TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Bush In 30 Seconds
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Bush In 30 Seconds

Some of you may have already seen this, but I thought I'd post it here and see what everyones opinions are, seeing as how we're all rabid political experts

Click Here

Discuss.

Some powerfull stuff indeed. I'm glad that people see Bush for what he is. Nice Link.

quote:

Originally posted by Kytracid Some powerfull stuff indeed.

indeed.

Wow. No, I definitely hadn't seen this before Peter. Thanks for posting it. I've only gone through about half of them so far but it's pretty intense stuff... Hope something changes for the good for the upcoming election.

What a lovely set of inflammatory, emotionally-charged political whinings without any factual evidence or viable alternative suggestions.

The "polygraph" one was my favourite - are we supposed to imagine that that's what would have happened if he'd been hooked up to a real polygraph? Ha. Even if he was outright lying (as opposed to just being mistaken), polygraph tests are very subtle and show variations while the person is talking, they don't suddenly go wild right after they finish their sentence.

This is the kind of politics I hate - ranting, raving, conspiracy-theorizing "Bush-bashing". How about some suggestions, instead of constant complaining?

Edit: to be perfectly clear, I'm not any huge fan of Bush, but it's too easy to complain - much harder to get up and take action.

quote:

Originally posted by Pixiechick No, I definitely hadn't seen this before Graham.

Peter

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Edit: to be perfectly clear, I'm not any huge fan of Bush, but it's too easy to complain - much harder to get up and take action.[/COLOR][/FONT]

were you in the anti-war in Iraq rallies?

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut The "polygraph" one was my favourite - are we supposed to imagine that that's what would have happened if he'd been hooked up to a real polygraph? Ha. Even if he was outright lying (as opposed to just being mistaken), polygraph tests are very subtle and show variations while the person is talking, they don't suddenly go wild right after they finish their sentence.

Thats exactly what we're supposed to imagine...I thought it was pretty obvious. As for the needle going wild, its for effect. If you want to get a message across then you need make it noticeable; subtle, miniscule movements won't get people's attention.

And they had 30 seconds to present this. Thats hardly enough time to pull out a sheet of facts and start reading.

diginut you're being a dick stop lamenting over details.

These ads are aimed to the general public, you have to get their attention in 30 seconds. I think most of these ads are perfect!

quote:

Originally posted by drgoodvibe were you in the anti-war in Iraq rallies?

No, because I wasn't anti-war. I'm not sure if I'm seeing your point - I'm not attempting to be an "activist", but the people who made those ads are. Besides which, rallies are slacktivism, they're about as useful as online petitions.

quote:

Originally posted by ahlamalek diginut you're being a dick stop lamenting over details. These ads are aimed to the general public, you have to get their attention in 30 seconds. I think most of these ads are perfect!

To you and Peter - I'm not being a dick, but having only 30 seconds to present is not a valid excuse for handing out fanatical, misleading, paranoid conspiracy theories to the general public.

Of course, people are entitled to free speech and there's nothing wrong with the ads they made - I just wouldn't call them "deep" or "powerful" or "intense." They're meaningless to me. Someone could just as easily show me a video of an actor portraying Bush getting gang probed on an alien ship with a dubbed-over narrative saying that he's pregnant with a Martian baby, and it would be just as "powerful."

quote:

some powerful stuff

Heh, not really, its more like fact.

Oh also, Diginut is trying to look like a smart ass.
hihihihihi

You should post this in the political forum.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut No, because I wasn't anti-war. I'm not sure if I'm seeing your point - I'm not attempting to be an "activist", but the people who made those ads are. Besides which, rallies are slacktivism, they're about as useful as online petitions.

I think rallies have become pretty powerful. It puts a lot of pressure on the government. Lets hypothesize for the moment and say that instead of winning the second Iraq war outright Americans started coming home in body bags in droves.

The sheer outcry would be disasterous, from what little I know of history, isn't that one of the reasons why the Americans pulled out of the war in Vietnam? The fact that the people couldnt stand watching there own fathers, sons and brothers die like that?

So many people became a part of the anti-war movement back in those years that it became difficult for the government to legitimize the war. There was a huge pressure to "bring the boys home"?

Anyways I wasn't trying to make a point, I just wanted to know wether you went to any rallies or not. You don't seem the type to be an activist to be honest. I think you seem more the time to watch and wait in the wings and see what happens, with a little bit of commentary on the side. Thats fine though, there must be people of all types.

cheers!

quote:

Originally posted by Pixiechick Wow. No, I definitely hadn't seen this before Graham. Thanks for posting it. I've only gone through about half of them so far but it's pretty intense stuff... Hope something changes for the good for the upcoming election.

quote:

Originally posted by drgoodvibe I think rallies have become pretty powerful. It puts a lot of pressure on the government. Lets hypothesize for the moment and say that instead of winning the second Iraq war outright Americans started coming home in body bags in droves. The sheer outcry would be disasterous, from what little I know of history, isn't that one of the reasons why the Americans pulled out of the war in Vietnam? The fact that the people couldnt stand watching there own fathers, sons and brothers die like that? So many people became a part of the anti-war movement back in those years that it became difficult for the government to legitimize the war. There was a huge pressure to "bring the boys home"? Anyways I wasn't trying to make a point, I just wanted to know wether you went to any rallies or not. You don't seem the type to be an activist to be honest. I think you seem more the time to watch and wait in the wings and see what happens, with a little bit of commentary on the side. Thats fine though, there must be people of all types. cheers!

You are right, to an extent. I disagree in the sense that likening the Iraq invasion to the Vietnam war is sketchy at best. There really were very few casualties in Iraq, despite many "guesstimated" statistics intended to show otherwise.

Anyway, again, you're right, I'm not an activist. I think if I really felt particularly strongly about some particular cause, then I might try and do something, but the point is that a lot of these so-called activists have such a totally one-sided view of the situation that their activism loses all meaning anyway.

Yes, I do prefer to wait in the wings and disseminate information, and maybe try to get a more objective view of the situation, rather than diving into the fray and being caught up in the moment. But, as you said, to each his own, and I can't fault people for believing in a cause - I can only disagree with them.

Call it a hunch, right or wrong, but I don't feel that the people who made those movies have a very objective view of the situation.

They may be meaningless to you Aaron, but you have to know who they're targeted at. The uneducated oblivious Americans. (I'm not saying that all Americans are uneducated and oblivious, I'm just saying there are some)

If these ads are finally bringing light to the situation in the US to the American general public, then so be it. Something HAS to be done.

I think the best one was the Wake Up America one. America really should wake up.

my favorite one is the "Future Presidents" with the kids saying all those facts and the parents having this shocked look on their faces.

"I'll make enemies of our allies and I don't care."

quote:

Originally posted by The Highroller If these ads are finally bringing light to the situation in the US to the American general public, then so be it. Something HAS to be done.

I understand that, but it's a matter of opinion whether those ads are really bringing light to a situation, or casting shade on it. They're all very radical leftist claims designed to instil fear in people. They are not going to make the gullible general public "wake up" and start doing their own research - rather, if they achieve their desired effect, it's going to just be to make people paranoid about the government as well as uneducated.

Does nobody else see this? These ads aren't designed to educate, they're designed to push an agenda. Yes, many Americans are stupid, but this is not the way to smarten them up. It's brainwashing, pure and simple.

Some of you may hate to admit it, but a lot of Canadians are equally as intolerant as Americans to other political beliefs - the only difference is, the Canadians lie much farther to the left on the political scale. We need to spend more time criticizing our own sad, pathetic government, rather than bitching about what happens in the U.S. At least they're doing something. Our government's neglected our economy and made our country into an international joke, but how many people complain about that?

Seems to me we're collectively just as uneducated as Americans. We only get educated because it's convenient to the American-bashing agenda.

quote:

Originally posted by Dr. Z Oh also, Diginut is trying to look like a smart ass.

or devil's advocate??

Before I've even watched any of these videos:

I hope nobody actually thinks this is unbiased... With a judge like MICHAEL MOORE it certainly is not.

The whole purpose of the site appears to be anti-Bush. Should anybody really be looking at any of this as pure "fact" when it is merely editorial content? IMHO - No.

Anybody could paint such a picture of any of the democratic nominees currently running for the democratic presidential opposition seat.

How about someone try suggesting an alternative leader (one who actually might win [which means forget the green party - which leaves Bush or a democrat]) and the counter-positions that the leader supports?

Addendum: after watching video #1 (Child's Pay) I couldn't help but rephrasing the question to be: Who is going to pay off the free-spending debt and deficit ways of the Trudea administration? Answer: You and I.

Addendum #2: sensationalist. Hyperbole sure is an easy way to prove a point - but people figure it out pretty quick and dismiss it as such.

quote:

Originally posted by rabbitjoker I hope nobody actually thinks this is unbiased... With a judge like MICHAEL MOORE it certainly is not. The whole purpose of the site appears to be anti-Bush. Should anybody really be looking at any of this as pure "fact" when it is merely editorial content? IMHO - No. Anybody could paint such a picture of any of the democratic nominees currently running for the democratic presidential opposition seat. How about someone try suggesting an alternative leader (one who actually might win [which means forget the green party - which leaves Bush or a democrat]) and the counter-positions that the leader supports?

yeah with that political system, there's never an alternative .. only a lesser of evils..

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#99CCEE]I understand that, but it's a matter of opinion whether those ads are really bringing light to a situation, or casting shade on it. They're all very radical leftist claims designed to instil fear in people. They are not going to make the gullible general public "wake up" and start doing their own research - rather, if they achieve their desired effect, it's going to just be to make people paranoid about the government as well as uneducated.

The same fear tactics have been used by the republicans, right wingers, neo-cons and so on for ages. Back when the communists were the enemy and everyone has to fear the soviets! Now we have an even better enemy an invisible one that can be amongst us, living next door to us, one who would want do harm right here in your very own home. How powerful is that? At least before, the enemy was clearly defined.

Now every time the U.S goes into Orange alert people run for there homes and lock themselves inside. Fearing some Muslim Middle Eastern will come and blow them up! If you wanted a desired effect of paranoia well then we've already accomplished that with a neo-con government!

I see what Grahams point is, the videos may actually make the people who would blindly follow a regime to maybe think just a little bit. A person doesn�t have to necessarily agree with the videos or believe that they're true, but really now the truth is so convoluted in lies and half truths that nobody really knows what is true anymore anyway. IF the videos made a person think, and maybe question the status quo, then they served there purpose.

quote:

Originally posted by dEsidEL yeah with that political system, there's never an alternative .. only a lesser of evils..

Yep.. Lets just stay here in Canada.

quote:

Originally posted by drgoodvibe ...Now we have an even better enemy an invisible one that can be amongst us, living next door to us, one who would want do harm right here in your very own home. How powerful is that? At least before, the enemy was clearly defined.

That's what the radicals would have us believe, but it's pretty much B.S. I mean, it's not totally false, but it's also not any different from what was in place 50 years ago.

It's that kind of fearmongering that bothers me. Bush's government is the "invisible enemy." There are people out there who believe that the entire September 11 event was orchestrated by the U.S. government - now you have to ask yourself, who would want us to believe that? That's right, the radicals and the terrorists! And what better way for them to spread their messages than to do it through innocuous-looking commercials and through pawn political figures like Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky.

Okay, maybe the commercials weren't made by terrorist groups - but again, playing devil's advocate ( thanks Emery ), the possibility of that being the case is no less valid than the possibility of the content of those commercials being objectively true.

quote:

Originally posted by dEsidEL yeah with that political system, there's never an alternative .. only a lesser of evils..

actually you know what though? In some cases Canada is much LESS democratic then the U.S!

how so?

well we gotta define a few things first!

Majority government = When there are more liberals in the house of commons then ALL other parties combined!

Party whip/ Party discipline = Most often then not when there is a majority government the party members MUST vote in line with the PM.
i.e when Chretian wants a piece of legislation passed, he count on the "Party Whip" to keep all the other liberals in line voting with him

Generally MPs must vote in line with the PM or else face retribution, loss of favor with the PM, or not be invited to caucus meetings.

This means that no matter what kind of opposition is used towards legislation, it will pass anyway becuase the number of liberals outnumber all other parties combined even if they ALL oppose the legislation.

This gives the PM so much power! and VERY un-democratic. Where as the U.S house of commons does not have such party discpline. Each member is allowed to vote in any which way they wish.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.