You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 05, 2016, 08:39:33 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.  (Read 4329 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TriesteTopic starter

  • Faerie Queen; Her Imperial Lubemajesty; Willing Victim
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: In the middle of Happily Ever After with a dark Prince Charming.
  • Gender: Female
  • I am many things - dull is not one of them.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 4
I'm putting this in P&R because it will no doubt spark off-topic discussion of how Obama sucks in some way, but I had to share. Hi-lar-i-ous.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/40018314#40018314

Offline mystictiger

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #1 on: November 06, 2010, 09:13:57 AM »
Bah! If she's a lesbian vampire, I can't make any bad jokes about sucking.

Yum

Mice with human brains! Aieee!

Thank you, T. Although you owe me another shirt.

Although I'm curious - to what extent is left wing media true, free, and honest?
« Last Edit: November 06, 2010, 09:22:45 AM by mystictiger »

Offline ReijiTabibito

  • Gatecrasher
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: Titanian Autonomous University, Gate Studies Dept.
  • Gender: Male
  • There cannot be another Fall.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #2 on: November 06, 2010, 09:23:37 AM »
I'm sorry.  Since when do people take ships to go anywhere these days?  Traveling via ship kinda went out the mass world transportation with the invention of, oh, I don't know, the airplane?

And how, how do you spend $200 million dollars in one day?  I don't think I could spend that much in one lifetime, let alone one day!

Also, PS: how is it that people treat things like Glen Beck as legitimate news?  They're sensationalists at best, and at worst...worse.

« Last Edit: November 06, 2010, 09:25:01 AM by ReijiTabibito »

Offline Brandon

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #3 on: November 06, 2010, 10:53:40 AM »
A lesbian vampire hosting a political news show even though if mythology is to be believed she wouldnt show up due to the vampires cast no reflection...wow there are no words to how hilarious that is


Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #4 on: November 06, 2010, 11:08:43 AM »
A lesbian vampire hosting a political news show even though if mythology is to be believed she wouldnt show up due to the vampires cast no reflection...wow there are no words to how hilarious that is

* Oniya plants tongue firmly in cheek.

That's only when you're dealing with old-fashioned mirrors and film photography: it's all about the silver (silver nitrate in terms of film, silver film on the old mirrors).  Digital should work just fine. 

* Oniya scurries off before someone smacks her.

Offline TriesteTopic starter

  • Faerie Queen; Her Imperial Lubemajesty; Willing Victim
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: In the middle of Happily Ever After with a dark Prince Charming.
  • Gender: Female
  • I am many things - dull is not one of them.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 4
Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #5 on: November 06, 2010, 11:39:26 AM »
Thank you, T. Although you owe me another shirt.

Shirt count: 2. Woo!

Although I'm curious - to what extent is left wing media true, free, and honest?

It's really not. However, I kinda feel like the left wing media showed just a little more restraint when Bush was in office. I mean, the dude DID take many many many trips to his ranch, but nobody ever accused him of spending 2 million dollars a day to go to other countries. I think the worst I saw/heard was pictures of Bush walking around hand in hand with some Iranian prince and he was accused of being in their pocket.

Some of the theories put forth about Obama and science research in general are ... um. Well, they're very special. I wonder if it's because people are worried about Obama's intelligence. He's smart and well-spoken. One could, at most, only accuse Bush of half of that sentence. ^_^

Offline Sure

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #6 on: November 06, 2010, 01:53:50 PM »
Iranian prince

... Iran is not a Monarchy? It has not had a Prince since the Iranian Revolution.

Anyway, I've heard both sides be fairly ridiculous. For example, while Bush was President I'd hear liberals saying Bush and his administration ought to be tried for war crimes or forced to give up their personal fortunes to contribute for the cost of the war. They'd accuse him of being in the pockets of big business, the Saudis, Dick Cheney, just about anyone. They'd insult his intelligence and demand he take an IQ test to see if he was fit to be President. Literally an entire industry developed around selling pictures that made Bush look like an idiot (one I remember is of him scratching his head so that he looked a bit like a monkey) when in reality there are hundreds of such pictures of anyone. It's what happens when cameras follow you around all day, you get caught in an awkward pose or two. That sort of thing. These are just what I can think of off the top of my head.

It seems to me that both sides tend to think their side is 'softer' on the other side. Neither really is, from my point of view.

Anyway, from what I've seen thus far of her, Rachel Maddow is just Bill O'Reilly liberal-style.

Offline HairyHeretic

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #7 on: November 06, 2010, 01:58:13 PM »
Probably meant Saudi, rather than Iranian.

Offline TriesteTopic starter

  • Faerie Queen; Her Imperial Lubemajesty; Willing Victim
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: In the middle of Happily Ever After with a dark Prince Charming.
  • Gender: Female
  • I am many things - dull is not one of them.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 4
Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #8 on: November 06, 2010, 02:05:51 PM »
Did the point get across? Yes? Good. 'Cause I'm not spending any part of my weekend looking up a random picture that I heard of in passing of George Bush holding anybody's hand.

Congratulations on knowing more about Iran's government than I do; frankly, it's really not that difficult.

Offline Will

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #9 on: November 06, 2010, 02:14:10 PM »
... Iran is not a Monarchy? It has not had a Prince since the Iranian Revolution.

Anyway, I've heard both sides be fairly ridiculous. For example, while Bush was President I'd hear liberals saying Bush and his administration ought to be tried for war crimes or forced to give up their personal fortunes to contribute for the cost of the war. They'd accuse him of being in the pockets of big business, the Saudis, Dick Cheney, just about anyone. They'd insult his intelligence and demand he take an IQ test to see if he was fit to be President. Literally an entire industry developed around selling pictures that made Bush look like an idiot (one I remember is of him scratching his head so that he looked a bit like a monkey) when in reality there are hundreds of such pictures of anyone. It's what happens when cameras follow you around all day, you get caught in an awkward pose or two. That sort of thing. These are just what I can think of off the top of my head.

It seems to me that both sides tend to think their side is 'softer' on the other side. Neither really is, from my point of view.

Anyway, from what I've seen thus far of her, Rachel Maddow is just Bill O'Reilly liberal-style.

Does any of that really equate with Obama taking 34 warships to India? Or of him being a muslim, or even a non-native American?  Or Rachel Maddow being a vampire?  Tiny quantities of Muslims... seriously?  Then what?  They might as well call Obama a terrorist.

Offline Zeitgeist

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #10 on: November 06, 2010, 03:12:10 PM »
I'll forgo commenting on topic and entertain myself with imagining Rachael Maddow scissoring with Ariana Huffington.  >:)

Can you just hear Ariana's lisping accent? Oh Rachael, Rachael... LOL

Offline Sure

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #11 on: November 06, 2010, 06:24:32 PM »
Quote
Did the point get across? Yes? Good. 'Cause I'm not spending any part of my weekend looking up a random picture that I heard of in passing of George Bush holding anybody's hand.

Congratulations on knowing more about Iran's government than I do; frankly, it's really not that difficult.
I'm sorry, I might be recalling this incorrectly, but weren't you the one lamenting how many Americans are politically undereducated? ::)

Regardless, if you'll notice I did address your point.

Quote
Does any of that really equate with Obama taking 34 warships to India? Or of him being a muslim, or even a non-native American?  Or Rachel Maddow being a vampire?  Tiny quantities of Muslims... seriously?  Then what?  They might as well call Obama a terrorist.
Suggesting Bush is functionally retarded, ought to be tried for warcrimes, and have his wealth confiscated? Yes. Yes it does.

Quote
I'll forgo commenting on topic and entertain myself with imagining Rachael Maddow scissoring with Ariana Huffington.  >:)

Can you just hear Ariana's lisping accent? Oh Rachael, Rachael... LOL
You, sir, have just won this thread.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2010, 06:45:23 PM by Sure »

Offline mystictiger

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #12 on: November 06, 2010, 06:39:43 PM »
Quote
Suggesting Bush is functionally retarded, ought to be tried for warcrimes, and have his wealth confiscated? Yes. Yes it does.

I wouldn't want to be on the side of trying to argue that Bush is intelligent, nor would I want to try and argue that the US invasion of Iraq was anything other than the crime of aggression. As to wealth confiscated? Maybe he'd (at least I think he) and (certainly) Cheney would like to make a donation from all the Haliburton dividends they received after heaps of state money went to the companies that they both used to work for?

The difference being that the democrats / left-wingers claims had some vague grounding in reasonable fact. Although I do like the idea of Obama snorting a line of Muslims.

Offline Will

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #13 on: November 06, 2010, 07:21:29 PM »
Suggesting Bush is functionally retarded, ought to be tried for warcrimes, and have his wealth confiscated? Yes. Yes it does.

Aside from the aforementioned difference (being at least distantly related to the truth), it's not the same.  None of those accusations found any real traction among the population, unlike the idea that Obama is a Muslim, and therefore a terrorist (which I have heard too many times to count from people believing it to be TRUE).  Outright lies have become a legitimate strategy for conservatives, apparently; you can't reasonably say the same for liberals.  After all, as we all know, they have no strategy.  In all seriousness, I haven't seen nearly as many examples of liberals deliberately pushing lies as truth.

More importantly, though, only one of those things you brought up is a true/false statement.  That Bush should be tried for war crimes and have his assets taken?  That's not objectively true OR false; it's an opinion, albeit extreme.  No one is lying to anyone there; there's a qualitative difference between that and the 34 warships accusation.  Saying that Bush is functionally retarded IS a true/false statement, but the liberal talking heads never pushed that in the same way that Fox News has pushed "Obama = Muslim."

Offline Jude

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #14 on: November 06, 2010, 08:07:27 PM »
Although it's not particularly relevant since excessive bias is bad no matter what side it leans towards, it really isn't fair to say that left-wing media is anywhere near as outrageous as the right's information machine.  CNN doesn't deserve to be part of the discussion as it tries to be apolitical and does a good job of riding the center (despite the fact that the far right likes to pretend otherwise because it's good for their cause), but analyzing MSNBC and Fox shows vast differences.

Fox does a good job of using its "hard news" side to perpetuate and spread messages that their commentators fabric from loose pieces of evidence, where MSNBC's fact reporting is incredibly dull, often tasteless, and stupid, but not particularly partisan.  If you compare the commentators at Fox and MSNBC you find a similar difference in extremes:  MSNBC consists entirely of liberal editorializers with the exception of a strong moderate conservative voice Joe Scarborough (who I actually rather like) where the only liberal on Fox is routinely matched up against lions, lacks force of personality, and isn't particularly incisive (Alan Combs).  In general whenever a liberal appears on Fox, they do a great job of putting them up against someone who has the tools to rip them apart, to the point that I don't know how any unbiased person can see it as anything but purposeful.

Ed Schultz is every bit as bad as the worst that Fox has to offer.  I wouldn't be surprised if he actually was Rush Limbaugh in disguise -- both are large, boisterous men who make absurdly extreme claims on the fringe of ideology.  Keith Obermann isn't much better than Ed, I really don't like his condescending, vicious attitude.  From there things chill out quite a bit, Chris Matthews is a centrist lefty with a very strange, old-school point of view that is unlike anyone else in television.  Maddow is surprisingly fair despite the fact that she's a devoted liberal, though she has her slip ups occasionally.  Newer additions like Lawrence O'Donnel are harder to peg -- I don't know where he falls yet.

Compare the MSNBC line up against the Fox likes of Shaun Hannity, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and the Fox and Friends crowd, and really there's no contest as to who's more extreme.  This doesn't even get into radio which is dominated by right-wing personalities -- left-wingers have a very little media influence by comparison.  Newspapers are dying and Jon Stewart hardly counts as a left wing commentator (and is quite fair with his commentary which does not moralize or preach ideology as much as it criticizes extremism on all sides), so only by painting timid outlets like NPR as liberal can you really create the perception of widespread leftist influence.  Unfortunately, that never stopped the Republicans from trying, which is why they've been doing it for decades now.  It really does prove that if you repeat something enough, people start believing it.

Now, if you want to talk the left as a whole, moving away from media outlets, then I'd say things are pretty much even.  Liberals are every bit as bad as conservatives when it comes to twisting fact to suit their political opinions.  Yeah, they say Obama is a Muslim terrorist bent on fundamentally transforming America, but many others said 9/11 was an inside job intended to give justification for invasion of the Middle East in order to enrich corporate profits for Haliburton and secure oil.

Insanity is not partisan.

Offline Sure

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #15 on: November 06, 2010, 08:11:53 PM »
Aside from the aforementioned difference (being at least distantly related to the truth), it's not the same.  None of those accusations found any real traction among the population, unlike the idea that Obama is a Muslim, and therefore a terrorist (which I have heard too many times to count from people believing it to be TRUE).  Outright lies have become a legitimate strategy for conservatives, apparently; you can't reasonably say the same for liberals.  After all, as we all know, they have no strategy.  In all seriousness, I haven't seen nearly as many examples of liberals deliberately pushing lies as truth.

More importantly, though, only one of those things you brought up is a true/false statement.  That Bush should be tried for war crimes and have his assets taken?  That's not objectively true OR false; it's an opinion, albeit extreme.  No one is lying to anyone there; there's a qualitative difference between that and the 34 warships accusation.  Saying that Bush is functionally retarded IS a true/false statement, but the liberal talking heads never pushed that in the same way that Fox News has pushed "Obama = Muslim."
What grounds do you have to say that it never gained traction? I heard it frequently enough.

And outright lies have always been a legitimate strategy for all politicians, full stop. As to saying liberals do it more than conservatives, again, I've seen them do the same. I've seen that claim before, but I've never seen evidence for it. What evidence do you have to say Republicans do it more?

You're splitting hairs there. Both contain an assertion of fact implicitly: that Bush is guilty of a crime, that he's a murderer, etc. In fact, it was not all that unusual for people to assert that Bush was guilty of war crimes rather than he ought to be tried. As to Fox News, as I recall they pushed on the Jeremiah Wright front, not the Muslim one. Muslims do not have Christian Pastors.


Offline TriesteTopic starter

  • Faerie Queen; Her Imperial Lubemajesty; Willing Victim
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: In the middle of Happily Ever After with a dark Prince Charming.
  • Gender: Female
  • I am many things - dull is not one of them.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 4
Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #16 on: November 06, 2010, 08:20:26 PM »
Mmkay.

Since the above couple posts are discussing neither lesbians nor vampires, I believe they are off-topic. Please go make your own thread to debate about the media, or post in the one Veks just created.

Thanks. :)

Offline Sure

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #17 on: November 06, 2010, 08:25:30 PM »
Ah, I'm sorry, I thought this thread was about Rachel Maddow. On topic.

Offline TriesteTopic starter

  • Faerie Queen; Her Imperial Lubemajesty; Willing Victim
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: In the middle of Happily Ever After with a dark Prince Charming.
  • Gender: Female
  • I am many things - dull is not one of them.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 4
Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #18 on: November 06, 2010, 08:38:25 PM »
Nobody was talking about her, either!  ::)

I quite like the picture.

Offline Noelle

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #19 on: November 06, 2010, 09:13:41 PM »
I actually have freckles on my arm in the shape of the Big Dipper/Ursa Major.

OH MY GOD I'M A BEAR FROM OUTER SPACE.

Offline Scott

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #20 on: November 06, 2010, 09:26:03 PM »
Best 19 minutes I've spent all week watching that.

Thanks Trieste.

Offline Aludiana of the Dusk

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #21 on: November 06, 2010, 09:34:56 PM »
I like the comment about the Self contained right wing media universe. It's like doing scientific research and confirming it by citing your own research.

Offline mystictiger

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #22 on: November 06, 2010, 09:43:10 PM »
I actually have freckles on my arm in the shape of the Big Dipper/Ursa Major.

OH MY GOD I'M A BEAR FROM OUTER SPACE.

Isn't there something in the Constitution about the right to bear arms? So come on, hand 'em over...

Offline Lilias

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #23 on: November 07, 2010, 02:23:44 PM »
Would Lesbian Vampire Killers be on topic here? ;D

Offline alxnjsh

Re: Rachel Maddow, lesbian vampire: It's true because it's on the internet.
« Reply #24 on: November 08, 2010, 07:42:47 PM »
hijack momentarily (I've never done it before gimme one break!)

This title wrote a check the thread couldn't cash! Where the hell are the lesbian vampires?! Where there are lesbians, there are bound to be gay ones!  ;)

/hijack

PS...I have a crush on Rachel Maddow! I know...me! The clip is classic Rachel - debunking myths.