I think we can't reasonably be doing front page stories every time one of these things gets reported. It's going to keep happening. Different people have different feelings about that, but we've had thousands of front-page-thread comments on much more important stories than Bannon's dumb podcast channel. At some point we should just refer back to those threads. I don't need to see Bannon's culpability litigated on HN…
You know, stories don't just get to the front page on their own. If people stop upvoting them, they won't make it to the front page.
YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel
621–630 of 1001 posts
Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel
#622Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bias measurements are relative to something. It could make sense for you to feel that way, because you and your social circles may generally be more left leaning. What is the definition of "center"? They describe how they come to a bias rating at https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-rating-method... .
If you think that CNN is as far left as OAN and The Daily Caller are to the right, I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you.
Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel
#623The lies are 100% of the reason the capital riot happened, so yes, they do need to stop. Fox News lies every single day. What do we expect from a population of people that only hear these lies, day in and day out? They're going to react just like they did on 1/6.
Do you believe Fox News should be banned/censored? What about CNN? They are as biased as Fox News.
Some examples... Clinton Server Controversy Concluded years later nothing illegal took place https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controve...
Mueller Report Concluded years later collusion did not take place (https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/24/attorney-general-william-bar...)
I'm sure millions still believe everything they let these outlets of their choice pump in their brain and get them revved up. For me it's all garbage (political drama) ... not to waste my time on.
Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel
#624Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel
#625Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I also don’t agree with their equivalent person on the left. Just out of curiosity who is their equivalent person on the left? > Can’t we all try to find consensus and compromise? What consensus and compromise do you want when the President of the US wants to "find" the votes or when calls the rioters good people and we love you?
That’s just it. A lot of people of all political persuasions are reasonable and rational. I don’t think the current administration is at all. I’m a generally middle of the road guy that has a general viewpoint of live and let live. The problem is we are letting fringe opinions dictate the narrative.
>Just out of curiosity who is their equivalent person on the left?
Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel
#626I read things like this and it really makes me sad. I don’t agree with Steve Bannon or Rudy Giuliani on a lot of things. I also don’t agree with their equivalent person on the left. In fact I am skeptical of most “career politicians”. I really wish we could switch what politics is about. Currently we (meaning news channels and Twitter/internet folk) want to dunk on the other tribe and show them how wrong and stupid t…
So, when you say "Can’t we all try to find consensus and compromise?", in my opinion that already goes against what conservatives and right leaning people value. An individual having to compromise for "the greater good" goes against their core values.
Now, I do think that life is more complex than simply choosing one side. Because life isn't necessarily copatible with "human rationality". Sometimes there are situations where it is more rational to be hypocritical or sometimes it is more rational to let conflicting opinions exist.
I think it comes down to what humans learn at a young age and in school. If we were able to focus more on ethics and helping people find a purpose to live at a young age already, it would make a big difference.
Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel
#627Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s still stuff coming out about this. 1) Bombs were left during the invasion. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fbi-50k-reward-pipe-bombs-capit... 2) Weapons were recovered. https://ktla.com/news/nationworld/13-arrested-5-weapons-reco... That’s weapons recovered. How many more were carrying?
Also there’s this: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/10/us/politics/capitol-arres... Jake Angeli carried a spear. Several weapons recovered from Eric Munchel.
I honestly cannot tell if you are being sarcastic here.
Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel
#628Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hunter Biden is not running for President nor part of the Biden administration. So what he does in his spare time is frankly irrelevant.
If it was truly irrelevant, Twitter wouldn't censor it. They even locked out the New York Post out of their account for posting about it. Biden is in the politics for decades, there is more then plenty of pretty damning evidence to show that, at the very best, he doesn't believe in anything he says. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_xXx0yUvSw
Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel
#629Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bedrock cultural events (or signs of them) should gratify anyone's intellectual curiosity. IMO we downplay them only because of fatigue and denial and even helplessness. "Surely this is a one-off thing over one dumb podcast, not symptoms of a larger problem that I can avoid thinking about" or maybe "It's fine cuz I don't like that guy". And that's how we deathmarch into the next, for example, Holocaust. That said, I…
> I will admit that our comments sections sucks ass on these topics Please tell me where on the internet you can get better discussion on these topics than here? This is one of the few places where these things can even be discussed by people with opposing viewpoints without instantaneous flamewar apocalypse.
Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel
#630Earlier quoted context omitted.
There were three separate bonfires in DC in May. In that case, DC was also burning back then from angry mobs of protesters. My point is the narrative. Take a step back and observe and claim the wrong done by both parties instead of saying one is right and one is wrong.
With all due respect, you don’t know anything about me. When BLM protestors burn down a Footlocker, I say they did something wrong. But I also don’t assume that all BLM protestors are violent. And I don’t assume all Republicans are violent. But all the people who invaded the capitol? They all invaded the capitol. Let’s be clear about that.