Quote:Yes, it's humorous, but ultimately doesn't matter.
People who would instantly believe that sort of thing aren't going to engage in any kind of self reflection over their misguided beliefs, so it's really only good for a laugh and sad shake of the head.
You shouldn't hold yourself in such high regard. You didn't want to believe it, either. What is so misguided about believing the point behind the article? Is it because it would have supported an opposing political party's opinion about California? The moment YOU instantly believe anything on the internet, you will become exactly what you just criticized.
Quote:I think you guys are missing the real story here, which is that someone is (supposedly) feeding poisoned news articles to right wing news websites in an attempt to destroy their credibility. I think that's much more interesting than whether a guy got fired for his accent or not.
I guess it depends on how you look at it.
Is it more important that the Right Wing media outlets are too quick to spread this stupid reports, or is it more important that the Left Wing media feels like it's necessary to lie in order to discredit the Right Wing media outlets?
Quote:You shouldn't hold yourself in such high regard. You didn't want to believe it, either. What is so misguided about believing the point behind the article? Is it because it would have supported an opposing political party's opinion about California? The moment YOU instantly believe anything on the internet, you will become exactly what you just criticized.
I guess it depends on how you look at it.
Is it more important that the Right Wing media outlets are too quick to spread this stupid reports, or is it more important that the Left Wing media feels like it's necessary to lie in order to discredit the Right Wing media outlets?
Like I said, there are some things I wouldn't bother to question because they're so common. I would believe they're easily possible, and in an absence of evidence I would presume it could be true but wouldn't assume it is.
On the other hand there are some things so absurd that I wouldn't begin to believe they're possible without some documentation.
Anyone who believed the idea that someone was "fired in CA" for having a southern accent was likely enough to believe it was probably true without any documentation could benefit from a bit of introspection.
Quote:Like I said, there are some things I wouldn't bother to question because they're so common. I would believe they're easily possible, and in an absence of evidence I would presume it could be true but wouldn't assume it is.
On the other hand there are some things so absurd that I wouldn't begin to believe they're possible without some documentation.
Anyone who believed the idea that someone was "fired in CA" for having a southern accent was likely enough to believe it was probably true without any documentation could benefit from a bit of introspection.
If you don't read them, they mustn't be a problem, right? The media publishes what sells; they don't care about frequency or validity.
Why is this so absurd? It's a stupid reason to fire someone, and most reasonable people wouldn't fire someone before of their accent. It isn't like we haven't seen an inclusive-oriented attitude from the left that often leaves those that don't fit the mold (ironically) outside the group. This really isn't all that impossible. While I agree that there should definitely be something to support such a claim before people blindly accept it, it doesn't mean, however, that this idea is all that absurd.
In other words, it appears that your idea that those people, that did accept it, lack any potential at self-reflection is only based on opposing ideological beliefs. Especially when it's such a common occurrence on both sides. Believing something you read doesn't mean you're incapable of self-reflection. Believing that other people lack that ability because they read something on the internet tells me that you're more likely to fit into that category more than the other way around.
Quote:If you don't read them, they mustn't be a problem, right? The media publishes what sells; they don't care about frequency or validity.
Why is this so absurd? It's a stupid reason to fire someone, and most reasonable people wouldn't fire someone before of their accent. It isn't like we haven't seen an inclusive-oriented attitude from the left that often leaves those that don't fit the mold (ironically) outside the group. This really isn't all that impossible. While I agree that there should definitely be something to support such a claim before people blindly accept it, it doesn't mean, however, that this idea is all that absurd.
In other words, it appears that your idea that those people, that did accept it, lack any potential at self-reflection is only based on opposing ideological beliefs. Especially when it's such a common occurrence on both sides. Believing something you read doesn't mean you're incapable of self-reflection. Believing that other people lack that ability because they read something on the internet tells me that you're more likely to fit into that category more than the other way around.
No, I'm sorry to have to tell you, JNG, that you're incorrect.
It's not ideology that leads me to state what I did, it's simply reality.
I've never heard of someone being fired for their southern accent, while people being persecuted being a homosexual is a sadly common occurrence. If you don't believe me just do a search on Google.
So, my point was if you hear something reasonable it's not out of line to think it plausible. I still would want to see some documentation about someone fired for being gay, but I wouldn't believe they're lying from the start. However, someone fired for having a southern accent is so unusual that I'd believe it to more likely be a persecution complex on the part of the person who was fired in a dearth of documentation.
Now, if you don't understand what I'm saying here you might want to take a step back and clear your mind, then copy what I wrote, place some generic placeholder terms such as "unheard of event" and "very common event" in the southern accent and being gay sections and read them again. That might help.
Quote:No, I'm sorry to have to tell you, JNG, that you're incorrect.
It's not ideology that leads me to state what I did, it's simply reality.
I've never heard of someone being fired for their southern accent, while people being persecuted being a homosexual is a sadly common occurrence. If you don't believe me just do a search on Google.
So, my point was if you hear something reasonable it's not out of line to think it plausible. I still would want to see some documentation about someone fired for being gay, but I wouldn't believe they're lying from the start. However, someone fired for having a southern accent is so unusual that I'd believe it to more likely be a persecution complex on the part of the person who was fired in a dearth of documentation.
Now, if you don't understand what I'm saying here you might want to take a step back and clear your mind, then copy what I wrote, place some generic placeholder terms such as "unheard of event" and "very common event" in the southern accent and being gay sections and read them again. That might help.
I'm not even arguing about homosexuality, so that topic of conversation is irrelevant.
Your ideology is your "reality". I suppose everyone that disagrees with you is wrong too, huh?
Again, because you didn't "hear of it", it doesn't mean it hasn't happened. That excuse doesn't justify your opinion that it hasn't happened. Are you saying that it never happened? Ever? If not, you're really underestimating people's stupidity? If so, you're whole entire point is now irrelevant since someone believing the topic of conversation is now plausible (by your own admission). It doesn't have to be a trend to possible.
Quote:I'm not even arguing about homosexuality, so that topic of conversation is irrelevant.
Your ideology is your "reality". I suppose everyone that disagrees with you is wrong too, huh?
Again, because you didn't "hear of it", it doesn't mean it hasn't happened. That excuse doesn't justify your opinion that it hasn't happened. Are you saying that it never happened? Ever? If not, you're really underestimating people's stupidity? If so, you're whole entire point is now irrelevant since someone believing the topic of conversation is now plausible (by your own admission). It doesn't have to be a trend to possible.
Does your "ideology" lead you to believe just as many people are persecuted for having southern accents as are people for being gay?
Quote:Your ideology is your "reality". I suppose everyone that disagrees with you is wrong too.
All you have to do is read his missives from the Homie-based reality in his head to see that. He speaks truth to power by redefining realty to fit his preferred outcomes, just like every other leftist, especially when reality and history repeatedly shows that his preferences lead to tyranny, misery and deaths on the order of millions.
Look fellas, here is what happened. Someone set up a fake news site and used it to feed a false story into the internet, in the hopes that some right wing news site would pick it up and publish it, thereby damaging their credibility.
So the story didn't happen. There wasn't a man in California fired for having a southern accent.
What does it all mean? Nothing. Even if it had happened, it would have meant nothing. It would have been one dumb guy doing one dumb thing.
It's not an indictment of right wingers or left wingers. It's not an indictment of right wing philosophy or left wing philosophy. It has nothing to do with whether we need more government or less government. You guys are taking this thing and making it a personal attack on right wingers or a personal attack on left wingers. And that is what your controllers on the right or left want you to do. They want you to simplify your thinking down to "conservatives are stupid" or "liberals are stupid" because that makes your mind more controllable. They want to keep you in the herd.
So, get up out of the mud and start thinking about real issues individually, without regard to whose side you are on. Don't set a default response to everything you hear. Having a political side is just pure intellectual laziness. It allows you to filter ideas into or out of your brain without having to actually think about them.
Free your mind! Don't be a sheep!