H. Rollins-Freedom Under Attack

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
21

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
And by ‘people like’ Rollins I mean reactionaries, alarmists, conpiracy theorists, foul-mouthed people with cursory knowledge of what’s going on that people with less knowledge regard as experts. I don’t mean people with tattoos or people with dark hair. I knw we all want to see a bigot in the turn of every phrase, but sometimes they are just not there.

In terms of public discourse Mr. Rollins is very informed. This is how he makes his living. You can ignore the message because you don’t like the way he states his opinion which is fine. He isn’t speaking for people like you. He speaks to the under-represented.

You shouldn’t get your panties in such a wad about language. It is only a convention and it doesn’t mean anything. The fact that it doesn’t lend anything useful other than allowing for a more colorful description doesn’t hurt his argument. He speaks the way real people speak. You have been blinded by political correctness.[/quote]

I think this is the first time I’ve ever been called politically correct.
I know who Henry Rollins is and know what he’s about. That’s just a window dressing that doesn’t really help the view.

I have no problem with language. I have a problem with content. His is bullshit. What’s bothersome about Rollins is that he pretends to have no agenda other than what’s right and good and true. But that’s not the case. He has an agenda. His agenda is the success of Henry Rollins. And I got NO problem with that. That’s great.

That’s what it’s all about. My problem with this guy is that he would have you believe otherwise. And he does so in his MTV, “I’m a radical, hear me roar!” bullshit style that is everywhere these days. At some point group think disguised as original thought is going to stop being hip, right?

22

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
And by ‘people like’ Rollins I mean reactionaries, alarmists, conpiracy theorists, foul-mouthed people with cursory knowledge of what’s going on that people with less knowledge regard as experts. I don’t mean people with tattoos or people with dark hair. I knw we all want to see a bigot in the turn of every phrase, but sometimes they are just not there.

In terms of public discourse Mr. Rollins is very informed. This is how he makes his living. You can ignore the message because you don’t like the way he states his opinion which is fine. He isn’t speaking for people like you. He speaks to the under-represented.

You shouldn’t get your panties in such a wad about language. It is only a convention and it doesn’t mean anything. The fact that it doesn’t lend anything useful other than allowing for a more colorful description doesn’t hurt his argument. He speaks the way real people speak. You have been blinded by political correctness.[/quote]

Mr. Rollins?

23

[quote]DS 007 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
And by ‘people like’ Rollins I mean reactionaries, alarmists, conpiracy theorists, foul-mouthed people with cursory knowledge of what’s going on that people with less knowledge regard as experts. I don’t mean people with tattoos or people with dark hair. I knw we all want to see a bigot in the turn of every phrase, but sometimes they are just not there.

In terms of public discourse Mr. Rollins is very informed. This is how he makes his living. You can ignore the message because you don’t like the way he states his opinion which is fine. He isn’t speaking for people like you. He speaks to the under-represented.

You shouldn’t get your panties in such a wad about language. It is only a convention and it doesn’t mean anything. The fact that it doesn’t lend anything useful other than allowing for a more colorful description doesn’t hurt his argument. He speaks the way real people speak. You have been blinded by political correctness.

I think this is the first time I’ve ever been called politically correct.
I know who Henry Rollins is and know what he’s about. That’s just a window dressing that doesn’t really help the view.

I have no problem with language. I have a problem with content. His is bullshit. What’s bothersome about Rollins is that he pretends to have no agenda other than what’s right and good and true. But that’s not the case. He has an agenda. His agenda is the success of Henry Rollins. And I got NO problem with that. That’s great.

That’s what it’s all about. My problem with this guy is that he would have you believe otherwise. And he does so in his MTV, “I’m a radical, hear me roar!” bullshit style that is everywhere these days. At some point group think disguised as original thought is going to stop being hip, right? [/quote]

As opposed to all that want to tame the Internet, having no agenda whatsoever?

When in doubt I will err on the side of freedom, which is Rollins side in this case, thank you very much…

24

[quote]orion wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
And by ‘people like’ Rollins I mean reactionaries, alarmists, conpiracy theorists, foul-mouthed people with cursory knowledge of what’s going on that people with less knowledge regard as experts. I don’t mean people with tattoos or people with dark hair. I knw we all want to see a bigot in the turn of every phrase, but sometimes they are just not there.

In terms of public discourse Mr. Rollins is very informed. This is how he makes his living. You can ignore the message because you don’t like the way he states his opinion which is fine. He isn’t speaking for people like you. He speaks to the under-represented.

You shouldn’t get your panties in such a wad about language. It is only a convention and it doesn’t mean anything. The fact that it doesn’t lend anything useful other than allowing for a more colorful description doesn’t hurt his argument. He speaks the way real people speak. You have been blinded by political correctness.

I think this is the first time I’ve ever been called politically correct.
I know who Henry Rollins is and know what he’s about. That’s just a window dressing that doesn’t really help the view.

I have no problem with language. I have a problem with content. His is bullshit. What’s bothersome about Rollins is that he pretends to have no agenda other than what’s right and good and true. But that’s not the case. He has an agenda. His agenda is the success of Henry Rollins. And I got NO problem with that. That’s great.

That’s what it’s all about. My problem with this guy is that he would have you believe otherwise. And he does so in his MTV, “I’m a radical, hear me roar!” bullshit style that is everywhere these days. At some point group think disguised as original thought is going to stop being hip, right?

As opposed to all that want to tame the Internet, having no agenda whatsoever?

When in doubt I will err on the side of freedom, which is Rollins side in this case, thank you very much…[/quote]

Does anyone actually take the time to read all posts on this board?

25

[quote]DS 007 wrote:

That’s what it’s all about. My problem with this guy is that he would have you believe otherwise. And he does so in his MTV, “I’m a radical, hear me roar!” bullshit style that is everywhere these days. At some point group think disguised as original thought is going to stop being hip, right?

[/quote]
Yes, it is unfortunate that pop-culture has ruined our percetion of political dialog. I don’t believe he actually thinks its a radical concept to fight mainstream media bullshit–which is probably why he has a televion show on IFC. Don’t let the messenger affect how you hear the message.

I am not sure how old you are but MTV hasn’t been hip since 1983. I don’t think Hank represents the MTV crowd just because he used to have a band with minimal air-play in the early 90’s. MTV is all about representing mainstream pop culture which isn’t even in the same universe as his dialog.

26

[quote]DS 007 wrote:
orion wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
And by ‘people like’ Rollins I mean reactionaries, alarmists, conpiracy theorists, foul-mouthed people with cursory knowledge of what’s going on that people with less knowledge regard as experts. I don’t mean people with tattoos or people with dark hair. I knw we all want to see a bigot in the turn of every phrase, but sometimes they are just not there.

In terms of public discourse Mr. Rollins is very informed. This is how he makes his living. You can ignore the message because you don’t like the way he states his opinion which is fine. He isn’t speaking for people like you. He speaks to the under-represented.

You shouldn’t get your panties in such a wad about language. It is only a convention and it doesn’t mean anything. The fact that it doesn’t lend anything useful other than allowing for a more colorful description doesn’t hurt his argument. He speaks the way real people speak. You have been blinded by political correctness.

I think this is the first time I’ve ever been called politically correct.
I know who Henry Rollins is and know what he’s about. That’s just a window dressing that doesn’t really help the view.

I have no problem with language. I have a problem with content. His is bullshit. What’s bothersome about Rollins is that he pretends to have no agenda other than what’s right and good and true. But that’s not the case. He has an agenda. His agenda is the success of Henry Rollins. And I got NO problem with that. That’s great.

That’s what it’s all about. My problem with this guy is that he would have you believe otherwise. And he does so in his MTV, “I’m a radical, hear me roar!” bullshit style that is everywhere these days. At some point group think disguised as original thought is going to stop being hip, right?

As opposed to all that want to tame the Internet, having no agenda whatsoever?

When in doubt I will err on the side of freedom, which is Rollins side in this case, thank you very much…

Does anyone actually take the time to read all posts on this board?

[/quote]

I do, and then I take a little extra time to cut through all the BS.

Everbody has an agenda.

In Rollins case it is barely hidden. If he wants to make a living by being a champion of more freedom and democracy and less BS, more power to him.

The people that want to make a living cageing us in, pretending to advance the war on whatever, moms applepie and of course the well being of our children, well those fuckers, they tend to scare me…

Omg, I used fuck! As in fuck-ers!

Now I have positively PROVEN that I have no idea…

27

I think Rollin’s attitude and verbiage exactly echo the majority of people’s inner thoughts who are fed up with pseudo religious wackos and propagandists dominating the MSM who practically giggle and piss their pants with excitement at the prospects of WWIII.

The village idiot has been “elected” President TWICE. The system is broken.

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
-John F. Kennedy

28

[quote]orion wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
orion wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
And by ‘people like’ Rollins I mean reactionaries, alarmists, conpiracy theorists, foul-mouthed people with cursory knowledge of what’s going on that people with less knowledge regard as experts. I don’t mean people with tattoos or people with dark hair. I knw we all want to see a bigot in the turn of every phrase, but sometimes they are just not there.

In terms of public discourse Mr. Rollins is very informed. This is how he makes his living. You can ignore the message because you don’t like the way he states his opinion which is fine. He isn’t speaking for people like you. He speaks to the under-represented.

You shouldn’t get your panties in such a wad about language. It is only a convention and it doesn’t mean anything. The fact that it doesn’t lend anything useful other than allowing for a more colorful description doesn’t hurt his argument. He speaks the way real people speak. You have been blinded by political correctness.

I think this is the first time I’ve ever been called politically correct.
I know who Henry Rollins is and know what he’s about. That’s just a window dressing that doesn’t really help the view.

I have no problem with language. I have a problem with content. His is bullshit. What’s bothersome about Rollins is that he pretends to have no agenda other than what’s right and good and true. But that’s not the case. He has an agenda. His agenda is the success of Henry Rollins. And I got NO problem with that. That’s great.

That’s what it’s all about. My problem with this guy is that he would have you believe otherwise. And he does so in his MTV, “I’m a radical, hear me roar!” bullshit style that is everywhere these days. At some point group think disguised as original thought is going to stop being hip, right?

As opposed to all that want to tame the Internet, having no agenda whatsoever?

When in doubt I will err on the side of freedom, which is Rollins side in this case, thank you very much…

Does anyone actually take the time to read all posts on this board?

I do, and then I take a little extra time to cut through all the BS.

Everbody has an agenda.

In Rollins case it is barely hidden. If he wants to make a living by being a champion of more freedom and democracy and less BS, more power to him.

The people that want to make a living cageing us in, pretending to advance the war on whatever, moms applepie and of course the well being of our children, well those fuckers, they tend to scare me…

Omg, I used fuck! As in fuck-ers!

Now I have positively PROVEN that I have no idea…[/quote]

Let me get this straight. People are concerned for the well-being of our children are ‘fuckers’ that scare you?

29

[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
I think Rollin’s attitude and verbiage exactly echo the majority of people’s inner thoughts who are fed up with pseudo religious wackos and propagandists dominating the MSM who practically giggle and piss their pants with excitement at the prospects of WWIII.

The village idiot has been “elected” President TWICE. The system is broken.

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
-John F. Kennedy

[/quote]

You have serious problems, do you know that?

30

[quote]DS 007 wrote:
You have serious problems, do you know that?[/quote]

Struck a nerve I see.

31

[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
You have serious problems, do you know that?

Struck a nerve I see.[/quote]

Not at all. Just observing the obvious.

32

[quote]DS 007 wrote:
JustTheFacts wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
You have serious problems, do you know that?

Struck a nerve I see.

Not at all. Just observing the obvious.[/quote]

Me too.

33
34

[quote]DS 007 wrote:

Let me get this straight. People are concerned for the well-being of our children are ‘fuckers’ that scare you?[/quote]

The people who use the well-being of our children as a scare tactic and/or excuse to do all sorts of things to which we wouldn’t otherwise consent, scare me. Those people who really care about the well-being of our kids should concern themselves with safeguarding our liberties.

35

[quote]DS 007 wrote:
Let me get this straight. People are concerned for the well-being of our children are ‘fuckers’ that scare you?[/quote]

WHAT ‘people’ are concerned for the well-being of our children? The government? OUR government? THIS government…

A Federal Blight for Cherry Farmers
The FDA’s warning letters to cherry farmers about health claims posted on their Web sites have troubling legal implications
http://www.businessweek.com/print/smallbiz/content/jun2006/sb20060626_541703.htm

FDA Threatens To Raid Cherry Orchards
http://www.bettervitamin.com/arthritisandCherries.html

FDA Downplayed Vioxx Doubts
Merck knew it had trouble on its hands and took action. At the same time, instead of acting as a public watchdog, the Food and Drug Administration was busy challenging its own expert and calling his work ‘scientific rumor’.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/26/health/main651448.shtml

Vioxx Woes May Reveal FDA’s Flaws
There’s no question in my mind that, had Merck not withdrawn Vioxx, it would still be on the shelves today and Americans would still be dying from heart attacks because of it. And this would be with the FDA’s full knowledge and complicity.

10 on FDA Vioxx panel had ties to companies
Report: Panelists given consulting fees, funding from drug makers

EPA May Drop Lead Air Pollution Limits
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/1207-01.htm

Study Shows Military Pollution Poisoning U.S. Food Supply
http://www.organicconsumers.org/2006/article_3250.cfm

FDA rejects new limits on mercury in vaccines

1991 Memo Warned of Mercury in Shots
A memo from Merck & Co. shows that, nearly a decade before the first public disclosure, senior executives were concerned that infants were getting an elevated dose of mercury in vaccinations containing a widely used sterilizing agent.

The March 1991 memo, obtained by The Times, said that 6-month-old children who received their shots on schedule would get a mercury dose up to 87 times higher than guidelines for the maximum daily consumption of mercury from fish.
http://www.laleva.org/eng/2005/02/1991_memo_warned_of_mercury_in_shots.html

They’re only concerned for the well-being of our children… HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Actually its not very funny at all.

36

[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
I think Rollin’s attitude and verbiage exactly echo the majority of people’s inner thoughts who are fed up with pseudo religious wackos and propagandists dominating the MSM who practically giggle and piss their pants with excitement at the prospects of WWIII.

The village idiot has been “elected” President TWICE. The system is broken.

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
-John F. Kennedy

[/quote]

You actually believe the religious right dominates the mainstream media?

How can anyone take you seriously?

37

[quote]LBRTRN wrote:
DS 007 wrote:

Let me get this straight. People are concerned for the well-being of our children are ‘fuckers’ that scare you?

The people who use the well-being of our children as a scare tactic and/or excuse to do all sorts of things to which we wouldn’t otherwise consent, scare me. Those people who really care about the well-being of our kids should concern themselves with safeguarding our liberties. [/quote]

Just curious - Do you have kids? I don’t think it’s fair to call these types of actions ‘scare tactics’ or an ‘excuse’.

And I don’t think that you should be ‘scared’. These people are the the booooger man. They are not the devil. They don’t want to kill you in your sleep. They might simply want a good place for their kids to grow up in. So they seek certain community standards. Now, my guess is that if these standards consist of gun-control and abortion on demand, you are all for them. If they consist of a ban on pornography or parental notification for minor seeking abortions then, well, that probably scares the hell out of you. Is that about right?

38

[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
DS 007 wrote:
Let me get this straight. People are concerned for the well-being of our children are ‘fuckers’ that scare you?

WHAT ‘people’ are concerned for the well-being of our children? The government? OUR government? THIS government…

A Federal Blight for Cherry Farmers
The FDA’s warning letters to cherry farmers about health claims posted on their Web sites have troubling legal implications
http://www.businessweek.com/print/smallbiz/content/jun2006/sb20060626_541703.htm

FDA Threatens To Raid Cherry Orchards
http://www.bettervitamin.com/arthritisandCherries.html

FDA Downplayed Vioxx Doubts
Merck knew it had trouble on its hands and took action. At the same time, instead of acting as a public watchdog, the Food and Drug Administration was busy challenging its own expert and calling his work ‘scientific rumor’.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/26/health/main651448.shtml

Vioxx Woes May Reveal FDA’s Flaws
There’s no question in my mind that, had Merck not withdrawn Vioxx, it would still be on the shelves today and Americans would still be dying from heart attacks because of it. And this would be with the FDA’s full knowledge and complicity.

10 on FDA Vioxx panel had ties to companies
Report: Panelists given consulting fees, funding from drug makers

EPA May Drop Lead Air Pollution Limits
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/1207-01.htm

Study Shows Military Pollution Poisoning U.S. Food Supply
http://www.organicconsumers.org/2006/article_3250.cfm

FDA rejects new limits on mercury in vaccines

1991 Memo Warned of Mercury in Shots
A memo from Merck & Co. shows that, nearly a decade before the first public disclosure, senior executives were concerned that infants were getting an elevated dose of mercury in vaccinations containing a widely used sterilizing agent.

The March 1991 memo, obtained by The Times, said that 6-month-old children who received their shots on schedule would get a mercury dose up to 87 times higher than guidelines for the maximum daily consumption of mercury from fish.
http://www.laleva.org/eng/2005/02/1991_memo_warned_of_mercury_in_shots.html

They’re only concerned for the well-being of our children… HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Actually its not very funny at all.
[/quote]

Yeah. I didn’t get most of that.

Seek help, pal. You need it.

39

[quote]JD430 wrote:
JustTheFacts wrote:
I think Rollin’s attitude and verbiage exactly echo the majority of people’s inner thoughts who are fed up with pseudo religious wackos and propagandists dominating the MSM who practically giggle and piss their pants with excitement at the prospects of WWIII.

The village idiot has been “elected” President TWICE. The system is broken.

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
-John F. Kennedy

You actually believe the religious right dominates the mainstream media?

How can anyone take you seriously?
[/quote]

Oh, right. Bush got elected twice IN SPITE OF the ‘liberal media’.

This is so dead on…
http://www.theyoungturks.com/tag/Cenk%20Mainstream%20Press

40

[quote]DS 007 wrote:
Yeah. I didn’t get most of that.
[/quote]

Probably because it involved simple reasoning.