SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network

SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network (http://www.socnet.com/index.php)
-   The Lounge (http://www.socnet.com/forumdisplay.php?f=224)
-   -   Remember: There is NO Progressive Agenda (http://www.socnet.com/showthread.php?t=121158)

SATCOM 8 August 2014 09:38

Remember: There is NO Progressive Agenda
 
Nothing to see here, just move along. This reminds me of a virus, slowly working its way into every facet of American life.

http://eagnews.org/1000-member-secre...oup-uncovered/

1,000-member secretive progressive journalist group uncovered

WASHINGTON, D.C. – A prominent CNN commentator, the top two political reporters for The Huffington Post, a Reuters reporter, the editor of The Nation magazine, a producer for Al Jazeera America television, a U.S. News & World Report columnist, and approximately two dozen Huffington Post contributors are among the more than 1,000 members of Gamechanger Salon.

Founded by leftwing activist Billy Wimsatt, the group is a secretive digital gathering of writers, opinion leaders, activists and political hands who share information, ideas and strategy via a closed Google group.

The group’s existence was discovered by Media Trackers through an open records request filed with a University of Wisconsin professor who happened to be a member of the network.

Longrifle 8 August 2014 09:45

Patiently cooking the frog with slow, incremental increases in temperature . . .

Octoberfest 8 August 2014 10:22

It still blows me away that people even look twice at the huff post. Not even in regards to politics, it is an absolute farce of a news organization

Colonel Flagg 8 August 2014 18:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Octoberfest (Post 1058412461)
It still blows me away that people even look twice at the huff post. Not even in regards to politics, it is an absolute farce of a news organization

I don't like Huff Post either, but they did recently run articles that savaged Paul Krugman, the economic Goebbels mouth piece supporting the current Executive Branch and the left.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2014/07/14/is-paul-krugman-leaving-princeton-in-quiet-disgrace/

btq96r 8 August 2014 18:28

How dare they conspire to use their rights under the First Amendment...:rolleyes:

Sigaba 8 August 2014 19:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by SATCOM (Post 1058412453)
his reminds me of a virus, slowly working its way into every facet of American life.

How would you characterize the Koch brothers' funding of right of center populist political groups?

AZ5326 8 August 2014 19:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaba (Post 1058412617)
How would you characterize the Koch brothers' funding of right of center populist political groups?

Lol! Your frame of reference may be just a TAD tainted... From your own profile on SOCNET: "An academic historian by training".

Polypro 8 August 2014 19:51

Both sides do it, not surprised. Manipulating the slaves is how money is made, and elections are won.

DirtyDog0311 8 August 2014 19:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by btq96r (Post 1058412606)
How dare they conspire to use their rights under the First Amendment...:rolleyes:

Honestly, I see little difference in people that choose to abuse the First Amendment in order to undermine America, and those that abuse the 2nd Amendment to commit mass murder. In fact, the former may be more harmful to us as a whole than the more overt and visceral danger of the latter. And this isn't some partisan shit about Medicare I'm talking about or any of the other stupid shit we bitch about on a daily basis. This is about people who, for lack of a better phrase, want to "fundamentally transform America". We already have one person in that position doing what he can to that end --- and we can see the results of that almost every day.

It's the actions and intent of the individuals performing the deeds that are insidious. The very fact that it was "secret" makes it all the more shady. I believe Kennedy made a speech that outlines this.

btq96r 8 August 2014 20:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by DirtyDog0311 (Post 1058412627)
Honestly, I see little difference in people that choose to abuse the First Amendment in order to undermine America, and those that abuse the 2nd Amendment to commit mass murder. In fact, the former may be more harmful to us as a whole than the more overt and visceral danger of the latter. And this isn't some partisan shit about Medicare I'm talking about or any of the other stupid shit we bitch about on a daily basis. This is about people who, for lack of a better phrase, want to "fundamentally transform America". We already have one person in that position doing what he can to that end --- and we can see the results of that almost every day.

It's the actions and intent of the individuals performing the deeds that are insidious. The very fact that it was "secret" makes it all the more shady. I believe Kennedy made a speech that outlines this.

How can they abuse the First Amendment? If you don't like their message, ignore it or counter it.

Anybody is allowed to coordinate a message with others until it involves the violent overthrow of the government. Prior restraint is unconstitutional, and that shouldn't change because you disagree with the message.

DirtyDog0311 8 August 2014 20:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by btq96r (Post 1058412630)
How can they abuse the First Amendment? If you don't like their message, ignore it or counter it. If you are worried it could reach kids, talk to them about it.

Anybody is allowed to coordinate a message with others until it involves the violent overthrow of the government. Prior restraint is unconstitutional, and that shouldn't change because you disagree with the message.

I'm not saying that it should be outlawed. I'm saying it should be viewed for what it is. Abuse of a right. Those journalist are using their First Amendment rights to undermine values and ideals that made this country #1 in the world........and simultaneously planting their own seeds of discord aimed primarily at the younger generations who don't know any better, are looking for something 'new' to believe in, or just generally don't know any better. All to fit an agenda. I'd say that fits the general description of misuse/abuse.

It's something that may not be generally seen as outright sedition, but a slow acting poison never really is seen as poison and is, until modern forensics, usually attributed to other things. Hell, the Romans drank lead for years and even made their water pipes with it.

How do you think our current POTUS got elected? It certainly wasn't overnight. He certainly didn't come up with this stuff on his own at Occidental college. He is merely representative of an ideal that has been making it's way through the American psyche for years now. All through the help of people that have organized and colluded together in exactly the same manner that is described in this article.

Which begs the question, if this organization was outed, only through exposure from an 'inside source', then what else is out there working behind the scenes that we don't know about?

Colonel Flagg 8 August 2014 20:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by btq96r (Post 1058412630)
How can they abuse the First Amendment? If you don't like their message, ignore it or counter it.

Anybody is allowed to coordinate a message with others until it involves the violent overthrow of the government. Prior restraint is unconstitutional, and that shouldn't change because you disagree with the message.

Personally, I would never suggest limiting freedom of speech.

But I have grave concerns over the extremely high concentrations of mass media ownership in so few hands:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_cross-ownership_in_the_United_States

People can claim immunity to news/propaganda/perception shaping/etc, but I reckon nearly everyone gets worn down by it.

If that were not true, then marketing and advertising wouldn't exist as what is effectively private sector propaganda targeting consumers.

I would think it would be easier to align 6 interests with your own than 60, 600, or 6000…we used to have 6000 not that long ago.

For all the increased variety(depth and breadth) of mass media, the ownership has effectively collapsed from thousands so a mere few.

btq96r 8 August 2014 20:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by DirtyDog0311 (Post 1058412634)
I'm not saying that it should be outlawed. I'm saying it should be viewed for what it is. Abuse of a right. Those journalist are using their First Amendment rights to undermine values and ideals that made this country #1 in the world........and simultaneously planting their own seeds of discord aimed primarily at the younger generations who don't know any better, are looking for something 'new' to believe in, or just generally don't know any better. All to fit an agenda. I'd say that fits the general description of misuse/abuse.

It's something that may not be generally seen as outright sedition, but a slow acting poison never really is seen as poison and is, until modern forensics, usually attributed to other things. Hell, the Romans drank lead for years and even made their water pipes with it.

How do you think our current POTUS got elected? It certainly wasn't overnight. He certainly didn't come up with this stuff on his own at Occidental college. He is merely representative of an ideal that has been making it's way through the American psyche for years now. All through the help of people that have organized and colluded together in exactly the same manner that is described in this article.

Which begs the question, if this organization was outed, only through exposure from an 'inside source', then what else is out there working behind the scenes that we don't know about?

I guess I just don't get spun up over these things and take what comes one issue at a time and subject it to my own BS filter.

These groups meeting in secret is their choice. There are plenty of behind the scenes groups doing work to coordinate messages on either side of any issue/agenda. I'm sure the NRA, Brady Campaign, National Right to Life, and Planned Parenthood would all equally like for their internal communications with outside groups/people to stay private. I just don't see the big to-do with the outrage over it.

We're in the middle of another general shift in politics. It happened with Presidents Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, JFK, Reagan and now Obama, with the last two generational ideologies at odds. As long as each works within the system and doesn't overthrow a government, we'll get what we get. I think America will survive.

Richard 8 August 2014 21:06

Skulls and Bones...and illumaniti...and progressives...and novus ordo seclorum...oh, my! :rolleyes:

And so it goes...

Richard

Sigaba 8 August 2014 21:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZ5326 (Post 1058412624)
Lol! Your frame of reference may be just a TAD tainted... From your own profile on SOCNET: "An academic historian by training".

Since when is knowing how to research, to read carefully, and to think critically disreputable?

AZ5326 8 August 2014 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaba (Post 1058412652)
Since when is knowing how to research, to read carefully, and to think critically disreputable?

The fact that you reflexively bring up the boogey men Koch brothers when they were never part of this discussion (not to mention your own intro) screams out that you have spent too much time in "academia" being "educated"... So tell us, what forum did you use for your "research". Huffington Post, DU, or some other equally enlightened venue?

AZ5326 8 August 2014 21:24

I'm honestly not trying to call you out Sigaba, just completely exhausted with the folks who sit at the feet of their college professors who just regurgitate whatever they have been fed, with absolutely no life experiences whatsoever. Koch brothers seem to be the lefts boogey man the last several years.

SATCOM 8 August 2014 22:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaba (Post 1058412617)
How would you characterize the Koch brothers' funding of right of center populist political groups?

The Koch brothers have nothing to do with the list that was exposed.

Difference being the Koch brothers are not covering up or compromising the public’s method of receiving news. The Koch brothers are giving money to various organizations, and that is their right. They are not personally corrupting the news in order to push Progressive/Socialist/Leftist/Communist/Liberal (we’ll use PSLCL to keep this short) agendas. You might recall that in 2009 another secretive PSLCL journalist/think-tanker/academic list was outed. That scandal brought many PSLCL folks into the public venue. You can read about that here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList

* I believe that there was evidence gleaned from Journolist that connected George Soros and the Democratic Socialists of America to the White House.

Freedom of the press is essential to America, NOT usurpation of the truth. We are now seeing that these Alinsky-motivated reporters, academics, and think-tankers have colluded, corrupted, and co-opted (C3) the truth. Why was there a concerted effort (C3) to BURY what happened in Benghazi? Why was there virtually no coverage of the IRS scandal? ATF/Fast and Furious? It’s called lack of reportage and talking points.

This exposed group utilized propaganda and media manipulation to cover for their PSLCL-minded friends, chiefly the POTUS and cronies embedded in this current administration.

Why did they have to hide the existence of this group? You really have to ask yourself that……

Also, does anybody else find it surprising that the lamestream media never presented the public any serious investigative reports on the above scandals PRIOR to the last election?

btq96r 8 August 2014 22:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg (Post 1058412641)
Personally, I would never suggest limiting freedom of speech.

But I have grave concerns over the extremely high concentrations of mass media ownership in so few hands:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_c..._United_States

Oh, it's a concern for sure, and like you, I'm not a fan of it. But I think in the end, mass media has to be treated like any other industry. I don't know enough about the anti-trust laws in this area to suggest if they are enough or not.


Quote:

Originally Posted by SATCOM (Post 1058412663)
Why was there a concerted effort (C3) to BURY what happened in Benghazi? Why was there virtually no coverage of the IRS scandal? ATF/Fast and Furious? It’s called lack of reportage and talking points.

Also, does anybody else find it surprising that the lamestream media never presented the public any serious investigative reports on the above scandals PRIOR to the last election?

Talk radio, Fox News and a lot of the sites you link to on here dedicated no small amount of their resources to report on the issues you brought up? They count as media also.

The term "lamestream media" is just the feel good dog whistle for those news outlets conservatives have issues with. The counter message is getting out there through plenty of sources.

MakoZeroSix 8 August 2014 22:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Octoberfest (Post 1058412461)
It still blows me away that people even look twice at the huff post. Not even in regards to politics, it is an absolute farce of a news organization

It blows me away that people don't read Huffington Post.

You need to be reading that shit. I read it every day, along with Salon, Mother Jones and Slate.

Do you want to not know what they are propagandizing?

Should we just all stick our fingers in our ears and go Lalalalalala I can't hear you over how awesome fox news is Lalalalala

I don't need to hear my own views parroted back at me in an inarticulate and ponderous manner, making me question why I have those views (Fox). I want to hear the views of people I don't agree with, so I can formulate counter arguments and strategies. Plus every now and again, believe it or not, liberals do come up with a good point. For instance, they've always squawked about police brutality- only recently have we woken up to its hideous reality.

To make another point- at Robin Sage, you don't get classes on what the fuck General Petraeus thinks. You get classes on what Mao and Che Guevara thought. Because to destroy your enemy you must understand him, even empathize with him.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:22.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Socnet.com All Rights Reserved