to save the universe from her.

 

[historian]

Then sir, you should have used better protection?

 

[SheepDog4Life]

'splains a lot!

 

[IndyGal65]

Surprised I missed this trash.

NYT complains that Super Mario Run is sexist.

https://archive.is/ZOy3w

I have read so much ridiculousness in this thread. Thank goodness I'm a recovering Democrat. (Thank you INGO for being my sponsor!)

 

[OakRiver]

And yet, people are buying it. It's popular.

People are buying it for the same reason that Trump won; because America is racist, misogynistic, xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, transphobic, bitter clingers, deplorables, too stupid to realize they were being duped by Russia, and it's all Bush's fault.

I know this because the media told me so