Right wingers get paid per post? We need this too! :-D

49 posts / 0 new

Thom was just saying on the show that right wingers can get paid for posting their talking points to various message boards (including this one apparently, before they got the ban hammer out mercifully.) Why don't we have this? That would be awesome!

I'm thinking of all of these crazy right-wing screeds that get forwarded around the intarwebs that are so often debunked by mythbusting sites like snopes. We should be countering this by educating ourselves with really well-researched zinger articles from places like thinkprogress.org, where they back up their facts with reference after reference after reference.

Just my $.02 for the day!

arclight's picture
arclight
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Comments

That's creepy. Anybody know who the Paid Poster on this board was?

I would love to read his stuff for reference material so I can Identify them later.

De Duivel's picture
De Duivel
Joined:
Jul. 19, 2010 7:10 am

I want to get paid to post.

What a great gig that would be to get paid for what I now do for free.

Lead me to the promised land!

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

Yeah! It's "pay as you go" ever since '89 when the checks from Moscow dried up! :) Sux!

harry ashburn
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Well whom ever pays them really should get their money back, because they aren't very good.

meljomur's picture
meljomur
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Dear meljomur: "whom ever pays them"?? "whom ever??" Who died and made YOU Helen Crump?

harry ashburn
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Why not? One word: Integrity.

Call me outdated. Call me an idealist. Whatever. But, my heart goes out to anyone who would sell out their words, thoughts and opinions for dollars and cents.

I view those who posts for money as losing sight of the real value and worth of their own words, thoughts and opinions and have given in to spouting others sound bytes and rhetoric for money.

I couldn't do it. I'd feel like a heal and a worthless unauthentic piece of dung if I did.

bonnie
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I'm not sure how much validity there is to that, but it makes sense. I often end up thinking that right wing commenters are GOP operatives who's only goal is to derail the conversation and further polarize the voters. I mean how else can they believe some of the stuff they say? Just read slabmasters posts and you'll see what I mean...

Barbazza's picture
Barbazza
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Barbazza:

I'm not sure how much validity there is to that, but it makes sense. I often end up thinking that right wing commenters are GOP operatives who's only goal is to derail the conversation and further polarize the voters. I mean how else can they believe some of the stuff they say? Just read slabmasters posts and you'll see what I mean...

Since you specifically called me out, what posts of mine do you question whether I believe them or not?

I'll help you along: I DO believe in God. I DO believe in working for a living. I DO believe in giving to others, and saving, before myself. I DO believe confiscation of others belongings for redistribution is theft. I DO believe raising taxes on wage earners to suplement governments inefficiencies and provide handouts to the lazy are destructive. I DO believe that illegal alians are in fact breaking the law. I DO believe people in society are not entitled to a free living because they choose not to work. I DO believe shooting well is a practical skill. I DO believe eating venison cleanses the soul. I DO believe Obama may be the worst President ever to occupy the office based on his actions and plans so far.

This is the only place I can find where people float the idea that posters are paid to post. I find it very weird. It seems like a severe case of paranoia to me or that some of the liberal views are so silly and weak, anyone offering a different view is immediately demonized and the weird conspiracy theories start.

It is entertaining though....

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am
Quote slabmaster:

[quote=Barbazza]

I'll help you along: I DO believe in working for a living.

Too bad your $700 billion handout leech socialist right-wing buddies on Wall Street don't.

kwikfix
Joined:
Apr. 9, 2010 12:51 pm
Quote kwikfix:

[quote=slabmaster]

[quote=Barbazza]

Too bad your $700 billion handout leech socialist right-wing buddies on Wall Street don't.

Or the current assclowns that handed it over to them.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

OK - aside from all those tangents you say you believe in, (and I'm sure you do believe)... ...the direct and concrete question I'd like to ask is... ...do you get paid to post?

bonnie
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
...anyone offering a different view is immediately demonized and the weird conspiracy theories start.

I can't speak for everyone but I can speak for my self and... ...speaking for my self I'd have to say "Nope. I do not immediately demonize those who express different views. In fact, I think the shared expression of different views is the only way change can occur."

But, I'm still curious - do you get paid to post?

bonnie
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote bonnie:
...anyone offering a different view is immediately demonized and the weird conspiracy theories start.

I can't speak for everyone but I can speak for my self and... ...speaking for my self I'd have to say "Nope. I do not immediately demonize those who express different views. In fact, I think the shared expression of different views is the only way change can occur."

But, I'm still curious - do you get paid to post?

Bonnie, sorry it took me so long to respond. I normally don't look this far down in my short window to post. I appreciate people like you that can disagree without getting vile or snotty. It leads to people actually looking at why they form opinions and views.

No, I do not get paid to post. Years ago when I joined here, someone had mentioned that and I asked 100 times how in the hell I get in on that dealio. I always thought it might have been a joke that I wasn't in on, but came to realize that some people here are paranoid enough to actually believe posters here are somehow paid. I remember Ren posted a link to a marketing website, but it had no info on anyone paying anyone to post. I know several of the conservative posters pretty well (from communicating here) and the whole "paid poster" paranoia is like the standing joke amongst us. It makes for some laughing attacks when we talk about it.

I now wonder if the paranoia is really a deep seated psychosis. The weird part is there are several people afflicted and actually believe it, and I think that is a power of suggestion, lemming leading, narcassism. But then, reading what they write on a daily basis, I suspect there are more mental issues at hand that probably ties in with the paranoid dillusions.

I'd still like to know how to get paid to post. So would all of the conservative posters. PeeWee says he's owed millions in backpay!

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

It's not paranoia. It's business. And it is real. There are people who do get paid to post on the internet.

Sometimes its by companies that want to utilize viral marketing. Sometimes its by groups/organizations attempting to promote certain ideas/concepts. It can be in house, (within the company's own marketing team), external or a combination of both.

bonnie
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Any examples other than vague the "they're out there"?

I've never seen nor heard of anyone that gets paid to post on boards like this. Of all the massive amounts of time wasted piddling around the internet crying about how there are no jobs, this could be an opportunity for the triilions of unemployed I keep hearing about. maybe the hand wringers amongst us could do someone a service and get them a job.

I guess in short, prove it. I ain't buyin it. It's a standing joke to the dozen conservative posters that have and do frequest Thoms board. Honestly, the paranoia makes the mentality look a bit bizarre.

I also frequent very conservative boards. In 10-12 years, not one mention of people being paid to post as you claim. I've even asked on the boards and the answers I get are "where do I sign up..LOL!" This is the only place I've ever heard of it.

If there are pay for posting opportunities, I'd like to do it. A little change for what I currently do for free to amuse myself would be......sweet!

Where do I sign up?

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am
It's a standing joke to the dozen conservative posters that have and do frequest Thoms board.

I find it oddly interesting you keep talking about Thom's forum, (and the posters here), as if it's the end-all beat-all heart of the universe. I'm sure Thom would like for it to be the heart of the universe... ...but it ain't. Not by a long shot.

Here's one of the more blatant "payed to post" avenues. I actually respect this one. It's out there and "in your face". Others are less honest in their obviousness. https://payperpost.com/

Here's another one: http://www.mysteryautoincome.com/top-pay-per-post-sites/

Or: http://alstrasoft.com/forum-pay-per-post-exchange.htm

But if you really want to look into it - do a search for "viral marketing"+ "paid to script"

Anyway, as much as you may want to think and.or argue it's BS. It isn't. I know it isn't. You want to know how I know? Because this is one of the marketing practices I find questionable and therefore have dedicated quite a bit of time researching.

Frankly, I could give an aerial rodent's rectum, (flying rat's ass) about partisan arguments on ANY political forum - including Thom's. I'm far more interested in the psychology behind perceived cultural "norms", pop-culture and psycho-social marketing.

bonnie
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote bonnie:

I find it oddly interesting you keep talking about Thom's forum, (and the posters here), as if it's the end-all beat-all heart of the universe. I'm sure Thom would like for it to be the heart of the universe... ...but it ain't. Not by a long shot.

It is the only liberal board I frequent so I really don't know if there are other boards worth visiting. I think it's the only board Loganthor, Rutherford, PeeWee, Sawdust, Kulak, and other conservatives frequent as well. Other ones just never come up in conversation. Who knows. I've heard blips of Rany Roads and Ed whathisname and a few others, but frankly I couldn't listen to their whiny howling for more than a minute. I've heard Thom and he can speak clearly without too much of the petty mud slinging. It's a different mindset for sure, but not as obnoxious as the other lib shows.

Here's one of the more blatant "payed to post" avenues. I actually respect this one. It's out there and "in your face". Others are less honest in their obviousness. https://payperpost.com/

Here's another one: http://www.mysteryautoincome.com/top-pay-per-post-sites/

Or: http://alstrasoft.com/forum-pay-per-post-exchange.htm

I'll take a look and get back to you. Thanks for being normal and posting info without the cinical personal attacks that are so common here. I am actually interested as it's something I've never heard of.

But if you really want to look into it - do a search for "viral marketing"+ "paid to script"

Anyway, as much as you may want to think and.or argue it's BS. It isn't. I know it isn't. You want to know how I know? Because this is one of the marketing practices I find questionable and therefore have dedicated quite a bit of time researching.

I'll look and report on my findings.

Frankly, I could give an aerial rodent's rectum, (flying rat's ass) about partisan arguments on ANY political forum - including Thom's. I'm far more interested in the psychology behind perceived cultural "norms", pop-culture and psycho-social marketing.

If everyone agreed with me here, I would find it boring and find other avenues of entertainment. What attracts the conservatives to this site is the 180 worldview of some of the libs. It's so funny at times, it has spawned other websites that talk about the strange personalities here. It's like the addiction of watching a trainwreck. One question often asked is "are the people on Thoms board actually real, or are they plants to spout the rediculous, waaay out there, rhetorec?" It has been suggested that the most liberal posters are paid or planted, because it's hard to imagine a person living amongst us could actually believe some of the views posted. I gotta say, it was a far more intersting group before the management started banning people to cull the differing opinions.

The psychology is fascinating for sure.

Sheesh.......A conversation without being called names......what a concept....

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

Bonnie,

I took a look at the links you provided and only found websites that are pushing a particular retail product. Part of the posting requirements include running ad's and banners for the consumer product to increase hit counts. It usually involves the site owner. The pay to post is all about selling a product and/or driving hits to a forum, which makes sense. The google searches I looked through were all about the site owner driving hit counts and how to pay posters to write on your forum to increase traffic to the companies ad's on the site.

In the obvious paranoia here about "paid posters" to disrupt the liberal message or whatever the paranoia is about, I'm not finding any sites or avenues that even discuss it let alone pay for it.

Maybe there is something obvious that I missed.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am
Quote slabmaster:
Quote kwikfix:

[quote=slabmaster]

[quote=Barbazza]

Too bad your $700 billion handout leech socialist right-wing buddies on Wall Street don't.

Or the current assclowns that handed it over to them.

That happened on 'W's watch. Don't have a very good memory, do you, Slab? Yeah, Yeah, with Dems in control of congress (tenuously), with all the Corporadems in place. Pretty much the same congressional landscape we had in '05

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

For whatever it's worth, a member who has since left this forum (for reasons unknown to myself) once told me in open, on this forum that (s)he had been paid to post here-By The Word, no less (maybe that's why (s)he always put up such long posts) rather than by the post. Out of respect for whatever confidentiality this person might be entitled to, I won't identify him (or her, never quite knew for sure). However, to those who have been here that long (and have used their memories and powers of observation while dealing with this MB, rather than most of the cons here that seem to not remember what happened on this board yesterday, let alone several months ago) I'll give this clue: (S)He claimed a birthdate of August 6, 1945, and a birthplace of Hiroshima, Japan, and had a username that was also a title of a book about that date and place.

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Barefoot Gen "claimed" to be a Paid Poster.

Drew, I thought just for giggles I would ask the source about your claim.

and I qoute

That's complete bullshit. I have a full-time teaching job and teach additional classes to pay my mortgage. Who the hell would pay me anything for posting in that rat-hole?

Those fuckers just don't want to deal with people better educated and informed than Thom. They are pathetic.

Sheesh.

ouch...

Depending on how long you've been here
Thom liked to claim (on the radio, no less) that Joe Szynal was a paid poster. Also equally Bullshit. Although when Joe came back from Iraq, he just laughed alot.

Sorry Drew, They don't exist.. At least not on Thoms.

Johnny_Boy's picture
Johnny_Boy
Joined:
Aug. 2, 2010 8:35 am
Quote drew013:

That happened on 'W's watch. Don't have a very good memory, do you, Slab? Yeah, Yeah, with Dems in control of congress (tenuously), with all the Corporadems in place. Pretty much the same congressional landscape we had in '05

The first 350 billion was a "W" folly. I objected and thought he was insane. Obama contributed the next 750+ billion in the same fashion...only double. Hiring Geitner makes sense as he is the conduit to Wall Street asshole greasing. Notice the crooks Obama surrounds himself with.

My memory is ok, I guess.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am
Quote Johnny_Boy:Barefoot Gen "claimed" to be a Paid Poster. Drew, I thought just for giggles I would ask the source about your claim. and I qoute
That's complete bullshit. I have a full-time teaching job and teach additional classes to pay my mortgage. Who the hell would pay me anything for posting in that rat-hole? Those fuckers just don't want to deal with people better educated and informed than Thom. They are pathetic. Sheesh.
ouch... Depending on how long you've been here Thom liked to claim (on the radio, no less) that Joe Szynal was a paid poster. Also equally Bullshit. Although when Joe came back from Iraq, he just laughed alot. Sorry Drew, They don't exist.. At least not on Thoms.
Remember the asshat on this forum that was giving Joe shit about supporting the "illegal" war and how he should go to Iraq if he believed in it?

Joe posted a photo from Iraq with a big smile.

I wonder why it's not an "illegal" war in the minds of liberals anymore?

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

Just going by what I was told. If you can directly talk to BFG, that's something not in my domain. However, if you reference the original post, you see that I say that I was told that BFG was paid, not that it was carved in stone fact. Sorry to take away your gotcha. You'd never get one off me that cheap, anyway. I was lied to, plain and simple. And I acknowledged the possibility right off the bat. Nice job with the recall, though. I'm duly impressed. I doubt I've been around this forum long enough to remember Joe Szynal. BTW, so was BFG a man or a woman?

P.S. Slab, it never was anything but Bush's illegal war. And now, apparently it is being ended. Can't just pull out the rug (as much as I personally wish we could).

And TARP (as I recall) =$700 billion.

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Those pay per post deals work like this: they monitor popular search terms and phrases and develop content to divert traffic to their sites to subject browsers to advertising.

Sorry, but Thom's web audience just isn't big enough to justify a pay per post strategy. Do you really think what gets discussed here is that consequential in the national political dialog?

PeeWee Returns's picture
PeeWee Returns
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote PeeWee Returns:

Those pay per post deals work like this: they monitor popular search terms and phrases and develop content to divert traffic to their sites to subject browsers to advertising.

Sorry, but Thom's web audience just isn't big enough to justify a pay per post strategy. Do you really think what gets discussed here is that consequential in the national political dialog?

No. And that was my point in the first place. As it has always been. We're not sending people into different dimensions here. We're not curing cancer. We're not achieving peace on Earth.

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

So, Hey, Johnny_Boy!

Who do you like in the gubernatorial primaries: Hoekstra, Cox, or the dark horse, Snyder? IMO Hardiman and Bouchard are already out. I'm thinking Cox. Whatcha think?

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Johnny doesn't care who the next Michigan Governor will be. Johnny is interested in Oregon Governors race.

But I would go with darkhorse Candidate Snyder. Only because I greatly dislike career Politicians at the moment. Which is why I am voting for Chris Dudley for Oregon Governor.

Johnny_Boy's picture
Johnny_Boy
Joined:
Aug. 2, 2010 8:35 am
Quote drew013:

P.S. Slab, it never was anything but Bush's illegal war. And now, apparently it is being ended. Can't just pull out the rug (as much as I personally wish we could).

And TARP (as I recall) =$700 billion.

Ended? Really? What part? I see increased troops and increased bombing/missles/nation building, etc...

You're right Drew, TARP 1 = 350 billion. TARP 2 = 350billion. Double FUBAR. http://blog.heritage.org/2009/02/09/the-seven-floats-of-the-bush-obama-borrow-bailout-parade/

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am
I think it's the only board Loganthor, Rutherford, PeeWee, Sawdust, Kulak, and other conservatives frequent as well.

I really can't comment on the other posters you've mentioned - but, I can comment on my interactions with Sawdust. I like Sawdust very much. But, more importantly, I respect Sawdust. And for me respect is something I do not give lightly. Sawdust is well spoken and has always taken the time to patiently articulate his POV to me while being respectful of my POV. Not to mention he has an awesome taste in music and has introduced me to some of my current favorite musicians/artists.

I guess in a way one could say Sawdust has been quite a mediating force/influence on me. By self disclosing other facets of him self outside of 1 dimensional political arguments and by explaining his views sans the reactionary, compensatory and insulting super ego responses that tend to dominate political debate forums like this one - he's helped me open my mind to listening to and considering apposing POVs.

Those fuckers just don't want to deal with people better educated and informed than Thom. They are pathetic.

WOW! Look, I am not a moderator and I certainly disagree with Thom on some issues but - seriously - I think this is way out of line.

As much as I might think Thom may be wrong about some things - Thom Hartmann is one of the most intelligent and informed people I've ever encountered - EVER. But that is Thom Hartmann the individual. Thom is not this forum and this forum is not Thom Hartmann.

Oh, and if you feel the urge to include me in the "Those fuckers just don't want to deal with people better educated and informed than Thom" - don't. I can say with 100% confidence I am intelligent, educated and informed enough to decide for my self who truly is intelligent and informed enough to pay attention to. Thank you very much.

bonnie
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Couldn't have said it better. Goes double for me. Thanks, Bonnie!

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Perhaps they are not paid, but they certainly have ZERO self respect.

If you were banned from a MB, would you return once, let alone over 100 more times...

If they aren't being paid, they must just be very bored, sad little men.

meljomur's picture
meljomur
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Bonnie,

Since I was the one that Posted barefoot Gen’s email response to the claim that he “admitted to being a Paid troll” I completely understand his anger. Let alone he probably hadn’t had his coffee that morning yet. Since I have known you for years, you have never been subjected to the constant demeaning ridicule of the so called angelic left here on Thom’s. Alan in the vast majority his discussions on this board has treated everyone with respect and offered much insightful intellectual discourse only to be torn down personally and banned for no other reason than he disagreed with people premise. Unlike me who has just been on the ass end of some very unfortunate board altering events.

Since I do not believe you had the pleasure of having discourse with Barefoot Gen. So no, his comment is not even remotely directed at YOU. His above comment is direct squarely upon those who have and “they” know exactly who they are. What are they going to do, Ban him again, He hasn’t been here in months. Just like Joe Szynal, Barefoot Gen’s legacy lives on.

Tommy.D's picture
Tommy.D
Joined:
Aug. 3, 2010 8:27 am
Quote meljomur:

Perhaps they are not paid, but they certainly have ZERO self respect.

If you were banned from a MB, would you return once, let alone over 100 more times...

If they aren't being paid, they must just be very bored, sad little men.

Ren was banned and returned under another sock until the board changed yet again. Do you include him in your question?

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am
Quote Tommy.D:Bonnie, Since I was the one that Posted barefoot Gen’s email response to the claim that he “admitted to being a Paid troll”

It wasn't a "claim". It is a FACT. It's on the old board. Couldn't exactly tell you where, but it is.

I completely understand his anger. Let alone he probably hadn’t had his coffee that morning yet. Since I have known you for years, you have never been subjected to the constant demeaning ridicule of the so called angelic left here on Thom’s.

No, but the abuse we that try to actually have conversations of substance on this board get from the majority of right wing trolls on it is far worse. And who exactly calls it the "angelic left" around here anyways? You cons just make that up? It sounds about that demeaning.

Alan in the vast majority his discussions on this board has treated everyone with respect and offered much insightful intellectual discourse only to be torn down personally and banned for no other reason than he disagreed with people premise. Unlike me who has just been on the ass end of some very unfortunate board altering events.

So, I finally get a straight answer about BFG's gender. Thanks. Other than that, all I get out of this statement is a bunch of sour grapes and "poor me... I'm so discriminated against here...I can't believe I got banned for calling Carter a "tottering old fool"...etc...etc..." Whatever happened to the concept of "personal responsibility" that you guys like to banter around here so much?

Since I do not believe you had the pleasure of having discourse with Barefoot Gen. So no, his comment is not even remotely directed at YOU. His above comment is direct squarely upon those who have and “they” know exactly who they are.

I, however, did. And I'll agree, BFG was one of the real thinkers on this board. And he could inspire real thinking in return, or inspire the wrath of those who didn't want to take him on on the issues. Kind of like most of the cons I've seen here. Just being a lib doesn't make you any smarter or more tolerant of other POVs.

What are they going to do, Ban him again, He hasn’t been here in months. Just like Joe Szynal, Barefoot Gen’s legacy lives on.

And if the past is all you have, it goes without saying that you are history.

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Little bitchy this morning aren’t you Drew.

It wasn't a "claim". It is a FACT. It's on the old board. Couldn't exactly tell you where, but it is.

Is this one of those Liberal facts I hear about all the time. You know the one. Where original source material refutes the claim, Secondary source Can’t be found and third source is at best hearsay. All the while being passed off as “It is a FACT” (with bold even)
And who exactly calls it the "angelic left" around here anyways?

I do, Several others would concur. It comes from years of watching what was at first a subtle tend to become a full blown hypocrisy of civil discourse. The left of this board get free rein to be raging A-holes to the Right without fear of Ban hammer. While in “most” cases the right on this forum exhibit far more social grace than their counterparts. (not directed at you, mostly at the forum pets and you know who they are)

Your claim of Substantive discussion being suppressed by the Right. You know that is a joke right. Just watch a discussion that is only has left participants. It’s halfassed, shallow and has little to no context and then everyone circles about slapping each other on the ass telling each other what a wonderful job they did. Thom’s Posts are getting downright flammable. Substance requires more than one perspective. It requires that the facts of an issue to be fully explored and acknowledged by both sides thereby supporting any of the conclusions one is inclined to support. I learned long ago with Jason that even when all the facts are on the table that differing outcomes can be put forth depending upon the context and weight applied to the facts, If done properly, a left/right discussion should always stalemate and each person should understand opposing argument. (There IS more than one way to skin a cat) Generally speaking, the Left and the Right want the same thing, they just tend to look at it differently . Problem, nobody around here wants to take the time to actually have a Substantive discussion.

Whatever happened to the concept of "personal responsibility" that you guys like to banter around here so much?

By your comment, I am guessing you don’t know how to Define Personal Responsibility. Did Sawdust Break any rules for calling “"tottering old fool" If he was banned for not breaking the Rules… How is that his responsibility? Quite frankly he hasn’t been back and has no desire to be subjected to arbitrary

I, however, did. And I'll agree, BFG was one of the real thinkers on this board. And he could inspire real thinking in return, or inspire the wrath of those who didn't want to take him on on the issues.

I’ll pass that on to him, if he not already reading it. It’ll provide some measure of comfort in his Cyber prison.

And if the past is all you have, it goes without saying that you are history

Somehow I think you missed the legacy point of referring to people that are gone as Paid Trolls. It’s easy, doesn’t require facts and feeds in the conspiracy paranoia that makes for wonderful talking points and the needed excuse for those who do not desire “stimulating, substantive discussions”. It like saying “I can’t have a substantive discussion with all these paid trolls around” when the actual reality is you simply just can’t have a substantive discussion. It the famous liberal excuse for not having to defend your convictions.

Can you guess what other long time Conservative just got the Banned Hammer last Friday?

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Jack.A's picture
Jack.A
Joined:
Aug. 9, 2010 11:09 am
Quote Jack.A:Little bitchy this morning aren’t you Drew.

You ought to see how I react when some joker calls me a liar to my face with the same amount of back-up.

It wasn't a "claim". It is a FACT. It's on the old board. Couldn't exactly tell you where, but it is.
Is this one of those Liberal facts I hear about all the time. You know the one. Where original source material refutes the claim, Secondary source Can’t be found and third source is at best hearsay.

Original source material: nowhere to be found. You "claim" to have communicated with BFG, and I'll take that on its face. However, it carries about the same weight at the end of the day as my "claim" that he said what he said. Except for one thing: I'm not the one with the credibility issue around here. And, my "claim" CAN be substantiated. Clearly you haven't bothered to look.

All the while being passed off as “It is a FACT” (with bold even)

Because it is a fact. Ask yourself: Why would I bother to (sort of) identify someone who simply said he was a paid poster? What would I get out of it?

And who exactly calls it the "angelic left" around here anyways?
I do, Several others would concur.

Name a few. Other trolls don't count.

It comes from years of watching what was at first a subtle tend to become a full blown hypocrisy of civil discourse. The left of this board get free rein to be raging A-holes to the Right without fear of Ban hammer. While in “most” cases the right on this forum exhibit far more social grace than their counterparts. (not directed at you, mostly at the forum pets and you know who they are)

Thank you. And while you clearly get the point of who gets to say what, and why, you don't seem to get it that this board was created for use by progressives. Therefore, any deviation from that perspective that is put into a post on this message board is done at the member's own risk Virtually every right wing MB works the same way (as you well know) and most of them don't wait any longer than the first progressive post before banning its author (as you also well know- what makes you think that the people running this board should be held to any different kind of standard?)

Your claim of Substantive discussion being suppressed by the Right. You know that is a joke right.

I know quite the opposite.

Substance requires more than one perspective. It requires that the facts of an issue to be fully explored and acknowledged by both sides thereby supporting any of the conclusions one is inclined to support. I learned long ago with Jason that even when all the facts are on the table that differing outcomes can be put forth depending upon the context and weight applied to the facts, If done properly, a left/right discussion should always stalemate and each person should understand opposing argument. (There IS more than one way to skin a cat) Generally speaking, the Left and the Right want the same thing, they just tend to look at it differently . Problem, nobody around here wants to take the time to actually have a Substantive discussion.

In principle, I agree with this summation, however there is a problem with it in regard to current American politics. What once were regarded as solid centrist Republican positions are now regarded by today's American right as "radical socialist" Examples include:

Teddy Roosevelt's trust busting, environmental protection agenda (national parks and such), championing of what he called the "living wage", etc.

Eisenhower suing for peace with the U.S.S.R., ending the Korean War (at least the shooting part), and establishing the Interstate highway system

Nixon offering Ted Kennedy's caucus a better deal on health care than we got under Obama.

As far as "nobody here wants substantive discussion", I don't think so...

Whatever happened to the concept of "personal responsibility" that you guys like to banter around here so much?
By your comment, I am guessing you don’t know how to Define Personal Responsibility.

You are guessing wrong, I'm afraid...

Did Sawdust Break any rules for calling “"tottering old fool" If he was banned for not breaking the Rules… How is that his responsibility? Quite frankly he hasn’t been back and has no desire to be subjected to arbitrary

I'm pretty sure that he has in fact been back, and in addition, if I were a betting man I would put down a small wager that he is in fact you. That having been said, I'm reasonably sure you know exactly why you were banned and while your remarks about Carter may have been the proverbial last straw, we both know that by itself it wasn't a reason to get anyone banned. Before you get all defensive about you getting outed, you did it yourself at least three times in this thread alone, and if that wasn't enough, Slabmaster didn't exactly help you maintain the disguise.

And if the past is all you have, it goes without saying that you are history
Somehow I think you missed the legacy point of referring to people that are gone as Paid Trolls. It’s easy, doesn’t require facts and feeds in the conspiracy paranoia that makes for wonderful talking points and the needed excuse for those who do not desire “stimulating, substantive discussions”. It like saying “I can’t have a substantive discussion with all these paid trolls around” when the actual reality is you simply just can’t have a substantive discussion.

For some people, that is excuse enough. I think that by now, you know better when it comes to me. Paid trolls or not, they have always been for the most part just more message board chaff.
Again, I simply pointed out that BFG once claimed to be a paid poster. Whether I thought it was true or not is an issue that I purposely did not address.

It the famous liberal excuse for not having to defend your convictions.

With statements like that, it's really not that hard to see why you have been banned. You used to do it all the time. After a while, the stereotyping gets kind of old. Some of us are like that, for sure. Most are not. Have to defend my convictions? Regarding this MB, I don't have to do anything. But against most of the arguments presented by the majority of righties on this MB, I actually find myself wanting to, and way too many times more than not, I personally find it to be easy and relaxing, kind of like child's play.

Can you guess what other long time Conservative just got the Banned Hammer last Friday?

Why don't you tell me? I'm sorry, but a lot of my time is taken up by this annoying thing I happen to have. It's called a life.

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. THEN THEY CAME for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. THEN THEY CAME for me and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Godwin's law...

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
You ought to see how I react when some joker calls me a liar to my face with the same amount of back-up.

“Lair” is a bit harsh.. But I do have the original source of the quote that is not nearly as civil as I. Who would emphatically agree with your assessment

I'm sure doing this face to face would be a magically experience that we both would enjoy.

Original source material: nowhere to be found. You "claim" to have communicated with BFG, and I'll take that on its face. However, it carries about the same weight at the end of the day as my "claim" that he said what he said. Except for one thing: I'm not the one with the credibility issue around here. And, my "claim" CAN be substantiated. Clearly you haven't bothered to look.

O he is to be found.. My clever Goodwin law link aside.

Except.. You NOW are the one with the credibility issue. You made a “Factual” Claim with no facts. It’s be challenged, you have yet to produce your evidence. Normally a fairly simple process. You either produce or eat crow. Generally not a lot of gray area in these matters.

Name a few. Other trolls don't count.

Let me guess, they can’t be conservative, White, Tall, heterosexual, English speaking and successful also. Let just proclaim everyone Troll..

Thank you. And while you clearly get the point of who gets to say what, and why, you don't seem to get it that this board was created for use by progressives. Therefore, any deviation from that perspective that is put into a post on this message board is done at the member's own risk Virtually every right wing MB works the same way (as you well know) and most of them don't wait any longer than the first progressive post before banning its author (as you also well know- what makes you think that the people running this board should be held to any different kind of standard?)

Actually it wasn’t, it was originally created for the Salem Project and the forum has evolved to what we have today. I completely agree. They can do whatever they want to do with this board and my feeling on the subject have long since been anesthetized. Sawdust would give you a long historical run down of all the changes to the forum and people since 2003 to the authoritarian jack boot march currently. I watched POAC die because they sanitized their site, they got bored and everyone left.

In principle, I agree with this summation, however there is a problem with it in regard to current American politics. What once were regarded as solid centrist Republican positions are now regarded by today's American right as "radical socialist"

So.. Is this yet another excuse for not having substantive discussion? I’ve personally have taken that Political compass test half a dozen times.. and every time I have been 1 click to the right and 1 click up. A near bull’s-eye every time. Seems to me your wrapping yourself in gross generalizations for whatever reason.

You are guessing wrong, I'm afraid...

Wouldn’t be the first time, but that was hardly a refuting of the point.
For some people, that is excuse enough. I think that by now, you know better when it comes to me. Paid trolls or not, they have always been for the most part just more message board chaff.
Again, I simply pointed out that BFG once claimed to be a paid poster. Whether I thought it was true or not is an issue that I purposely did not address.

Technically I don’t recall crossing keyboards with you so I don’t really have a sense of you as a person. But many that I have crossed paths with and have a sense of the man/women most I now count among my friends and speak with off board. It’s amazing what happens when you have substantive dialog with people and not have to worry about the arbitrary invisible hand who doesn’t understand pass judgments’ upon you without your knowledge. The link on Goodwin law is a path to freedom..

And BFG simply pointed out that your claim is false. Abet a bit uncivilly for the morning. I'm sure he would love to chat with you upon the subject.

With statements like that, it's really not that hard to see why you have been banned. You used to do it all the time. After a while, the stereotyping gets kind of old. Some of us are like that, for sure. Most are not. Have to defend my convictions? Regarding this MB, I don't have to do anything. But against most of the arguments presented by the majority of righties on this MB, I actually find myself wanting to, and way too many times more than not, I personally find it to be easy and relaxing, kind of like child's play.

Let it be known… The truth will set you free… And get you banned at the same time. Truth hurts sometimes and it doesn’t mean we should shield ourselves from it either. In case you are keeping track, the majority of the “righties” are gone.
Why don't you tell me? I'm sorry, but a lot of my time is taken up by this annoying thing I happen to have. It's called a life

Takes all the fun out of it.. Just think Guns and BBQ.
See you at Goodwin Law…

Jack.A's picture
Jack.A
Joined:
Aug. 9, 2010 11:09 am

Slab??? Almost as not right as you... I'm sorry, Don. We used to discuss these issues at length back in the day... No, I agree it's not right. Those that can't take it ought to check themselves...I still stand by my original assessment about the rights of the people that run this board, but I agree that discourse is a good idea, even if it's not necessarily so civil... something that I believe Hartmann himself tries to promote on the radio program, but unfortunately doesn't translate too well on a message board. So I think that he has tried to foster such discourse by starting threads in his style (on the radio), that doesn't necessarily work so well here (on a MB). Maybe he should try to participate in some of the discussions that already exist on this MB, maybe even in the role of referee, at first, too get a real idea of how things work around here. 'Til then, I'll continue (as long as this MB stays at least somewhat interesting...) to keep the faith as to what I believe to be the real reason this MB was created in the first place.

Thanks, Don, for the interesting dialogue here over the past year. It's been my pleasure.

-Drew

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

This is ackward.
Drew, This is not Don. I will certianly take that as a compliment though. You can call me Brian.

I tend to disagree with your assessment of thoms postings. I have politely, yet critically responded to his obviously imflamitory posts at least 6 times. Been deleted and banned 6 times for my troubles. However,cheerleading posts are encourged.

Like you. I’ll hang about till the board becomes stale or dies, much like today's assortment of dull postings.

Live Long and Prosper

Jack.A's picture
Jack.A
Joined:
Aug. 9, 2010 11:09 am

Maybe the subtle references were too subtle.
Drew, hit the Goodwin Law link.

Jack.A's picture
Jack.A
Joined:
Aug. 9, 2010 11:09 am

Nice exchange.

Do you conservatives have a life, or are you just that vindictive?

Its not about listening to different POV, its about debating in an intelligent, well thought out manner. If you have to resort to name calling, and lies than its not tolerated here.

But it doesn't seem to stop any of you from re-registering new ID's time and time again. Why?

meljomur's picture
meljomur
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Your right, it was quite pleasant. Your false dichotomy aside.

I think you have inadvertently expressed your fatal flaw. You don’t listen. You can’t debate without listening, you can’t have understanding without listening, You can’t find common ground without listening. No matter how intelligent, well thought out an argument is, it’s just white noise to those who won’t listen to it.

Again you are wrong, Lies and name calling are tolerated here. Dare I say encouraged. Since I have never in my history ever posted a lie and any name calling I have done was mild in comparison to the incivility shown me. The only rational conclusion one can draw from this is that Lies and name calling standard is a convenient, arbitrary excuse to stifle substantive discussions that may prove to be inconvenient or uncomfortable for some people. All the complaints over the years about the dumbing down of America, ring true with this Forum, but it wasn’t always like that… this is a relatively new phenomenon.

I do find it entertaining that many here have consciously or subconsciously supports the very things done here that they have been raging about for years. Corporatism, censorship, authoritarianism. Perhaps as a suggestion, Thom should do away with the notion that he occupies the Radical middle (which I occupy) and supports stimulating discussion or as you as say: Intelligent, well thought out arguments and simply adopt the DU entry rule “online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office.”, And just do away with the guise all together. Truth in advertising and all…

Why ask why.

Jack.A's picture
Jack.A
Joined:
Aug. 9, 2010 11:09 am

And just when we were getting along so well... Oh well, you'll never be able to rationally say that I didn't give you a chance.

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I'm not sure what your meaning by your last post Drew... My response was to Mel.

Anyway...

Drew was able to provide the required evidence from the old Board and I concede to Drew that BFG did if fact claim to be a Paid Troll to Drew. In the form of a Joke with Laughing Icon... But he did actually say it.

if anybody inclined to view for themselves the qoute and the context
Here

I will take my crow cajun style

Jack.A's picture
Jack.A
Joined:
Aug. 9, 2010 11:09 am

My mistake... twice. Sorry, Brian, I thought you were in fact talking to me.

And thanks for the classy move.

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

The inbedwith dis-infotainment: Gaza to Iraq
☛The Corporate Muzzle
☛Trolls of Fascism

Bivings Group

Bivings work, premised on the power of the Internet, engages in covert online attacks and web based front groups. Many promote GM "food" for chemical and biotechnology clients including Monsanto.

Founded in 1993, and originally known as as Bivings-Woodell Inc., The Bivings Group has been described as the '20th Largest Public Relations Firm in the Washington Metro Area' (Largest Public Relations Firms in the Washington Metro Area, Washington Business Journal April 2000). In addition to Washington DC, it has satellite offices in Brussels and Tokyo, and it previously had offices in Chicago and New York.

The Bivings Group's specialty is online PR - the intersection between IT and lobbying. Its slogan is 'Wired engagement. Global reach. Lasting Impact.' It has, it tells us, developed 'Internet advocacy' campaigns for corporate America since 1996 and serves 'a number of Fortune 100 clients in the biotechnology, chemical, financial, food, consumer products and telecommunications industries.' The plastics industry and 'biotechnology giant Monsanto' are amongst the notable clients 'who have discovered how to make the Internet work for them.'

(Corporations Turn to Internet to Champion Political Causes, Chicago Tribune April 3, 2000) Other Bivings' clients have included Dow Chemicals, Kraft Foods, Phillip Morris, BP Amoco, Chlorine Chemistry council, and Crop Life International.

'The Bivings group has done outstanding work for Monsanto', according to a Monsanto Senior executive quoted by Bivings on its website. Its PR work for the company includes Monsanto's websites (eg Monsanto India, Monsanto UK, Monsanto France) as well as other biotech-related websites such as the biotech knowledge centre - 'a non-commercial website' promoting biotechnology.

According to the PR industry's Holmes Report:

'Bivings has worked with the life sciences company to establish websites in the U.S. and Europe to address the growing controversy over genetically modified foods. The sites provide a wealth of information on GM foods and engage the company's critics in a non-confrontational discussion of the issues. ...It received the Advocacy Award from the New Statesman, which described [its work] as being "Interesting. Openness in the face of controversy."

Elsewhere Bivings' work for Monsanto is described as 'addressing consumer concerns about genetically modified foods in a calm and rational way, even providing access to opposing viewpoints so that-consumers can be better informed.' (Inside PR - 1999 Agency Report Card)

This image of rational open-minded engagement even with the company's critics chimes in well with Monsanto's own commitment, encapsulated in its 'New Monsanto Pledge', to principles such as transparency, dialogue and respect.

However, as The Bivings Group acknowledges on its website, 'Sometimes we win awards. Sometimes only the client knows the precise role we played.' In addition to its publicly acknowledged role, The Bivings Group has helped Monsanto engage in covert online attacks on the company's critics - attacks that have generated considerable controversy and adverse publicity both for Bivings and Monsanto.

The work of Bivings is premised on the power of the Internet : 'Some of the most powerful message delivery tools used today are web-based and grassroots: online message boards, listservs, and web sites.' An article posted on its site states,

'Cyberspace is no longer just for citizen activists. With its savvy Internet lobbying campaigns, Corporate America has gotten off the digital sidelines. Its seasoned Washington lobbyists are turning on its head the assumption that the Internet would aid primarily resource-poor citizens groups allied against corporate interests... business groups are employing the Web to influence public opinion and mount grass-roots-style lobbying campaigns. (Corporations Turn To Internet To Champion Political Causes , Chicago Tribune, April 3, 2000)

Another article talks about 'spinning on-line discussions to favor the positions of companies and interest groups' and 'steering experts to on-line forums on behalf of clients'. The article goes on, 'Without question, these practices have made people taking part in on-line discussions suspicions. Questions about participants' identities and affiliations are becoming more common.' (Incognito Spinmeisters Battle On-Line Critics: When a Company's Product Is Under Fire, One Option is to Plant a Defender in the Chat Room, New York Times, Thursday, October 14, 1999)

The article also notes that Bivings can provide companies with a service involving the long-term monitoring of lists and forums. 'At best, the consultants can strangle misinformation in the electronic cradle. "If participated in properly," said Matt Benson, at Bivings Woodell, "these can be vehicles for shaping emerging issues." '

In an essay on Viral Marketing that appeared in April 2002 on

Thebivingsreport.com, Andrew Dimock, head of Bivings' online marketing and promotions division, spelt out how to make covert interventions on a client's behalf, 'There are some campaigns where it would be undesirable or even disastrous to let the audience know that your organization is directly involved. ...

Message boards, chat rooms, and listservs are a great way to anonymously monitor what is being said. Once you are plugged into this world, it is possible to make postings to these outlets that present your position as an uninvolved third party.' (Kernels of Truth)

Bivings' covert campaign on behalf of Monsanto has been waged through the use of postings to message boards and listservs under aliases, as well as the creation of a website for a fake agriculural institute. These have been used as means to post attacks on Monsanto's critics without disclosing the company's involvement.

Osborn & Barr Communications
Osborn & Barr was formed in 1988 with Monsanto as its founding client. The company's slogan is, "We create belief." - Friday, January 15, 1999 Osborne & Barr to harvest Monsanto's ag marketing.

Big Lies by Joe Conason
The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth

Kill the Messenger

When First We Practice To Deceive
The rest of the story: 'Kill the Messenger' does what the U.S. press wouldn't do—ask hard questions about the campaign against Gary Webb.

Gary Webb’s “Dark Alliance” Returns to the Internet

Restored Dark Alliance website.

Busheney Rumcondi Cocktail

Authoritarians and the Drug War by Pete Guither
Drug WarRant Saturday, February 17, 2007

The Wrecking Crew, on How Conservatives Rule
Columnist and author Thomas Frank joins us to talk about his latest book, The Wrecking Crew. Frank writes, “Fantastic misgovernment of the kind we have seen is not an accident, nor is it the work of a few bad individuals. It is the consequence of triumph by a particular philosophy of government, by a movement that understands the liberal state as a perversion and considers the market the ideal nexus of human society. This movement is friendly to industry not just by force of campaign contributions but by conviction.” [includes rush transcript]

DdC's picture
DdC
Joined:
Mar. 22, 2012 12:39 am
Quote arclight:I'm thinking of all of these crazy right-wing screeds that get forwarded around the intarwebs that are so often debunked by mythbusting sites like snopes.
I've some pretty far right material at Snopes.... so questionable I had to double check I was at the right website.

ulTRAX's picture
ulTRAX
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Currently Chatting

Are Killers Still In Charge Of Our Healthcare?

Malcolm MacDougall is dead, but he left us a really important message before he died.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system