logo Sign In

doubleofive

User Group
Members
Join date
4-Mar-2008
Last activity
26-Sep-2025
Posts
11,905
Web Site
http://www.doubleofive.com

Post History

Post
#1039153
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

doubleofive said:

This hatred or complete misunderstanding of journalism is probably the scariest part of this new world we live in now.

Well, maybe you could become a writer, and use your abilities for the actual truth instead of these places printing half-truths like they’re the gods-honest, hand on the holy book gospel.

The FIRST time the PRESS SECRETARY got in front of the PRESS, he LITERALLY told them a half truth. It’s not hard to NOT say “the biggest numbers in person” UNLESS the President flat out told you to go out there, say this, then leave WITHOUT TAKING QUESTIONS.

The fact that this was even the topic of a press conference, let alone the FIRST ONE, is complete insanity. IT DOESN’T MATTER HOW MANY PEOPLE SAW IT.

Post
#1039139
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

doubleofive said:

Jetrell Fo said:

doubleofive said:

Jetrell Fo said:

TV’s Frink said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/01/25/we-asked-people-which-inauguration-crowd-was-bigger-heres-what-they-said/?utm_term=.6d4b8e87069d

Depressing.

It’s clear even in this quote below that the media addresses only 1 piece of the evidence presented.

"On the first full day of the Trump administration, White House press secretary Sean Spicer admonished the news media for reporting that the crowd that witnessed Trump’s inauguration was smaller than other recent inauguration crowds, claiming, “This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration — period — both in person and around the globe.”

It’s very clear that he said it was the most people to watch in person AND around the globe. If he didn’t mean physical people, he would have said “around the globe” only and stressed that during the conference. These are people who are supposed to be professional speakers, we’re supposed to believe that their phrasing is very important.

It is the media’s job to report the truth, not disquise the truth to make it look like a lie, I don’t think I misread the article.

It’s also the media’s job to point out that the guy who’s supposed to be telling them the truth is telling them lies about easily observable things.

They make the assumption that he’s lying without bringing any of their facts about “around the globe” and the only part of the numbers they used were the photo of the mall as proof.

You’re saying the Washington correspondents for every major news outlet weren’t looking out their windows or actually at the Inauguration and could PHYSICALLY SEE that it wasn’t the biggest crowd ever?

Post
#1039124
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

doubleofive said:

Jetrell Fo said:

TV’s Frink said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/01/25/we-asked-people-which-inauguration-crowd-was-bigger-heres-what-they-said/?utm_term=.6d4b8e87069d

Depressing.

It’s clear even in this quote below that the media addresses only 1 piece of the evidence presented.

"On the first full day of the Trump administration, White House press secretary Sean Spicer admonished the news media for reporting that the crowd that witnessed Trump’s inauguration was smaller than other recent inauguration crowds, claiming, “This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration — period — both in person and around the globe.”

It’s very clear that he said it was the most people to watch in person AND around the globe. If he didn’t mean physical people, he would have said “around the globe” only and stressed that during the conference. These are people who are supposed to be professional speakers, we’re supposed to believe that their phrasing is very important.

It is the media’s job to report the truth, not disquise the truth to make it look like a lie, I don’t think I misread the article.

It’s also the media’s job to point out that the guy who’s supposed to be telling them the truth is telling them lies about easily observable things.

Post
#1039118
Topic
The Death Star trench run
Time

NeverarGreat said:

The one thing I never noticed was that the dish bisected the equatorial trench in the plans. I wonder if that is something Ady will fix for his new Star Wars Revisited project.

He did that almost 10 years ago now:

But he is changing it back thanks to Rogue One, I believe with the argument the Story Group came up with that the plans contain all of the variations and each one had the exhaust port.

Post
#1039115
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

TV’s Frink said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/01/25/we-asked-people-which-inauguration-crowd-was-bigger-heres-what-they-said/?utm_term=.6d4b8e87069d

Depressing.

It’s clear even in this quote below that the media addresses only 1 piece of the evidence presented.

"On the first full day of the Trump administration, White House press secretary Sean Spicer admonished the news media for reporting that the crowd that witnessed Trump’s inauguration was smaller than other recent inauguration crowds, claiming, “This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration — period — both in person and around the globe.”

It’s very clear that he said it was the most people to watch in person AND around the globe. If he didn’t mean physical people, he would have said “around the globe” only and stressed that during the conference. These are people who are supposed to be professional speakers, we’re supposed to believe that their phrasing is very important.

Post
#1039084
Topic
Opening Crawl for Star Wars: The Last Jedi
Time

Lord Haseo said:

Tobar said:

I suspect they might even open it with a scene depicting Hux delivering Kylo to Snoke.

I could have sworn Rian said that the first scene would pick up exactly where TFA left off.

This movie is going to start right where the last one left off.

Could be interpreted however you like. Also, we’re 11 months away, the edit could change a lot. Rogue One was a completely different movie at this point last year.

Post
#1038805
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Tyrphanax said:

Warbler said:

Trump is again claiming widespread voter fraud. He’s nuts.

It was sad before, but it’s getting pathetic at this point. You won, dude, let it go!

I had to have someone point it out to me, but you’d think if Hillary was able to get 4-5 million people to commit voter fraud, you’d think she’d do it in states that she wouldn’t have won otherwise. What a waste of what is apparently the perfect scheme since there’s no evidence of it having ever happened!

Post
#1038644
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

doubleofive said:

Jetrell Fo said:

TV’s Frink said:

http://www.vox.com/identities/2017/1/23/14356582/trump-global-gag-rule-abortion

The global gag rule goes much further than simply banning US foreign aid from paying for abortions directly — which is already the law, and which has its own detrimental consequences for women.

Instead, the gag rule tries to control how international organizations use their own funds, raised from other sources. Just like Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood in the United States, it’s an attempt to stop abortion from happening by forcing organizations that provide it to make a choice: stop providing or promoting abortion, or lose the large amounts of funding that you get from the US government to support your other medical services.

The reality is simple and brutal. Reinstating the global gag rule will not reduce abortions. Sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, had higher abortion rates after George W. Bush reinstated the gag rule, because it reduced women’s access to contraception and caused more unwanted pregnancies, which women then chose to terminate.

The gag rule will, however, lead to more women dying across the developing world. Marie Stopes International, a major global family planning organization, estimates that without alternative funding, the loss of its services alone will cause 6.5 million unintended pregnancies, 2.2 million abortions, 2.1 million unsafe abortions, and 21,700 maternal deaths just in Trump’s first term, from 2017 to 2020. The organization says it will also be prevented from reaching 1.5 million women with contraception every year.

Studies conducted by PAI have shown that every time the global gag rule returns, more women in developing countries bear unwanted pregnancies, die or become disabled due to unsafe abortions, or lose crucial medical care.

So much for respecting life.

Directed at personal use of one’s body ONLY, taking precautions or abstinence is every persons right and responsibility if they could not afford the possible outcome. In cases of medical necessity (life/death of fetus/mother) or sexual assault/attack, I would think they’d be wise enough to allow it. I’m not them nor am I privy to the actual details of all this gag rule encompasses so this is just my opinion based on information I know of.

If any organization mentions the word “abortion”, they can no longer have any American government funding, even for contraception. There is no wisdom to any of this. You can’t expect the entire third world to stop having sex because they can’t get condoms anymore.

You mean they cannot abstain? They must have sex constantly to survive like breathing air? They shouldn’t need American funding to take care of their own country should they? Those countries cannot raise the money themselves and/or find better ways to educate their populations on their own?

So we can be the world’s police, but not the world’s health advocates?

Pence did something similar in my state and we had an AIDS EPIDEMIC. IN INDIANA. Can you IMAGINE what it’s like in Africa?

JEDIT: Ok, it was HIV, and it was due to closing down drug rehabilitation centers. Still, I’m sure that some of the organizations that mention the word “abortion” also provide rehabilitation.

Post
#1038640
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

TV’s Frink said:

http://www.vox.com/identities/2017/1/23/14356582/trump-global-gag-rule-abortion

The global gag rule goes much further than simply banning US foreign aid from paying for abortions directly — which is already the law, and which has its own detrimental consequences for women.

Instead, the gag rule tries to control how international organizations use their own funds, raised from other sources. Just like Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood in the United States, it’s an attempt to stop abortion from happening by forcing organizations that provide it to make a choice: stop providing or promoting abortion, or lose the large amounts of funding that you get from the US government to support your other medical services.

The reality is simple and brutal. Reinstating the global gag rule will not reduce abortions. Sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, had higher abortion rates after George W. Bush reinstated the gag rule, because it reduced women’s access to contraception and caused more unwanted pregnancies, which women then chose to terminate.

The gag rule will, however, lead to more women dying across the developing world. Marie Stopes International, a major global family planning organization, estimates that without alternative funding, the loss of its services alone will cause 6.5 million unintended pregnancies, 2.2 million abortions, 2.1 million unsafe abortions, and 21,700 maternal deaths just in Trump’s first term, from 2017 to 2020. The organization says it will also be prevented from reaching 1.5 million women with contraception every year.

Studies conducted by PAI have shown that every time the global gag rule returns, more women in developing countries bear unwanted pregnancies, die or become disabled due to unsafe abortions, or lose crucial medical care.

So much for respecting life.

Directed at personal use of one’s body ONLY, taking precautions or abstinence is every persons right and responsibility if they could not afford the possible outcome. In cases of medical necessity (life/death of fetus/mother) or sexual assault/attack, I would think they’d be wise enough to allow it. I’m not them nor am I privy to the actual details of all this gag rule encompasses so this is just my opinion based on information I know of.

If any organization mentions the word “abortion”, they can no longer have any American government funding, even for contraception. There is no wisdom to any of this. You can’t expect the entire third world to stop having sex because they can’t get condoms anymore.

Post
#1038599
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

http://www.vox.com/identities/2017/1/23/14356582/trump-global-gag-rule-abortion

The global gag rule goes much further than simply banning US foreign aid from paying for abortions directly — which is already the law, and which has its own detrimental consequences for women.

Instead, the gag rule tries to control how international organizations use their own funds, raised from other sources. Just like Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood in the United States, it’s an attempt to stop abortion from happening by forcing organizations that provide it to make a choice: stop providing or promoting abortion, or lose the large amounts of funding that you get from the US government to support your other medical services.

The reality is simple and brutal. Reinstating the global gag rule will not reduce abortions. Sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, had higher abortion rates after George W. Bush reinstated the gag rule, because it reduced women’s access to contraception and caused more unwanted pregnancies, which women then chose to terminate.

The gag rule will, however, lead to more women dying across the developing world. Marie Stopes International, a major global family planning organization, estimates that without alternative funding, the loss of its services alone will cause 6.5 million unintended pregnancies, 2.2 million abortions, 2.1 million unsafe abortions, and 21,700 maternal deaths just in Trump’s first term, from 2017 to 2020. The organization says it will also be prevented from reaching 1.5 million women with contraception every year.

Studies conducted by PAI have shown that every time the global gag rule returns, more women in developing countries bear unwanted pregnancies, die or become disabled due to unsafe abortions, or lose crucial medical care.

So much for respecting life.

But no one cares about women more than him!

Post
#1038235
Topic
Last movie seen
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Do you have an Alamo Drafthouse by you? They explicitly say people get one warning and then they’re booted out. Even better, you just write it on an order card, so you don’t have to leave your seat and no one knows it was you who REPORTED it.

No, and my friend doesn’t either. I went to a couple when I visited Austin, it was incredible, even if the movies weren’t.

Post
#1038079
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

doubleofive said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DominicCobb said:

Devil’s advocate: it’s a silly sign, but it’s also supposed to be a joke. And, like most jokes, there’s some truth behind the intent. Which is to say, obviously women have far more rights than guns (don’t think anyone doesn’t literally think that), what they’re trying to say is that they wish protecting women’s rights were as important to politicians as protecting “gun’s rights” (preventing gun control).

I still don’t agree with the premise that women’s rights are under attack in the United States.

Looks like over 3 million women disagree with you, and since they’re women, I trust they know the issue more than you do.

Well, 60,000,000 people disagree with you on Donald Trump. See how that’s not a convincing argument?

Yes, but I can acknowledge that some people agree with Trump.

Post
#1038048
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

DominicCobb said:

Devil’s advocate: it’s a silly sign, but it’s also supposed to be a joke. And, like most jokes, there’s some truth behind the intent. Which is to say, obviously women have far more rights than guns (don’t think anyone doesn’t literally think that), what they’re trying to say is that they wish protecting women’s rights were as important to politicians as protecting “gun’s rights” (preventing gun control).

I still don’t agree with the premise that women’s rights are under attack in the United States.

Looks like over 3 million women disagree with you, and since they’re women, I trust they know the issue more than you do.