Politics and the Youtube effect...

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Read this;

Ben Smith's Blog: Kerry: McCain confused, 'unbelievably out of touch' - Politico.com

John Kerry, who's served in the past as Obama's heavy-hitter on national security, expressed incredulity at McCain's remark this morning that the timing of troops return is "not too important."

"It is unbelievably out of touch and inconsistent with the needs of Americans and particularly the families of troops who are over there. To them it’s the most important thing in the world when they come home," he said. "It’s a policy for staying in Iraq."

Then watch what McCain actually said, in context;

YouTube - Sen. McCain Discusses U.S. Presence In Iraq


I take note here more that we now have at our finger tips the ability to weigh a politicians incredulity and his spin directly against what he/she is getting all incredulous about and decide, for ourselves, in a timely fashion, if someone is full of it or making a good point.

Thank you, Algore, for your internets! It's sooo cool!

I would love to share your enthusiasm, but the stuff on youtube is only as good as the folks posting it and the willingness of people to believe what they see and hear.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

...OK. And here I thought this was a pretty straightforward example of being able to check spin vs. what was actually said.

Didn't you see the part where McCain was torturing snail darters with a sewing needle until Super O came along and foiled him like leftovers?

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

I would love to share your enthusiasm, but the stuff on youtube is only as good as the folks posting it and the willingness of people to believe what they see and hear.

Bruzilla, for god's sake!!!

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

...OK. And here I thought this was a pretty straightforward example of being able to check spin vs. what was actually said.

Didn't you see the part where McCain was torturing snail darters with a sewing needle until Super O came along and foiled him like leftovers?

But how does youtube allow for that? Well, you show a video like you described, that supposedly shows what someone really said or meant, but how do you know that it's accurate? For example, someone says some candidate said "we will attack, I mean not attack, Iran" during a stump speech. Someone posts a video on youtube of a different speech from that day where the candidate says "we will not attack Iran", and says "this shows he never said we would attack Iran." Youtube offers no validation for sourcing of material, so the only validity it has is in the eyes of the beholder.

Another example is the Michelle Obama "whitey" video. How hard is it for someone to use Adobe Premiere to dub in "whitey" into a video and post it on youtube? The video quality is usually so bad that you can't read the lips, and these days anyone can make a video showing just about anything. So you could look at that video and say "There's the smoking gun!" while I can look at it and say "was "whitey" dubbed in there? We need to look at this closer."

So yes, we do have, at our fingertips, a means to factcheck stories, but we also have to realize that some of those videos are as authentic as the crap that came out of Bill Burkett's printer.

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

But how does youtube allow for that? Well, you show a video like you described, that supposedly shows what someone really said or meant, but how do you know that it's accurate? For example, someone says some candidate said "we will attack, I mean not attack, Iran" during a stump speech. Someone posts a video on youtube of a different speech from that day where the candidate says "we will not attack Iran", and says "this shows he never said we would attack Iran." Youtube offers no validation for sourcing of material, so the only validity it has is in the eyes of the beholder.

Another example is the Michelle Obama "whitey" video. How hard is it for someone to use Adobe Premiere to dub in "whitey" into a video and post it on youtube? The video quality is usually so bad that you can't read the lips, and these days anyone can make a video showing just about anything. So you could look at that video and say "There's the smoking gun!" while I can look at it and say "was "whitey" dubbed in there? We need to look at this closer."

So yes, we do have, at our fingertips, a means to factcheck stories, but we also have to realize that some of those videos are as authentic as the crap that came out of Bill Burkett's printer.

You have ConspiracyTheoryitis. Seek help.

No... I'm just not blind to what's going on out there and believing everything I see or hear without questioning it... like the 9/11 truthers, you, etc.

[chernmax]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

No... I'm just not blind to what's going on out there and believing everything I see or hear without questioning it... like the 9/11 truthers, you, etc.

You are a blind idiot who can get kicked in the nuts by NObama and make an excuse why it was a good thing...

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

But how does youtube allow for that? Well, you show a video like you described, that supposedly shows what someone really said or meant, but how do you know that it's accurate? For example, someone says some candidate said "we will attack, I mean not attack, Iran" during a stump speech. Someone posts a video on youtube of a different speech from that day where the candidate says "we will not attack Iran", and says "this shows he never said we would attack Iran." Youtube offers no validation for sourcing of material, so the only validity it has is in the eyes of the beholder.

Another example is the Michelle Obama "whitey" video. How hard is it for someone to use Adobe Premiere to dub in "whitey" into a video and post it on youtube? The video quality is usually so bad that you can't read the lips, and these days anyone can make a video showing just about anything. So you could look at that video and say "There's the smoking gun!" while I can look at it and say "was "whitey" dubbed in there? We need to look at this closer."

So yes, we do have, at our fingertips, a means to factcheck stories, but we also have to realize that some of those videos are as authentic as the crap that came out of Bill Burkett's printer.

...I mention my theory on Obama's birth certificate and Arnold Schwarzenegger?

[Bann (Premo)]

For cripes' sake! I just saw the clip on TV!! This has been on every newsbreak I've heard since getting off of work @ 2pm. And the YouTube video has MORE to the context than any of the other clips I've heard or seen.

Anyhoo - the leftists in the media are certainly all atwitter, salivating like a pack of jackals and barely able to control their bladders that they've just proven that McCain is senile, out of touch, old


: