The internet has created millions of false reporters – people who write as if they’re journalists reporting facts, who spreading information as if it’s actual news.  Whether or not the information is true is irrelevant, because most people these days are too stupid to further Google the news in question to find out if it’s true or not.  They just sorta go with it, then link it on Twitter and/or Facebook and the little monster lives on fact without question.  I have no idea if the originators are purposely lying when writing or are too stupid to understand what they’re writing about.  Most of the time I actually have to hope that they’re just manipulative liars because it’s otherwise too sad to believe that people are really that dumb in America.  Either way they end up looking like assholes.
This short interview between George Stephanopoulos and Michele Bachmann took place today.  He first points out a few dumbass things she said in the past, which she had trouble denying, then says, and I quote: “I think one of the most impressive things that many people find in your background is the fact that you and your husband have helped raise 23 foster children, and I know you want to shield them, but are they prepared, and are you prepared for the loss of privacy that comes with a presidential campaign, and is that something you’re concerned about for them?“  This lone statement got psycho-conservative-translated into “George Stephanopoulos threatens Michele Bachmann that the media will investigate all 23 of her foster children“.  :shock:   What the fuck?  You don’t even have to view the interview.  Just read his one sentence!  Threaten?  Investigate?  Where are they getting this?  It makes no sense!
Now I suppose they could just be reading a headline, without actually reading the “offending” statement or watching the video, but what about the bloggers themselves?  Surely they are paying attention to what they’re publishing.  All these right-wing blogs are not just a bunch of copy and paste bullshit jobs from Fox Nation, where I believe this idiocy originated, right?  Or are they?  If Fox Nation was the root of this nonsense, were they really thinking George Stephanopoulos was praising her background with foster children, but then instantly turned and threatened her with investigation seconds later?  Is the person who wrote that really so stupid to not understand wording or something?  Is English a second language to him or her?  Since there’s no logical reason to come to this conclusion one has to assume there’s some sort of malice behind the wild claim that ol’ George threatened Michele with this mass media investigation of foster kids.  Was it because he pointed out her embarrassing and obvious mistruths earlier in the interview, that they felt, “Well, she did fuck up there, so we can’t talk about that, but we have nail George on something… let’s claim he’s gonna screw with the children somehow.”?  Ridiculous.
Humorously, all of the conservative blogs that posted this story about George’s Nazi-like oppression of Michele’s foster children included the video and the offending statement transcribed for their readers.  Then people would comment on the content and complain about the horrific treatment Michele received at the hands of George the child killer.  So these people are not the bloggers themselves.  They’re just innocent readers… with the video and statement staring them in the face, yet still they feel he threatened her with media investigation of all 23 of her foster children.  So this is my conclusion, but nothing is 100% of course.  Most of the bloggers are knowingly lying to fit a pro-Michele political agenda, and all sides are guilty of this type of thing, not just the right-wing, but the readers are the different story.  Most of the readers are either really unintelligent or pretending to be unintelligent, which is in turn an unintelligent thing to do, unless the unappealing behavior is getting you out of a dangerous situation and you want to live (no one wants to harm the town know-nothing because of his sweet innocence).  I just don’t understand.  In this specific case, George versus Michele, I don’t understand how anyone could misunderstand his statement.  It just doesn’t make sense.
It’s fine to post victim news stories.  I mean obviously everyone loves stories about bullies and the bullied, but one thing is always required in the stories – the stories must be true!  This idiotic, totally fabricated bullshit story spread all over the net is completely false, and what annoys me is that most of the people that believe it will never realize it’s not true.  What annoys me even more is that even if they did read this post or heard a lengthy explanation of how and why Stephanopoulos did not threaten Bachmann, they’d find a way to claim he actually did.

4 comments

Oh my god, I don’t know what’s going on with me, but I’ve become obsessed with the HBO documentary “Bobby Fischer Against the World” that was released two weeks ago.  I’ve already watched it multiple times, and have since watched more footage of Bobby Fischer online and have read quite a bit.  Well I guess I haven’t just become obsessed with the documentary, but just Bobby Fischer in general.  I knew about the big match against Russia, and I knew he’d gone missing, and I even knew about all his anti-Semitic rants, but I had no idea just how crazy the whole story was.  His life story is truly insane but also truly remarkable.  It’s sad, but like… fucked up sad.  You end up both liking Bobby and hating Bobby.
First let me say, this is an excellent documentary, and I love me some documentaries.  It does a great job of covering his childhood.  There’s quite a bit of footage from his youth and his few family members.  We learn of the confusion with his father.  Apparently the man he thought was his father, who was also a man he’d never met, ends up not being his real father.  This mysterious man is not Jewish, but his mother is.  He’s well-aware of this and considers himself half-Jewish.  So he spends time with a man who takes him out occasionally, who reprimands him and worries about him like a father.  Then this guy, Paul Nemenyi, suddenly stops coming by. Bobby asks his mother what happened to Paul.  His crazy-ass mother tells him that Paul died, and oh by the way, “He was your real father.”  What the fuck?!  What kinda crazy-ass mindfuck is that to do your kid?!  Anyway, Nemenyi is Jewish.  Bobby is now aware that he is 100% Jewish.  For him to later become an anti-Semetic nut shouting about Jewish conspiracies is extra, extra crazy.  Okay, I got off on a family tangent there.  My point is that as a documentary alone, it’s a very good one.
The one complaint I have is that they did not cover his very obvious mental illness.  He was not just a cranky, bigoted chess genius.  I mean, there was clearly something wrong with the man.  Those interviewed, mostly his friends and other chessmasters, mostly chalk it up to a loss of childhood.  The Michael Jackson excuse?  Are you fucking kidding me?  I’m done with the bad childhood or no childhood thing.  That does not create the level of paranoia Fischer was experiencing.  Before he famously disappeared for twenty years he thought the Russians were after him, was scared of radiation coming through TVs, and thought he could be spied on through his teeth fillings.  Fischer wasn’t germaphobic like Howard Hughes, but like Hughes, Fischer’s real father, Paul Nemenyi, supposedly carried around a bar of soap in his pocket and would wash his hands after touching door knobs or whatever.  So some type of mental disorder may have a had a genetic component (?).  None of this was covered in this documentary, and I almost think the mental factor should be its own separate movie!
His mother was a Communist and had a very thick FBI file.  She had a valid reason to be paranoid because she was actually being watched by the government.  So this real paranoia he had as a child mixed with whatever mental illness as an adult is not good.  He seemed to be seeking for meaning in life, but from what I can tell he was very susceptible to cults or cult-like thinking, such as conspiratorial ideas.  It’s the whole they’re-out-to-get-you bullshit, which I cannot stand.  Oh my god, that shit pisses me off.  So he starts reading up on the fucking illuminati and the The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and the White Man’s Bible.  Yeah, so for someone who appears to be gullible, this idiocy is not the best reading for a happy and fulfilling life.  What’s funny is that many of these new world order, anti-jewish assholes online use Bobby Fischer as some sort of authority figure for their bullshit movement.  They quote him and put up videos of him ranting like a lunatic.  They’re basically trying to say, “See, even a genius like Bobby Fischer agrees with us!”  They fail to realize Fischer is mentally ill.  Dumbasses.
Anyway, the random online message board consensus is Bobby had Asperger’s syndrome.  Paranoia can be a symptom, but it isn’t known to be especially extreme like this.  This gullibility that Bobby very obviously had, to believe in such outlandish conspiracies, can also be part of Asperger’s, but I’m quite intrigued by his drive to seek them out.  That seems very different.  He willingly looked for books on Jewish and government conspiracies.  As he got older his paranoia seemed to alter from fear to obsession.  While maintaining his skill at chess, it seemed like his only other focuses were absurd Jewish conspiracies and anti-U.S. sentiments.  This is all he wanted to talk about.
Coincidentally, and almost funny, two things happened to Fischer that would only further his craziness.  So, he’s already this big anti-government guy, thinks there’s a conspiracy around every corner, etc.  In 1981 he was arrested in Pasadena for a bank robbery he didn’t commit, and was kept in jail for two days.  He then writes this diatribe about the ordeal claiming he was tortured there, and even titles the piece I Was Tortured in the Pasadena Jailhouse!  Then, after 20 years hiding from fame, he re-emerged in 1992 and played a game against his old Russian rival in Yugoslavia.  The problem is that all hell was breaking loose and there was a U.N. embargo, with sanctions on sports, and apparently chess is a sport for some strange reason.  As a U.S. citizen he wasn’t allowed to play there, but naturally, he played anyway, and was charged by the federal government.  He faced up to 10 years in prison, and would lose all the money from the game, which he of course won.  He obviously didn’t go back to America and became an expatriate.  So my point is that he’s this crazed government-is-out-to-get-you guy and then he’s mistakenly arrested and kicked out of the country.  Those are some crazy coincidences!
Anyway, I’m annoyed that no one ever took on Bobby Fischer as some sort of case study, to at least know what the hell was going on there.  Then I’m further annoyed that no one drugged his drinks or food with anti-psychotic medication, or whatever medication that may have helped him.  Haha, okay, that may be going a little too far, but you see what I mean.  The man was a genius with so much potential!  Someone should have done something to help him avoid this paranoid, conspiratorial, hateful thinking so he could’ve kept up the chess-fame thing or gone onto something productive back in the day.  That is, if anything was possible.  Clearly there was something wrong with him that medication may not have been able to remedy, but at the very least someone should’ve tried to control his reading habits, influenced him in positive ways, kept him socialized, etc.  I just feel like everyone gave up on him too easily, which of course was actually very easy, because Bobby had brainwashed himself into such a hateful, nasty person.  Why would anyone want to help him?  I understand why they gave up, and I would have too; I just wish they hadn’t.
The bulk of Fischer’s fame was throughout his 20s.  He was attractive, white, and always reasonably dressed.  In his 1972 World Championship match the chess enemy to beat was Russian (but of course in those days they were always Russian).  The fact that it was an American fighting a Russian for a world title during the Cold War was perfect timing!  It’s amazing how all the pieces were in place for something as unexpected as chess to take over pop culture, ya know?  What if he’d been overweight, prematurely balding, and wore highly unappealing thick glasses?  No one would’ve cared, right?  Well, maybe like a few hundred thousand Americans would’ve cared, but I highly doubt it would’ve reached the level of media coverage it got at the time.  From the interviews I’ve seen, hosts weren’t appreciating his chess talent, but were more focused on his personality as if he was just any ol’ celebrity.  His all-American handsomeness led the fame; with his genius skill being secondary and definitely under-appreciated by those creating that fame.  It’s highly doubtful a chess match will ever be aired in Times Square again… unless another chess-hottie with good style comes along and the opponent is a member of Al-Qaeda.

••• Besides the first video, which is a trailer for HBO’s “Bobby Fischer Against the World”, the other video biopics are from “Bobby Fischer: Anything to Win”, from the Game Show Network, and one is from ABC News •••

  HBO ••• “Bobby Fischer Against the World” official site
  NY Times ••• “Bobby Fischer Documentary, Like the Subject, Was Hard to Make”
  The Atlantic ••• “Bobby Fischer’s Pathetic Endgame • Paranoia, Hubris, and Hatred”
  Wikiquote ••• just scroll down the page a little to see what he turned into
  ChessGames ••• database of Fischer’s games • watch them played out! (requires Java)
  SparkChess ••• Play chess online, no need to download anything!

Write the first comment!

Protected:

June 8, 2011 1 COMMENT

Categorized in: Uncategorized

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:


1 comment

:lol: UPDATE: HOLY SHIT, FORGET EVERYTHING I SAID BELOW :lol:


O kay, everyone knows what happened with Anthony Weiner and the picture and Twitter, and the whole thing.  I just want to sort of analyze why he’s acting like such a weirdo.  At this point everyone has assumed that the underwear pic is him because he won’t simply respond “No” to the question “Is that your picture?”  I should first point out that I have not read every single fucking article, nor have I painstakingly watched every single fucking interview over and over like I’m trying to write a scientific journal on this nonsense, so this is just me bullshitting on a bullshit topic.  I have, however, come to the conclusion that he was hacked, leaving the only mystery to be the identity of the penis owner.
The source of the crotch shot… at least the source for it to be known on Twitter was @patriotusa76, a.k.a. Dan Wolfe.  As the story goes, this was then noticed by Breitbart, or maybe someone else saw it and then forwarded it to him, considering it to be right up his alley.  Breitbart then freaks the fuck out of course.  He does no checking whatsoever, no research, no validation, no nothing etc., and just goes public with the story.  What I find most remarkable is that he doesn’t seem to go to any trouble to really identify and legitimize Dan Wolfe before potentially embarrassing himself and his organization, but I digress.  So, now everyone freaks out.  Then the next few days we see Weiner answering various reporters’ questions like a guy with a massive database of crotch pictures.  In the middle of all this everyone is trying to get in touch with the guy who started this mess, “patriot” Dan Wolfe, and then he starts to freak the fuck out.  We learn ol’ Wolfie is having crazy relationship problems! – There’s something about an ex-girlfriend with mental problems and oh my god his wife is suing for custody of the children and everything he owns.  He won’t even talk to anyone on the phone.  Interestingly the ex-wife and ex-girlfriend are in cahoots and he’s terrified they are going to record him and use it against him.  If any of this insanity is true, why is he playing on Twitter obsessing over Congressman Weiner?  I mean, where are your priorities moron?
Okay, nevermind what happened, or even the hacking, and how stupid this whole thing is.  I want to know why Anthony Weiner is acting like a freak in interviews!  His picture or not his picture, most people in his position would likely just deny it’s their picture, but for some reason it’s as if he’s allowing the story to linger.  It’s almost as if he wants it to remain relevant.  If he doesn’t confirm or deny, and instead give curious answers, it leaves something to talk about on news programs and various talk shows, right?  That’s one possibility, I suppose, but who the hell knows if it’s right, or even why.  Surely there’s more to it than just a desire to be the center of attention.
One odd thing I’ve noticed is that when referring to this story, in most cases, they’ve referenced Breitbart as the source of the story.  Some reporters, hosts, etc. have criticized Breitbart when introducing the story, while others just make a note of it, but at the very least they point out how the information was released to the public.  I mean none of this would have gone so massively widespread in the media had it not been for Breitbart’s Big Government site.  In practically every instance of discussing this “incident”, at least early on, the name “Breitbart” was mentioned repeatedly.  Okay, getting to my point, for some peculiar reason, in the press conference and multiple interviews with Anthony Weiner he never mentions the name Andrew Breitbart.  Furthermore, those asking the questions don’t mention Breitbart either!  Isn’t that strange?  I’ll remind you I have not seen or read every little thing like I stated earlier.  I am not obsessed with this story or anything, so I could totally be mistaken, but from what I’ve gathered, everyone has mentioned Breitbart in regards to this mess, except Weiner, and those speaking to him publicly.  It’s as if he’s told interviewers, “I’ll speak with you, but do not ask me any questions about Andrew Breitbart”.  If that’s the case, that’s certainly noteworthy, right?  Is he attempting to keep the story relevant long enough while he secretly plans some elaborate attack on Breitbart and the mysterious Dan Wolfe? – Sort of like a you-think-you-got-me-but-you’re-the-one-that’s-screwed type of deal?  Perhaps I’ve seen too many movies.
I just don’t understand the logic of furthering an appearance of guilt, unless, unlike most human beings, he’s so honest that he actually has a problem with lying.  Haha.  I feel like there has to be some reasonable motive behind his weird behavior.  Everyone assumes his lack of denial automatically means the photograph is his, but if it was or wasn’t, most people would just say “no” and try to forget this ever happened.  I believe he consciously making this linger for some reason, and it’s really fucking strange!  Think of every single political sex scandal.  Hell, think of every celebrity sex scandal.  At first they always deny, then they run away and hide, and after a little while they finally admit fault.  This is one of those extremely rare situations where the accused answers with, “I don’t know”.  Why would anyone automatically assume guilt in a case like that?!  It goes completely against the norm.  It’s goes against everything we’ve been taught from high profile sex scandals enjoyed in the past! :P
As far as the actual hacking part of it goes, which is definitely what happened, Rachel Maddow covered it best.  I was quite annoyed that no one addressed this part of the situation as well as she did.  I guess sneaky computer stuff isn’t quite as salacious as penis talk and pondering over relations with “young girls”, but I found all of this quite fascinating:

  Salon ••• A “Weinergate” Timeline: Did Who Send What?
  The Smoking Gun ••• The Wolfe at Anthony Weiner’s Front Door
  PoliticsUSA ••• The Provocateur Behind WeinerGate Terrified He Will Be Exposed
  Cannonfire ••• Case Closed! Congressman Weiner Was Framed!

Write the first comment!