Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Kellyanne Conway invents nonexistent terror attack to justify Trump ban
Topic Started: Feb 3 2017, 04:19 AM (1,461 Views)
Deleted User
Deleted User

Best line of the morning.
Joe Scarborough: How many victims were there of the Bowling Green massacre?
John Heilman: Just one.

:rotflmao:
Quote Post Goto Top
 
La Pasionaria
Member Avatar

It's all "par for the course": Trump's first two weeks in office have been utter chaos, and things just keep getting worse http://nyti.ms/2k8aQ8D

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Coast2coast

Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 04:20 AM
Let's all take a moment and remember the fictional victims of the imaginary "Bowling Green Massacre."
:wah:

:pray:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Coast2coast

wilmywood8455
Feb 3 2017, 01:44 PM
Best line of the morning.
Joe Scarborough: How many victims were there of the Bowling Green massacre?
John Heilman: Just one.

:rotflmao:
I heard that. I laughed so hard I was afraid that I was going to wake my wife in another part of the house.

:rotflmao:

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

Tsalagi
Feb 3 2017, 10:27 AM
A moment of silence, bow your heads in supplication to what name you call the Devine, as we remember the non-souls that lost their non-lives in that wonderful town in Kentucky where no one was massacred....please, hold any shredding of clothes, gnashing of teeth, or wailing til after the non-service is over please.
:lol:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

La Pasionaria
Feb 3 2017, 09:25 PM
It's all "par for the course": Trump's first two weeks in office have been utter chaos, and things just keep getting worse http://nyti.ms/2k8aQ8D

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
It is liberals who have been thrown into chaos....The best is yet to come................. :victory:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ringotuna
Member Avatar

CautionaryTales
Feb 3 2017, 05:10 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 04:58 AM
CautionaryTales
Feb 3 2017, 04:54 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 04:41 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 04:20 AM
Let's all take a moment and remember the fictional victims of the imaginary "Bowling Green Massacre."
Do you think she intentionally lied or just got her facts confused?
In the alternative facts world, no facts are incorrect or wrong.
There are no lies in alternative fact world.

Babbling platitudes don't answer my question. Would you care to take a shot at it?

Was she intentionally lying?
In alternative fact world there are no misstatements
No mistakes made
Everything you say is fact, sort of, kind of.... alternative facts are built to support the larger mission.
You don't have to be held to any accounting and when it's time to move on to the next adventure it's time to manufacture new alternative facts.

That isn't any platitude. It is the policy of this new administration.
Not just some claim making, it's also one that Conway herself has established...on a stage.. in front of people.

If you don't like today's alternative facts, not to worry, there will be some more issued today to "clarify" those alternative facts from yesterday.

Was she lying? Not really, because there are no lies in an administration that doesn't know the difference between truth and lies. When you can come up with the idea of "alternative fact" all notion of truth is dead.

Ask me if I think they are a gang of sociopaths. That I can answer, they haven't yet established their interpretation of that word. They HAVE reestablished the definition of fact and that definition nullifies the old definition.

They are not lies. They can't be lies because alternative facts are only limited by the imagination.
Still no answer.

Do you think she intentionally lied, or was she confused?
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ringotuna
Member Avatar

CautionaryTales
Feb 3 2017, 05:33 AM
Breaking!


“I bet it’s brand new information to people that President Obama had a six-month ban on the Iraqi refugee program after two Iraqi refugees came here to this country, were radicalized and were the masterminds behind the Bowling Green massacre,” Conway said. “Most people don’t know that because it didn’t get covered."
Is it true Obama put a six month ban on the Iraqi refugee program?
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ringotuna
Member Avatar

Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 05:28 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 05:04 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 05:03 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 04:41 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 04:20 AM
Let's all take a moment and remember the fictional victims of the imaginary "Bowling Green Massacre."
Do you think she intentionally lied or just got her facts confused?
I think facts are such a cheap commodity in this White House, that I'm not sure anyone there bothers to know the difference or care.

Don't worry. By this time next week, at least 40 percent of Trump voters will believe the Bowling Green Massacre happened and the liberal media covered it up to protect President Obama.

Just like Pizzagate or Trump's millions of illegal immigrant voters.

Another non answer....Do you think she lied intentionally? or was it a factual fubar?

I don't know. Do you think Trump's invention of millions of illegal votes was a "factual fubar"? How about his creative reworking of his inauguration crowd sizes? His calling CNN fake news? Or the literally hundreds of "factual fubars" he's had during the campaign.

I guess I should have posted that Hillary Clinton said this. Then you'd be all over it because, as we've established many times, there's no excuse for lying and it is all the same...except, I guess, when there is and it is different.

Anyway, your mistake is to believe that the Trump Administration makes some sort of difference between truth, dissembling, exaggerating, being wrong or making stuff up completely. Let me disabuse you. They don't. It is all the same to them. They simply say whatever nonsense pops into their head. Sometimes it is real. Sometimes it is false. Sometimes it is based loosely on actual events. Other times, it is a mixture of fact and fiction. Sometimes, it is completely invented. Sometimes, they misremember things. Sometimes, they blithely just retweet whatever some goofball on the internet said.

You may like to sit around calibrating their exact intent but I assure you, they don't. They just say whatever they feel like whenever they want to.

And they don't care.

I don't see Trump's lies any different from Hillary's, so stop trying to put words in my mouth. I'm simply questioning whether in this case it was a mistake or an intentional lie. Not sure why that's got you guys all worked up. And I find it interesting.... this turn about you've made regarding dishonesty in politics. You yammered on endlessly, defending the act of lying "to get ahead", even touting it as a virtue. Now all of the sudden honesty is important to you.



Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
thoughtless
Member Avatar

Only Trump can protect us from future imaginary massacres.
Without geometry, life is pointless.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Two a.m.
Member Avatar

ringotuna
Feb 4 2017, 04:53 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 05:28 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 05:04 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 05:03 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 04:41 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
I think facts are such a cheap commodity in this White House, that I'm not sure anyone there bothers to know the difference or care.

Don't worry. By this time next week, at least 40 percent of Trump voters will believe the Bowling Green Massacre happened and the liberal media covered it up to protect President Obama.

Just like Pizzagate or Trump's millions of illegal immigrant voters.

Another non answer....Do you think she lied intentionally? or was it a factual fubar?

I don't know. Do you think Trump's invention of millions of illegal votes was a "factual fubar"? How about his creative reworking of his inauguration crowd sizes? His calling CNN fake news? Or the literally hundreds of "factual fubars" he's had during the campaign.

I guess I should have posted that Hillary Clinton said this. Then you'd be all over it because, as we've established many times, there's no excuse for lying and it is all the same...except, I guess, when there is and it is different.

Anyway, your mistake is to believe that the Trump Administration makes some sort of difference between truth, dissembling, exaggerating, being wrong or making stuff up completely. Let me disabuse you. They don't. It is all the same to them. They simply say whatever nonsense pops into their head. Sometimes it is real. Sometimes it is false. Sometimes it is based loosely on actual events. Other times, it is a mixture of fact and fiction. Sometimes, it is completely invented. Sometimes, they misremember things. Sometimes, they blithely just retweet whatever some goofball on the internet said.

You may like to sit around calibrating their exact intent but I assure you, they don't. They just say whatever they feel like whenever they want to.

And they don't care.

I don't see Trump's lies any different from Hillary's, so stop trying to put words in my mouth. I'm simply questioning whether in this case it was a mistake or an intentional lie. Not sure why that's got you guys all worked up. And I find it interesting.... this turn about you've made regarding dishonesty in politics. You yammered on endlessly, defending the act of lying "to get ahead", even touting it as a virtue. Now all of the sudden honesty is important to you.




I've already elucidated my views on honesty in politics ad nauseam and it would serve no purpose to go over them again. I was merely having a bit of fun with you as I think you'd be far less charitable toward this "factual fubar" if the name were Clinton rather than Conway.

As for Conway herself, if this were an isolated incident, I'd simply characterize it as a particularly egregious screw-up. But the reason it is so darkly hilarious is that it reveals how little regard Trump and his administration have for facts. Not just for lying but for the very concept of factual information being important, distinct or meaningful in some way. Even the most dishonest administrations in American history have been careful to tell the truth and stick with the facts when they could. The fascinating thing about TrumpWorld is that - as I've said - they don't care. Information - true, false or otherwise - is pretty much all the same to them. I don't think Conway sat around making up a conscious lie about a nonexistent massacre just as I don't think that Trump sits around making up conscious lies about millions of fraudulent votes. But it is obvious Conway was totally unconcerned with whether what she was saying was accurate in the least. Ditto for Trump. She didn't care enough to worry about it and even deployed her standard attack on media coverage to explain why no one knew about her fictitious reinvention of history. A conscious lie would be comforting by comparison. Conway's blithe misuse of facts shows that she says whatever she wishes and has no fear of getting "caught" because society doesn't care about truth and facts anymore than she or her boss does.

Conway reminds me of a passage from 1984 when the protagonist is assigned to revise a past news article to make it appear accurate to present facts.

"...it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution of one piece of nonsense for another. Most of the material that you were dealing with had no connexion with anything in the real world, not even the kind of connexion that is contained in a direct lie. Statistics were just as much a fantasy in their original version as in their rectified version. A great deal of the time you were expected to make them up out of your head. For example, the Ministry of Plenty's forecast had estimated the output of boots for the quarter at one-hundred-and-forty-five million pairs. The actual output was given as sixty-two millions. Winston, however, in rewriting the forecast, marked the figure down to fifty-seven millions, so as to allow for the usual claim that the quota had been overfulfilled. In any case, sixty-two millions was no nearer the truth than fifty-seven millions, or than one-hundred-and-forty-five millions. Very likely no boots had been produced at all. Likelier still, nobody knew how many had been produced, much less cared. All one knew was that every quarter astronomical numbers of boots were produced on paper, while perhaps half the population of Oceania went barefoot. And so it was with every class of recorded fact, great or small. Everything faded away into a shadow-world in which, finally, even the date of the year had become uncertain."
"The stars can be near or distant, according as we need them." - George Orwell, 1984
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ringotuna
Member Avatar

Two a.m.
Feb 4 2017, 09:38 AM
ringotuna
Feb 4 2017, 04:53 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 05:28 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 05:04 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 05:03 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
Another non answer....Do you think she lied intentionally? or was it a factual fubar?

I don't know. Do you think Trump's invention of millions of illegal votes was a "factual fubar"? How about his creative reworking of his inauguration crowd sizes? His calling CNN fake news? Or the literally hundreds of "factual fubars" he's had during the campaign.

I guess I should have posted that Hillary Clinton said this. Then you'd be all over it because, as we've established many times, there's no excuse for lying and it is all the same...except, I guess, when there is and it is different.

Anyway, your mistake is to believe that the Trump Administration makes some sort of difference between truth, dissembling, exaggerating, being wrong or making stuff up completely. Let me disabuse you. They don't. It is all the same to them. They simply say whatever nonsense pops into their head. Sometimes it is real. Sometimes it is false. Sometimes it is based loosely on actual events. Other times, it is a mixture of fact and fiction. Sometimes, it is completely invented. Sometimes, they misremember things. Sometimes, they blithely just retweet whatever some goofball on the internet said.

You may like to sit around calibrating their exact intent but I assure you, they don't. They just say whatever they feel like whenever they want to.

And they don't care.

I don't see Trump's lies any different from Hillary's, so stop trying to put words in my mouth. I'm simply questioning whether in this case it was a mistake or an intentional lie. Not sure why that's got you guys all worked up. And I find it interesting.... this turn about you've made regarding dishonesty in politics. You yammered on endlessly, defending the act of lying "to get ahead", even touting it as a virtue. Now all of the sudden honesty is important to you.




I've already elucidated my views on honesty in politics ad nauseam and it would serve no purpose to go over them again. I was merely having a bit of fun with you as I think you'd be far less charitable toward this "factual fubar" if the name were Clinton rather than Conway.

As for Conway herself, if this were an isolated incident, I'd simply characterize it as a particularly egregious screw-up. But the reason it is so darkly hilarious is that it reveals how little regard Trump and his administration have for facts. Not just for lying but for the very concept of factual information being important, distinct or meaningful in some way. Even the most dishonest administrations in American history have been careful to tell the truth and stick with the facts when they could. The fascinating thing about TrumpWorld is that - as I've said - they don't care. Information - true, false or otherwise - is pretty much all the same to them. I don't think Conway sat around making up a conscious lie about a nonexistent massacre just as I don't think that Trump sits around making up conscious lies about millions of fraudulent votes. But it is obvious Conway was totally unconcerned with whether what she was saying was accurate in the least. Ditto for Trump. She didn't care enough to worry about it and even deployed her standard attack on media coverage to explain why no one knew about her fictitious reinvention of history. A conscious lie would be comforting by comparison. Conway's blithe misuse of facts shows that she says whatever she wishes and has no fear of getting "caught" because society doesn't care about truth and facts anymore than she or her boss does.

Conway reminds me of a passage from 1984 when the protagonist is assigned to revise a past news article to make it appear accurate to present facts.

"...it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution of one piece of nonsense for another. Most of the material that you were dealing with had no connexion with anything in the real world, not even the kind of connexion that is contained in a direct lie. Statistics were just as much a fantasy in their original version as in their rectified version. A great deal of the time you were expected to make them up out of your head. For example, the Ministry of Plenty's forecast had estimated the output of boots for the quarter at one-hundred-and-forty-five million pairs. The actual output was given as sixty-two millions. Winston, however, in rewriting the forecast, marked the figure down to fifty-seven millions, so as to allow for the usual claim that the quota had been overfulfilled. In any case, sixty-two millions was no nearer the truth than fifty-seven millions, or than one-hundred-and-forty-five millions. Very likely no boots had been produced at all. Likelier still, nobody knew how many had been produced, much less cared. All one knew was that every quarter astronomical numbers of boots were produced on paper, while perhaps half the population of Oceania went barefoot. And so it was with every class of recorded fact, great or small. Everything faded away into a shadow-world in which, finally, even the date of the year had become uncertain."
How is asking your opinion on the matter 'charitable'? Conway has now "clarified" her statement, saying she meant "Terrorist"
Edited by ringotuna, Feb 4 2017, 09:51 AM.
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Two a.m.
Member Avatar

ringotuna
Feb 4 2017, 09:50 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 4 2017, 09:38 AM
ringotuna
Feb 4 2017, 04:53 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 05:28 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 05:04 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep

I don't know. Do you think Trump's invention of millions of illegal votes was a "factual fubar"? How about his creative reworking of his inauguration crowd sizes? His calling CNN fake news? Or the literally hundreds of "factual fubars" he's had during the campaign.

I guess I should have posted that Hillary Clinton said this. Then you'd be all over it because, as we've established many times, there's no excuse for lying and it is all the same...except, I guess, when there is and it is different.

Anyway, your mistake is to believe that the Trump Administration makes some sort of difference between truth, dissembling, exaggerating, being wrong or making stuff up completely. Let me disabuse you. They don't. It is all the same to them. They simply say whatever nonsense pops into their head. Sometimes it is real. Sometimes it is false. Sometimes it is based loosely on actual events. Other times, it is a mixture of fact and fiction. Sometimes, it is completely invented. Sometimes, they misremember things. Sometimes, they blithely just retweet whatever some goofball on the internet said.

You may like to sit around calibrating their exact intent but I assure you, they don't. They just say whatever they feel like whenever they want to.

And they don't care.

I don't see Trump's lies any different from Hillary's, so stop trying to put words in my mouth. I'm simply questioning whether in this case it was a mistake or an intentional lie. Not sure why that's got you guys all worked up. And I find it interesting.... this turn about you've made regarding dishonesty in politics. You yammered on endlessly, defending the act of lying "to get ahead", even touting it as a virtue. Now all of the sudden honesty is important to you.




I've already elucidated my views on honesty in politics ad nauseam and it would serve no purpose to go over them again. I was merely having a bit of fun with you as I think you'd be far less charitable toward this "factual fubar" if the name were Clinton rather than Conway.

As for Conway herself, if this were an isolated incident, I'd simply characterize it as a particularly egregious screw-up. But the reason it is so darkly hilarious is that it reveals how little regard Trump and his administration have for facts. Not just for lying but for the very concept of factual information being important, distinct or meaningful in some way. Even the most dishonest administrations in American history have been careful to tell the truth and stick with the facts when they could. The fascinating thing about TrumpWorld is that - as I've said - they don't care. Information - true, false or otherwise - is pretty much all the same to them. I don't think Conway sat around making up a conscious lie about a nonexistent massacre just as I don't think that Trump sits around making up conscious lies about millions of fraudulent votes. But it is obvious Conway was totally unconcerned with whether what she was saying was accurate in the least. Ditto for Trump. She didn't care enough to worry about it and even deployed her standard attack on media coverage to explain why no one knew about her fictitious reinvention of history. A conscious lie would be comforting by comparison. Conway's blithe misuse of facts shows that she says whatever she wishes and has no fear of getting "caught" because society doesn't care about truth and facts anymore than she or her boss does.

Conway reminds me of a passage from 1984 when the protagonist is assigned to revise a past news article to make it appear accurate to present facts.

"...it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution of one piece of nonsense for another. Most of the material that you were dealing with had no connexion with anything in the real world, not even the kind of connexion that is contained in a direct lie. Statistics were just as much a fantasy in their original version as in their rectified version. A great deal of the time you were expected to make them up out of your head. For example, the Ministry of Plenty's forecast had estimated the output of boots for the quarter at one-hundred-and-forty-five million pairs. The actual output was given as sixty-two millions. Winston, however, in rewriting the forecast, marked the figure down to fifty-seven millions, so as to allow for the usual claim that the quota had been overfulfilled. In any case, sixty-two millions was no nearer the truth than fifty-seven millions, or than one-hundred-and-forty-five millions. Very likely no boots had been produced at all. Likelier still, nobody knew how many had been produced, much less cared. All one knew was that every quarter astronomical numbers of boots were produced on paper, while perhaps half the population of Oceania went barefoot. And so it was with every class of recorded fact, great or small. Everything faded away into a shadow-world in which, finally, even the date of the year had become uncertain."
How is asking your opinion on the matter 'charitable'?

Because I think that if the name were Clinton, you wouldn't bother to ask. She'd just be a liar making stuff up and that'd be the end of it. Now, maybe I'm wrong but in previous conversations, you haven't gone to great lengths to examine the gray areas of life when it comes to last years Democratic nominee. Everything was always in stark shades of black and white. That's all I'm saying.

Edited by Two a.m., Feb 4 2017, 09:54 AM.
"The stars can be near or distant, according as we need them." - George Orwell, 1984
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CautionaryTales
Member Avatar

ringotuna
Feb 4 2017, 04:31 AM
CautionaryTales
Feb 3 2017, 05:10 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 04:58 AM
CautionaryTales
Feb 3 2017, 04:54 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 04:41 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
In the alternative facts world, no facts are incorrect or wrong.
There are no lies in alternative fact world.

Babbling platitudes don't answer my question. Would you care to take a shot at it?

Was she intentionally lying?
In alternative fact world there are no misstatements
No mistakes made
Everything you say is fact, sort of, kind of.... alternative facts are built to support the larger mission.
You don't have to be held to any accounting and when it's time to move on to the next adventure it's time to manufacture new alternative facts.

That isn't any platitude. It is the policy of this new administration.
Not just some claim making, it's also one that Conway herself has established...on a stage.. in front of people.

If you don't like today's alternative facts, not to worry, there will be some more issued today to "clarify" those alternative facts from yesterday.

Was she lying? Not really, because there are no lies in an administration that doesn't know the difference between truth and lies. When you can come up with the idea of "alternative fact" all notion of truth is dead.

Ask me if I think they are a gang of sociopaths. That I can answer, they haven't yet established their interpretation of that word. They HAVE reestablished the definition of fact and that definition nullifies the old definition.

They are not lies. They can't be lies because alternative facts are only limited by the imagination.
Still no answer.

Do you think she intentionally lied, or was she confused?
I don't know and I don't know if she knows.
I'm also sure you don't know.

Let's wait and see if alternative facts turn up that verify this.
Edited by CautionaryTales, Feb 4 2017, 09:56 AM.


Have you paid your internet taxes?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tsalagi
Member Avatar

ringotuna
Feb 4 2017, 04:53 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 05:28 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 05:04 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 05:03 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 04:41 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
I think facts are such a cheap commodity in this White House, that I'm not sure anyone there bothers to know the difference or care.

Don't worry. By this time next week, at least 40 percent of Trump voters will believe the Bowling Green Massacre happened and the liberal media covered it up to protect President Obama.

Just like Pizzagate or Trump's millions of illegal immigrant voters.

Another non answer....Do you think she lied intentionally? or was it a factual fubar?

I don't know. Do you think Trump's invention of millions of illegal votes was a "factual fubar"? How about his creative reworking of his inauguration crowd sizes? His calling CNN fake news? Or the literally hundreds of "factual fubars" he's had during the campaign.

I guess I should have posted that Hillary Clinton said this. Then you'd be all over it because, as we've established many times, there's no excuse for lying and it is all the same...except, I guess, when there is and it is different.

Anyway, your mistake is to believe that the Trump Administration makes some sort of difference between truth, dissembling, exaggerating, being wrong or making stuff up completely. Let me disabuse you. They don't. It is all the same to them. They simply say whatever nonsense pops into their head. Sometimes it is real. Sometimes it is false. Sometimes it is based loosely on actual events. Other times, it is a mixture of fact and fiction. Sometimes, it is completely invented. Sometimes, they misremember things. Sometimes, they blithely just retweet whatever some goofball on the internet said.

You may like to sit around calibrating their exact intent but I assure you, they don't. They just say whatever they feel like whenever they want to.

And they don't care.

I don't see Trump's lies any different from Hillary's, so stop trying to put words in my mouth. I'm simply questioning whether in this case it was a mistake or an intentional lie. Not sure why that's got you guys all worked up. And I find it interesting.... this turn about you've made regarding dishonesty in politics. You yammered on endlessly, defending the act of lying "to get ahead", even touting it as a virtue. Now all of the sudden honesty is important to you.



In many lies therein is an essential kernel of truth to make the lie more palatable. Alluding to a massacre in an American city that never happened...yeah...that's not a mistake..It's an outright fabrication, or more accurately, a "tall tale" with a kernel of truth, no doubt the essential elements were there, just not the size, scrape, or severity of any action.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CautionaryTales
Member Avatar

Today, I will pray for healing in Bowling Green.
I'll light some imaginary candles.
Edited by CautionaryTales, Feb 4 2017, 09:57 AM.


Have you paid your internet taxes?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

CautionaryTales
Feb 4 2017, 09:57 AM
Today, I will pray for healing in Bowling Green.
I'll light some imaginary candles.


:rotflmao:
Quote Post Goto Top
 
ringotuna
Member Avatar

CautionaryTales
Feb 4 2017, 09:55 AM
ringotuna
Feb 4 2017, 04:31 AM
CautionaryTales
Feb 3 2017, 05:10 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 04:58 AM
CautionaryTales
Feb 3 2017, 04:54 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
Babbling platitudes don't answer my question. Would you care to take a shot at it?

Was she intentionally lying?
In alternative fact world there are no misstatements
No mistakes made
Everything you say is fact, sort of, kind of.... alternative facts are built to support the larger mission.
You don't have to be held to any accounting and when it's time to move on to the next adventure it's time to manufacture new alternative facts.

That isn't any platitude. It is the policy of this new administration.
Not just some claim making, it's also one that Conway herself has established...on a stage.. in front of people.

If you don't like today's alternative facts, not to worry, there will be some more issued today to "clarify" those alternative facts from yesterday.

Was she lying? Not really, because there are no lies in an administration that doesn't know the difference between truth and lies. When you can come up with the idea of "alternative fact" all notion of truth is dead.

Ask me if I think they are a gang of sociopaths. That I can answer, they haven't yet established their interpretation of that word. They HAVE reestablished the definition of fact and that definition nullifies the old definition.

They are not lies. They can't be lies because alternative facts are only limited by the imagination.
Still no answer.

Do you think she intentionally lied, or was she confused?
I don't know and I don't know if she knows.
I'm also sure you don't know.

Let's wait and see if alternative facts turn up that verify this.
Not knowing has never stopped you before. I'm simply asking your opinion. How hard is that?

Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ringotuna
Member Avatar

Two a.m.
Feb 4 2017, 09:53 AM
ringotuna
Feb 4 2017, 09:50 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 4 2017, 09:38 AM
ringotuna
Feb 4 2017, 04:53 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 05:28 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
I don't see Trump's lies any different from Hillary's, so stop trying to put words in my mouth. I'm simply questioning whether in this case it was a mistake or an intentional lie. Not sure why that's got you guys all worked up. And I find it interesting.... this turn about you've made regarding dishonesty in politics. You yammered on endlessly, defending the act of lying "to get ahead", even touting it as a virtue. Now all of the sudden honesty is important to you.




I've already elucidated my views on honesty in politics ad nauseam and it would serve no purpose to go over them again. I was merely having a bit of fun with you as I think you'd be far less charitable toward this "factual fubar" if the name were Clinton rather than Conway.

As for Conway herself, if this were an isolated incident, I'd simply characterize it as a particularly egregious screw-up. But the reason it is so darkly hilarious is that it reveals how little regard Trump and his administration have for facts. Not just for lying but for the very concept of factual information being important, distinct or meaningful in some way. Even the most dishonest administrations in American history have been careful to tell the truth and stick with the facts when they could. The fascinating thing about TrumpWorld is that - as I've said - they don't care. Information - true, false or otherwise - is pretty much all the same to them. I don't think Conway sat around making up a conscious lie about a nonexistent massacre just as I don't think that Trump sits around making up conscious lies about millions of fraudulent votes. But it is obvious Conway was totally unconcerned with whether what she was saying was accurate in the least. Ditto for Trump. She didn't care enough to worry about it and even deployed her standard attack on media coverage to explain why no one knew about her fictitious reinvention of history. A conscious lie would be comforting by comparison. Conway's blithe misuse of facts shows that she says whatever she wishes and has no fear of getting "caught" because society doesn't care about truth and facts anymore than she or her boss does.

Conway reminds me of a passage from 1984 when the protagonist is assigned to revise a past news article to make it appear accurate to present facts.

"...it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution of one piece of nonsense for another. Most of the material that you were dealing with had no connexion with anything in the real world, not even the kind of connexion that is contained in a direct lie. Statistics were just as much a fantasy in their original version as in their rectified version. A great deal of the time you were expected to make them up out of your head. For example, the Ministry of Plenty's forecast had estimated the output of boots for the quarter at one-hundred-and-forty-five million pairs. The actual output was given as sixty-two millions. Winston, however, in rewriting the forecast, marked the figure down to fifty-seven millions, so as to allow for the usual claim that the quota had been overfulfilled. In any case, sixty-two millions was no nearer the truth than fifty-seven millions, or than one-hundred-and-forty-five millions. Very likely no boots had been produced at all. Likelier still, nobody knew how many had been produced, much less cared. All one knew was that every quarter astronomical numbers of boots were produced on paper, while perhaps half the population of Oceania went barefoot. And so it was with every class of recorded fact, great or small. Everything faded away into a shadow-world in which, finally, even the date of the year had become uncertain."
How is asking your opinion on the matter 'charitable'?

Because I think that if the name were Clinton, you wouldn't bother to ask. She'd just be a liar making stuff up and that'd be the end of it. Now, maybe I'm wrong but in previous conversations, you haven't gone to great lengths to examine the gray areas of life when it comes to last years Democratic nominee. Everything was always in stark shades of black and white. That's all I'm saying.

This is not a grey area. It's..... a) is it an intentional lie? or.... b) Did she simply mis-speak? Nothing grey about it.

Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ringotuna
Member Avatar

Tsalagi
Feb 4 2017, 09:55 AM
ringotuna
Feb 4 2017, 04:53 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 05:28 AM
ringotuna
Feb 3 2017, 05:04 AM
Two a.m.
Feb 3 2017, 05:03 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
Another non answer....Do you think she lied intentionally? or was it a factual fubar?

I don't know. Do you think Trump's invention of millions of illegal votes was a "factual fubar"? How about his creative reworking of his inauguration crowd sizes? His calling CNN fake news? Or the literally hundreds of "factual fubars" he's had during the campaign.

I guess I should have posted that Hillary Clinton said this. Then you'd be all over it because, as we've established many times, there's no excuse for lying and it is all the same...except, I guess, when there is and it is different.

Anyway, your mistake is to believe that the Trump Administration makes some sort of difference between truth, dissembling, exaggerating, being wrong or making stuff up completely. Let me disabuse you. They don't. It is all the same to them. They simply say whatever nonsense pops into their head. Sometimes it is real. Sometimes it is false. Sometimes it is based loosely on actual events. Other times, it is a mixture of fact and fiction. Sometimes, it is completely invented. Sometimes, they misremember things. Sometimes, they blithely just retweet whatever some goofball on the internet said.

You may like to sit around calibrating their exact intent but I assure you, they don't. They just say whatever they feel like whenever they want to.

And they don't care.

I don't see Trump's lies any different from Hillary's, so stop trying to put words in my mouth. I'm simply questioning whether in this case it was a mistake or an intentional lie. Not sure why that's got you guys all worked up. And I find it interesting.... this turn about you've made regarding dishonesty in politics. You yammered on endlessly, defending the act of lying "to get ahead", even touting it as a virtue. Now all of the sudden honesty is important to you.



In many lies therein is an essential kernel of truth to make the lie more palatable. Alluding to a massacre in an American city that never happened...yeah...that's not a mistake..It's an outright fabrication, or more accurately, a "tall tale" with a kernel of truth, no doubt the essential elements were there, just not the size, scrape, or severity of any action.
At least Tsalagi has the cojones to give a straight answer.
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Op EDITORIALS: personal & political governance · Next Topic »
Add Reply