Oh now our frops are soooo sorry. Look at this article: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/5602.html Politico says they have a new strategy. It's to actually hold the incompetent lawbreakers among them accountable. Uh huh. There would be how many left? Zero.
And they are indignant over Craig. Indignation from Fox Republican officials and politicians (frops)? You MUST be kidding me. What about the illegal warrantless spying? What about the illegal politicization of the Justice Department, with our lying purging personal lawyer to Bush and now ex-Attorney General? What about the TORTURE! For heavens sake, if somebody told me I'd be writing about rampant torture condoned by our President 7 years ago I'd have told them they must be on crack. What about the lies to goad us into needless wars? Now our President is stuck on Iran - only problem is that way more foreign fighters caught in Iraq, to the tune of 50%, are from Saudi Arabia. It's the wrong country once again for our incompetent crooked frops.
So you tell me the frops are indignant over an attempted blowjob. Again. I tell you they haven't learned a thing. They haven't learned a single thing. They are hopeless. The sooner we can vote all of them out the better.
heck the real history channel is not much different.
sometimes i think it should change its name to the 'history of christianity' or the 'history that only concerns americans' channel.
it has some pretty strange programming on. lots about the crusades, noah's ark, dead sea scrolls that sort of stuff. maybe soon a "journey that traces the footsteps of moses lost in the desert" series to last for 40 years (or however long that directionless old dude wandered around.)
i thought history channel was a disney venture but i dug around a bit and it's not mentioned. i did find that history channel is one of group consisting of: A&E (arts and entertainment=dog the bounty hunter), biography, history int'l and en espanol and military history channels. found under "corporate information". nowhere does it mention disney/abc. BUT at the wiki page on disney it says that it owns 37.5% of a&e which i don't understand as a&e is a member of a group of cable tv channels. hum?
just an aside disney also owns the discovery channel.
Revisionism is a misunderstood term. People use it as a label on their critics when their version of history isn't in align with the government who writes it. RE-visioning can mean simply using sources to describe history that classroom textbooks left out or were censored.
Didn't anyone read A People's History by Howard Zinn? That's an example of revisionism.
heck the real history channel is not much different.
sometimes i think it should change its name to the 'history of christianity' or the 'history that only concerns americans' channel.
it has some pretty strange programming on. lots about the crusades, noah's ark, dead sea scrolls that sort of stuff. maybe soon a "journey that traces the footsteps of moses lost in the desert" series to last for 40 years (or however long that directionless old dude wandered around.)
i thought history channel was a disney venture but i dug around a bit and it's not mentioned. i did find that history channel is one of group consisting of: A&E (arts and entertainment=dog the bounty hunter), biography, history int'l and en espanol and military history channels. found under "corporate information". nowhere does it mention disney/abc. BUT at the wiki page on disney it says that it owns 37.5% of a&e which i don't understand as a&e is a member of a group of cable tv channels. hum?
just an aside disney also owns the discovery channel.
Yes, the History and Discovery channels have gone downhill. The Science channel seems to be heading in that direction too.
Revisionism is a misunderstood term. People use it as a label on their critics when their version of history isn't in align with the government who writes it. RE-visioning can mean simply using sources to describe history that classroom textbooks left out or were censored.
Didn't anyone read A People's History by Howard Zinn? That's an example of revisionism.
Did Jesus really ride a dinosaur? How did they get the saddle on it? And the T-Rex must have been a bitch to keep under control on the Arc.
Anyone know where I could send all my money this evening to help Jesus . . . he also apparently is a bad money manager . . . always needs the stuff.
I agree with Jenny 'O and the History of Christianity and other white america themes on the History Channel, Miltary, etc. Corporatists, Christianists and Crackers are driving. are driving. I am also seeing that Discovery health treats women's vaginas like a clown car. The number of multiple birth programs is astounding.
heck the real history channel is not much different.
sometimes i think it should change its name to the 'history of christianity' or the 'history that only concerns americans' channel.
it has some pretty strange programming on. lots about the crusades, noah's ark, dead sea scrolls that sort of stuff. maybe soon a "journey that traces the footsteps of moses lost in the desert" series to last for 40 years (or however long that directionless old dude wandered around.)
i thought history channel was a disney venture but i dug around a bit and it's not mentioned. i did find that history channel is one of group consisting of: A&E (arts and entertainment=dog the bounty hunter), biography, history int'l and en espanol and military history channels. found under "corporate information". nowhere does it mention disney/abc. BUT at the wiki page on disney it says that it owns 37.5% of a&e which i don't understand as a&e is a member of a group of cable tv channels. hum?
just an aside disney also owns the discovery channel.
Yes, the History and Discovery channels have gone downhill. The Science channel seems to be heading in that direction too.
Remember when the History channel tried to play the last epidsode of "The Men Who Killed Kennedy"? E Howard Hunt confirmed the contents of that episode in his death bed confession which I read in the April 2007 Rolling Stone.
Revisionism is a misunderstood term. People use it as a label on their critics when their version of history isn't in align with the government who writes it. RE-visioning can mean simply using sources to describe history that classroom textbooks left out or were censored.
Didn't anyone read A People's History by Howard Zinn? That's an example of revisionism.
Did Jesus really ride a dinosaur? How did they get the saddle on it? And the T-Rex must have been a bitch to keep under control on the Arc.
Anyone know where I could send all my money this evening to help Jesus . . . he also apparently is a bad money manager . . . always needs the stuff.
Main Entry: re·vi·sion·ism
Pronunciation: ri-'vi-zh&-"ni-z&m
Function: noun
1 : a movement in revolutionary Marxian socialism favoring an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary spirit
2 : advocacy of revision (as of a doctrine or policy or in historical analysis)
- re·vi·sion·ist /-nist/ noun or adjective
the History channel should be called the military industrial complex channel, with over 3 regular weapons or military program or future weapons, one sided pro-pentagon version from everything from Fallujah, where it's told as if the Pentagon wrote the history, the history of Saddam and Iraq, 90% is left out, and it contained all pentagon propaganda.
I've seen a dramatic shift to pentagon propaganda, in the last couple of years, you might as well include the JFK assassination, even though the MAJORITY of people think it was an inside job, of course the revisionist history channel, reads their script word for word .
I think the History Channel was confused somewhere along the line for Jesus His Story Channel. Or more accurately the Pissed-off Jesus Kicks Infidel Ass, His Story Channel.
that was too funny, dinos in the old west, there were so many other 'historical revisions' they could have given that would have been funny, hopefully it'll pop up again sometime with new revisions.
that was too funny, dinos in the old west, there were so many other 'historical revisions' they could have given that would have been funny, hopefully it'll pop up again sometime with new revisions.
Those dinos weren't in the old west. That would be silly. No, they were in Eden and lived with man at least until the time Noah carried them on the ark. Before the fall, they were friendly and vegetarians, too. Even the T-Rexes and Velociraptors ate veggies. Yeah, granted it may have been a little hard to eat veggies with those choppers, but hey biblical literalists wouldn't just pull these "theories" out of their behinds. Would they? After the fall, during old testament times, they were hardly noticed except when once or twice in the bible they were mentioned, as the "behemoth", which was obviously and incontrovertibly an Apatosaurus. And of course the old testament people rode on the backs of dinos.
Sorry, I can't continue without laughing my ass off, but these things really are believed by a large percentage of right-wingers in America.
Revisionism is a misunderstood term. People use it as a label on their critics when their version of history isn't in align with the government who writes it. RE-visioning can mean simply using sources to describe history that classroom textbooks left out or were censored.
Didn't anyone read A People's History by Howard Zinn? That's an example of revisionism.
Did Jesus really ride a dinosaur? How did they get the saddle on it? And the T-Rex must have been a bitch to keep under control on the Arc.
Anyone know where I could send all my money this evening to help Jesus . . . he also apparently is a bad money manager . . . always needs the stuff.
Well, you can laugh about Jesus on the horsy dino, but just remember God planted dinosaur bones to test our Faith.
Right.... uh huh. What kind of god plays practical jokes like that? I'm not sure that's the kind of god I want to put my faith in... I mean here you are trusting a god and bam he pulls the interplanetary rug out from under you. So why should we trust him/her/it again?
Main Entry: re·vi·sion·ism
Pronunciation: ri-'vi-zh&-"ni-z&m
Function: noun
1 : a movement in revolutionary Marxian socialism favoring an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary spirit
2 : advocacy of revision (as of a doctrine or policy or in historical analysis)
- re·vi·sion·ist /-nist/ noun or adjective
Note the parsing of the definition of "revisionist" as strictly a Marxist term. Done, no doubt, to conjure the most negative connotation to the telling and retelling of what history is without adding any substance. In short, if one disagrees with the History Channel version, it follows that one would have Stalin's portrait prominently displayed...!
This is not debate but a street fight. Bushevik , corporatist Rethuglicans are street fighters. Expect nothing else.
Sat, 09/01/2007 - 08:14 — art guerrilla (not verified)
1. joe, you are playing word games: of course 'revision' can connote a number of things which include a neutral cast of merely 'correcting'; *however* -like any number of code words or shorthand phrases- in this context, it has come to mean -by both sides- rewriting his story to suit your own propaganda purposes...
please adjust your memes accordingly...
2. i forget the poster, but they pretty much make no bones about the 'his story channel' being the 'merikan his story channel; there is -after all- a 'his story international' channel as well (only *slightly* more accurate in pointing out uncomfortable factoids)...
3. in those few areas of his story where i have some familiarity, i have found the his story channel productions to grossly gloss over (if not whitewash) MANY aspects of the stories they tell; generally following the amerikans = white hat, barbarians (all others) = black hat formula with minor cavils...
4. it is laughably consistent how they recount MANY his storical incidences where amerikan troops are involved, where the presence of said troops is merely ASSUMED to be a natural state of affairs... there is no explanation for WHY the amerikan troops got blowed up halfway around the globe; they just were there, some black-hatted furriners kilt'em daid, and we HAD TO kick us some ass in 'self defense'...
what part of 'defending democracy' don't you understand, com-symp ?
5. for stories concerning spook skullduggery, 'dirty tricks', coups, etc WHICH HAVE BEEN DOCUMENTED AND/OR ADMITTED TO, the his story channel productions will STILL refer to said incidents as if it is speculation, or not proven, or just some sort of rumor, really...
6. of course, nine one one will not get a fair hearing in ANY mainstream media or gummint institution, until the walls come crumbling down...
come the revolution, all secrets will be revealed...
I remember when the old nickname for the History Channel was "The Hitler Channel", since they used to air old WWII documentaries nonstop. Now they've branched out into weird fundie stuff, and off the wall cult crap like Nostradamus' predictions and the "truth" behind the DaVinci code.
Bill Maher announces the new channel's Friday night lineup.
Oh now our frops are soooo sorry. Look at this article: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/5602.html Politico says they have a new strategy. It's to actually hold the incompetent lawbreakers among them accountable. Uh huh. There would be how many left? Zero.
And they are indignant over Craig. Indignation from Fox Republican officials and politicians (frops)? You MUST be kidding me. What about the illegal warrantless spying? What about the illegal politicization of the Justice Department, with our lying purging personal lawyer to Bush and now ex-Attorney General? What about the TORTURE! For heavens sake, if somebody told me I'd be writing about rampant torture condoned by our President 7 years ago I'd have told them they must be on crack. What about the lies to goad us into needless wars? Now our President is stuck on Iran - only problem is that way more foreign fighters caught in Iraq, to the tune of 50%, are from Saudi Arabia. It's the wrong country once again for our incompetent crooked frops.
So you tell me the frops are indignant over an attempted blowjob. Again. I tell you they haven't learned a thing. They haven't learned a single thing. They are hopeless. The sooner we can vote all of them out the better.
funny...but sad
lollercaust
www.blackswamparts.org
Check it out.....
Absolutely amazing.
mono right channel audio is brutal, is it my PC messing up? Bad cable? Nope just crap off the internet.
Wes @ 7:
There is no right channel audio.
heck the real history channel is not much different.
sometimes i think it should change its name to the 'history of christianity' or the 'history that only concerns americans' channel.
it has some pretty strange programming on. lots about the crusades, noah's ark, dead sea scrolls that sort of stuff. maybe soon a "journey that traces the footsteps of moses lost in the desert" series to last for 40 years (or however long that directionless old dude wandered around.)
i thought history channel was a disney venture but i dug around a bit and it's not mentioned. i did find that history channel is one of group consisting of: A&E (arts and entertainment=dog the bounty hunter), biography, history int'l and en espanol and military history channels. found under "corporate information". nowhere does it mention disney/abc. BUT at the wiki page on disney it says that it owns 37.5% of a&e which i don't understand as a&e is a member of a group of cable tv channels. hum?
just an aside disney also owns the discovery channel.
Revisionism is a misunderstood term. People use it as a label on their critics when their version of history isn't in align with the government who writes it. RE-visioning can mean simply using sources to describe history that classroom textbooks left out or were censored.
Didn't anyone read A People's History by Howard Zinn? That's an example of revisionism.
JD21 has it right
when YOUR media is talking about 'vick' or 'mining disasters' or ANYTHING AT ALL
what are they doing in the BACKGROUND???
This would be hilarious...if it weren't such a damn accurate depiction of something Murdoch would produce for his Fox demographic.
The All The History We Need You Need To Know Channel
Jenny'O @ 8:
Yes, the History and Discovery channels have gone downhill. The Science channel seems to be heading in that direction too.
joe @ 9:
Did Jesus really ride a dinosaur? How did they get the saddle on it? And the T-Rex must have been a bitch to keep under control on the Arc.
Anyone know where I could send all my money this evening to help Jesus . . . he also apparently is a bad money manager . . . always needs the stuff.
I agree with Jenny 'O and the History of Christianity and other white america themes on the History Channel, Miltary, etc. Corporatists, Christianists and Crackers are driving. are driving. I am also seeing that Discovery health treats women's vaginas like a clown car. The number of multiple birth programs is astounding.
Otay @ 13:
Remember when the History channel tried to play the last epidsode of "The Men Who Killed Kennedy"? E Howard Hunt confirmed the contents of that episode in his death bed confession which I read in the April 2007 Rolling Stone.
The Last Confessions of E. Howard Hunt
E Ryno @ 14:
Take your meds today?
I hope this helps!
revisionism
One entry found for revisionism.
Main Entry: re·vi·sion·ism
Pronunciation: ri-'vi-zh&-"ni-z&m
Function: noun
1 : a movement in revolutionary Marxian socialism favoring an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary spirit
2 : advocacy of revision (as of a doctrine or policy or in historical analysis)
- re·vi·sion·ist /-nist/ noun or adjective
the History channel should be called the military industrial complex channel, with over 3 regular weapons or military program or future weapons, one sided pro-pentagon version from everything from Fallujah, where it's told as if the Pentagon wrote the history, the history of Saddam and Iraq, 90% is left out, and it contained all pentagon propaganda.
I've seen a dramatic shift to pentagon propaganda, in the last couple of years, you might as well include the JFK assassination, even though the MAJORITY of people think it was an inside job, of course the revisionist history channel, reads their script word for word .
I think the History Channel was confused somewhere along the line for Jesus His Story Channel. Or more accurately the Pissed-off Jesus Kicks Infidel Ass, His Story Channel.
that was too funny, dinos in the old west, there were so many other 'historical revisions' they could have given that would have been funny, hopefully it'll pop up again sometime with new revisions.
LOL. Seems they left out Rove's documentary on how Bush will be remembered as a really good president too.
A.Political @ 21:
Those dinos weren't in the old west. That would be silly. No, they were in Eden and lived with man at least until the time Noah carried them on the ark. Before the fall, they were friendly and vegetarians, too. Even the T-Rexes and Velociraptors ate veggies. Yeah, granted it may have been a little hard to eat veggies with those choppers, but hey biblical literalists wouldn't just pull these "theories" out of their behinds. Would they? After the fall, during old testament times, they were hardly noticed except when once or twice in the bible they were mentioned, as the "behemoth", which was obviously and incontrovertibly an Apatosaurus. And of course the old testament people rode on the backs of dinos.
Sorry, I can't continue without laughing my ass off, but these things really are believed by a large percentage of right-wingers in America.
joe @ 17:
Yes
Did anybody else notice Jesus' big, green penis? If you didn't, watch the video again.
classic video
This was as usual ..funny...I like the part when Mike Gravel called the Preznit a mental midget....too true.
Well, you can laugh about Jesus on the horsy dino, but just remember God planted dinosaur bones to test our Faith.
StirFry @ 28:
Right.... uh huh. What kind of god plays practical jokes like that? I'm not sure that's the kind of god I want to put my faith in... I mean here you are trusting a god and bam he pulls the interplanetary rug out from under you. So why should we trust him/her/it again?
Nice vid, what's it from?
StirFry @ 28:
I thought he planted them here to make pork and broccoli stirfry.
joe @ 18:
Note the parsing of the definition of "revisionist" as strictly a Marxist term. Done, no doubt, to conjure the most negative connotation to the telling and retelling of what history is without adding any substance. In short, if one disagrees with the History Channel version, it follows that one would have Stalin's portrait prominently displayed...!
This is not debate but a street fight. Bushevik , corporatist Rethuglicans are street fighters. Expect nothing else.
...
1. joe, you are playing word games: of course 'revision' can connote a number of things which include a neutral cast of merely 'correcting'; *however* -like any number of code words or shorthand phrases- in this context, it has come to mean -by both sides- rewriting his story to suit your own propaganda purposes...
please adjust your memes accordingly...
2. i forget the poster, but they pretty much make no bones about the 'his story channel' being the 'merikan his story channel; there is -after all- a 'his story international' channel as well (only *slightly* more accurate in pointing out uncomfortable factoids)...
3. in those few areas of his story where i have some familiarity, i have found the his story channel productions to grossly gloss over (if not whitewash) MANY aspects of the stories they tell; generally following the amerikans = white hat, barbarians (all others) = black hat formula with minor cavils...
4. it is laughably consistent how they recount MANY his storical incidences where amerikan troops are involved, where the presence of said troops is merely ASSUMED to be a natural state of affairs... there is no explanation for WHY the amerikan troops got blowed up halfway around the globe; they just were there, some black-hatted furriners kilt'em daid, and we HAD TO kick us some ass in 'self defense'...
what part of 'defending democracy' don't you understand, com-symp ?
5. for stories concerning spook skullduggery, 'dirty tricks', coups, etc WHICH HAVE BEEN DOCUMENTED AND/OR ADMITTED TO, the his story channel productions will STILL refer to said incidents as if it is speculation, or not proven, or just some sort of rumor, really...
6. of course, nine one one will not get a fair hearing in ANY mainstream media or gummint institution, until the walls come crumbling down...
come the revolution, all secrets will be revealed...
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
whatever, I only watch history channel for "cities of the underworld"
I remember when the old nickname for the History Channel was "The Hitler Channel", since they used to air old WWII documentaries nonstop. Now they've branched out into weird fundie stuff, and off the wall cult crap like Nostradamus' predictions and the "truth" behind the DaVinci code.
katecontinued @ 15:
Definitely. Why are we celebrating women who have litters?
It was funny but I don't watch that channel.....heck I don't watch much tv.
[...] This would be even funnier if it were not true - sadly it is all too true. Watch this clip over at Crooks and Liars [...]