US 2008 Presidential Campaign Discussion Thread - Part 9 - Page 41 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-27-2008, 01:08 PM   #601
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I know who they have to please.

I don't think I made a false equivocation. People are pushing up Fox News over CNN and Rush has almost as many listeners as Oprah has viewers. There is a demand for a reason. People are hungry to see their point of view out there. How come Al Franken failed at radio? Because we don't need another left wing point of view. It's everywhere. We know what it is.

Why do you think An American Carol is out there? Because conservatives are trying to get into the domination of Hollywood. They know that media influences people and they are trying to compete.

This competition is going to help America. The left will have to engage in the right's ideas whether the like it or not.

you made a false equivocation. it's not like Fox is right and CNN is left. it is that Fox is right and CNN is centrist.

a demand for reason? it's a demand for entertainment, which is all cable political combat is.

your examples of left wing media failings are uninformed, and let's just see if "An American Carol" makes even half of what "Fahrenheit 911" made.

just who does NPR and PBS have to please?
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-27-2008, 01:28 PM   #602
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Right, I'm sure that rural Albertans are reading Paul Krugman's columns on a daily basis, the paragons of economic intellect that they are.

Your paranoia about "socialists" is actually quite funny, I think you'd feel more at home if this was the 1950s or 60s.

There is nothing confused about my political views. I am in corporate law, and I don't happen to think that the bottom 95% needs to carry the water for me because I've been financially successful in life. I grew up in extreme poverty and have done very well for myself but I have not forgotten where I came from and who I was and I would only hope that I can contribute to the opportunities of others who were in my position to achieve the same success rather than sneering at them from the top with a "I got mine, fuck you!" attitude.
Well I don't think it's paranoia. Just look at N. Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Vietnam, China. These are real places with millions of humans suffering under these ideas turned to policy. Once we adopt the liberal point of view the pressure will be to go more left. The left in modern western democracies are about different special interest groups who want to fleece the forgotten man (tax payer). Somebody has to say NO to these groups at some point.

Most socialists I've met in University, or even in work, pretty much hold certain beliefs. They hate people having freedom to do what they want (envy). They want more communal experiences of people coming together (envy). They believe in authority in a major way. Ironically they often hate it when they are below authority themselves (envy). They also believe in entitlements (envy) but ignore the cost to the taxpayer. If someone does well for themselves they often hate them without even meeting them (envy). Liberals who are weathy and successful often like charity and get involved so they can steer other people's envy away. (eg. Bill Gates) I prefer that people like this don't get into power because it would be intolerable, even if they have good intentions.

Not all Conservatives don't say "I got mine, fuck you!" They prize individual freedom. They also understand that if they wait for the government to help them that it's faster to help themselves first in many instances.

Conservatives understand that if you over tax the population you actually end up getting less tax revenue. This is something the left has yet to understand. Look up the Laffer curve if you want more info.

I don't read too many newspapers. I prefer books. I read articles online to keep up with current politics but books are better for economics. I like Hayek, Mises, Hazlitt. I also like public policy economists because they are aware of what is theoretical and what can be accomplished in modern democracies. I don't know too much about Paul Krugman. I believe we need government for catastrophic health care, K - high school education, and military. We want the middle class to be less dependent on government and feel the liberals and people farther to the left want the middle class to be dependent so they can run their lives. Basically the nightmare for conservatives is a society that is like a modern version of the middle ages where bureaucrats are like aristocrats and have lots of entitlements paid by people who don't work in government (private sector taxpayers). The social programs are like alms for the poor but don't really solve the problem.

Well as a Corporate Lawyer do you find mostly conservatives where you work? Most lawyers I've met like liberals. Lawyers usually like socialists because they usually create more complex bureaucracy and laws which in the short-term benefit lawyers.

I'm in accounting and I often have to stuggle with the same point of view. I'm more aware that a good economy means more jobs but accountants tend to think that more complex tax rules are good for them so they often support anyone who does that. As long as I have a job and save money I don't really care about choking the life out of clients like some accountants. We can finish the race to retirement from slow steady saving.
__________________

__________________
purpleoscar is online now  
Old 09-27-2008, 01:42 PM   #603
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
you made a false equivocation. it's not like Fox is right and CNN is left. it is that Fox is right and CNN is centrist.

a demand for reason? it's a demand for entertainment, which is all cable political combat is.

your examples of left wing media failings are uninformed, and let's just see if "An American Carol" makes even half of what "Fahrenheit 911" made.

just who does NPR and PBS have to please?
CNN was more leftwing before FoxNews came on board with their slant, but they are still more left wing. CNN is more defensive about Obama, and Fox News is more defensive about McCain. CNN did add some people like Beck to shore up ratings. Competition is good.

Yes TV is info-tainment, but unfortunately people get their points of view from entertainment (hollywood, Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, SNL, Late night shows, Rush, Hannity & Colmes) It matters how much variety of content is available. Today there is more content available of the political spectrum than there was 10 years ago.

Fahrenheit 911 did make money from Democrats mostly preaching to the choir. I expect An American Carol will have 90% conservatives attending.

Well if NPR and PBS don't like conservative points of view then all they have to do is please themselves. "Please conservatives don't cut government funding to us because we will have to supply a demand with our programming." It reminds me of Canada where taxpayers pay for movies nobody wants to see. There are people that basically make expensive home movies for cronies and family and make $50,000/year or more just doing that. No wonder they don't like conservatives because they would like to cut cushy jobs like that.
__________________
purpleoscar is online now  
Old 09-27-2008, 01:48 PM   #604
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Phew! This is fun guys. Keep it up. I have things to do so I'll be back next week. I'll try and see some of the responses you guys have. It's hard sometimes for me to justify 3 hours of typing but it's more fun than the typical bland conversations I have to put up with on a daily basis. It's also more fun to talk to people I disagree with than people who agree. It makes you sharp. I wish people would get more interested and read more.

Oh BTW Mr. Corporate lawyer. Yes Rush uses slogans but he obviously does a lot more than that. You will probably see more slogans and simplification in a televised debate. Such is life when there is so little air time. I wish there were more thoughful programming like Bill Buckley. A lot of political programming can be too entertainment centric and that can reduce content.
__________________
purpleoscar is online now  
Old 09-27-2008, 01:50 PM   #605
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
CNN was more leftwing before FoxNews came on board with their slant, but they are still more left wing. CNN is more defensive about Obama, and Fox News is more defensive about McCain. CNN did add some people like Beck to shore up ratings. Competition is good.

no, this simply isn't true. please show me examples of how CNN is "left-wing." they aren't. in fact, the network bends over backwards to try to appear unbiased and fair to the point where, if anything, they skew to the right. a perfect example has been Sarah Palin. it's not that she's committed gaffes, its that she doesn't have any basic knowledge of international affairs. so CNN covers this. and in an attempt to be fair, they bring up a Joe Biden "gaffe" where he said something silly -- the Great Depression comment -- that's factually inaccurate, sure, but has no bearing on his understanding of the vice presidency or economics as a whole. what has happened here, and happens often, is that by trying to be "fair," they do what you do -- pretend that everything is equal when, factually, they are not. and the effect of this is to pull everything, at least in this election cycle, to the right.

the addition of Beck, when there is no left wing counterpart -- though you'll note that Beck is on CNN Headline and not CNN proper -- is a perfect example of a network panicking because someone called them left, and so they overcorrect and bring everything to the right while dumbing down the overall quality of debate.





Quote:
Well if NPR and PBS don't like conservative points of view then all they have to do is please themselves. "Please conservatives don't cut government funding to us because we will have to supply a demand with our programming." It reminds me of Canada where taxpayers pay for movies nobody wants to see. There are people that basically make expensive home movies for cronies and family and make $50,000/year or more just doing that. No wonder they don't like conservatives because they would like to cut cushy jobs like that.

it's because they want to lure American studios to make TV and movies in canada so they can support the canadian film industry in Vancouver and Toronto and the subsidies wind up hurting Americans.

but the point is this: go watch Jim Lehrer and tell me if you can find a more straightforward, intelligent, and, most importantly, non-hysterical newscast.

what drives cable, and what especially drives Fox News, is the sense of hysteria around any little blip on the news scene. ratings are driven not by being right or left but by giving the viewer a reason to watch, and hysteria is the best way to do that.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-27-2008, 02:21 PM   #606
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 04:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Well my assumption is often correct. Most people do rely on slogans. Why do you think they are used so often? That's why I asked you the question to be sure where you're coming from. I can't read your mind.
I think they're used so often because they rally bases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I understand your opinion on wiretaps but I hope there is much more deviation from conservatives then that. BTW not all conservatives agree with torture (McCain).
I disagree with conservatives on every issue, I believe. I cannot think of one where I agree with them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
The reason for the wiretaps is because war has changed since the 1800's. Guerilla warfare is different. When people dress in plain clothes, infiltrate your free society and then attack how do you catch them? Attacking before we get attacked becomes more important because of the damage one attack can do. The wiretapping is to check on people who communicate with known terrorists so we can do something about it. Thanks to Bush there hasn't been a successful attack in the U.S. since 9 11. Wiretapping is a part of spying. I hope you don't think the U.S. should dismantle it's spy agency because of wiretapping. You can't be much of a spy without wiretapping.
"Thanks to Bush there hasn't been a successful attack in the U.S. since 9 11."

Quote:
Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a
charm.
Lisa: That's spacious reasoning, Dad.
Homer: Thank you, dear.
Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.
Homer: Oh, how does it work?
Lisa: It doesn't work.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: It's just a stupid rock.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?
Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
When it comes to torture I don't think plain clothes enemies should be treated the same as our citizens. This is something the left introduced recently. In WWII if there was a NAZI dressed in plain clothes and caught he would be shot. The Geneva convention was for people in uniform. We can't be chivalrous against an enemy that pretends to be a civilian and stabs us in the back.
Here's the thing: you don't know if they're even an enemy. They're merely a suspect. They haven't been proven guilty by trial.

It's not as simple as a plain clothes guy with a bomb walking out in the street and getting arrested before he can do damage or something. Most of these arrests of "enemies" are only suspects based on varying levels of evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Now I'm against the torture that the U.S. is doing mainly because it's not harsh enough to get information out of them. If we are not prepared to get violent with them waterboarding is not going to do it. It's better to avoid it in that case. At minimum they need to be detained. Despite what lawyers say in regards to Guantanemo Bay and the supposed innocent people. A lot of those so called "innocent" people aren't that innocent and are at minimum affiliated with terrorist groups even if they haven't successfully killed anyone. If we let them all go we are endangering our soldiers and citizens in the name of political correctness.
Wait. You're saying you're against torture because it's not torturous enough? I'm going to refrain from responding until I get a clarification.

The rest of the post can be linked to my point above, about how you're torturing people you don't even know are guilty.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-27-2008, 03:34 PM   #607
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,296
Local Time: 04:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Lawyers usually like socialists because they usually create more complex bureaucracy and laws which in the short-term benefit lawyers.
You make pronouncements like they are facts when it's not true at all.

In a socialist world, you'd have minimal corporate law work so you're 100% wrong here on who would benefit. Why don't you take a look at those socialist countries you've been ranting about and tell me exactly how large their business law bar is?

Do you know when corp lawyers got rich? When the right went and deregulated everything. During the housing boom, there was so much money flowing into the firms that you wouldn't believe. The M&A activity was at such a high point that you couldn't get enough people to do all the work. So don't tell me what a corporate lawyer would prefer, when you have no idea at all. Deregulation by the right = when corp law firms roll in the dough. I find it very strange that as an accountant you don't comprehend this.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 09-27-2008, 03:59 PM   #608
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 03:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I can't ignore my experiences in University which are not uncommon. Other students were targeted in a similar style that you see in that movie "The Lives of Others."
You heard it here first, ladies and gents. Those Marxist-loving liberals go after conservatives in college like the Stasi spied on its citizens in East Germany.

That is the single most ridiculous statement you've made in here, and I simply can't take you seriously anymore. If your writing style in those classes is anything like your style in here, where you make wild accusations and pronounce things as if they were fact without any compelling evidence to back up your claims, then I don't think it's the Stasi-like tactics of the professors that you should be blaming for your lack of full marks.

By the way, what grade are you currently in?
__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 09-27-2008, 07:22 PM   #609
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:16 AM
Quote:
I disagree with conservatives on every issue, I believe. I cannot think of one where I agree with them.
Do you still consider yourself an independent, or are you just not a conservative.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 09-28-2008, 11:40 AM   #610
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 09:16 PM
Well yesterday I got rained on and crushed in a crowd of 26,000 but I was 2 feet from Obama and Biden when they did the ropeline



Obama and Biden stuck it out in the rain too, they were great.
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 09-28-2008, 11:51 AM   #611
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 04:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
Do you still consider yourself an independent, or are you just not a conservative.
Not really, anymore. I'd certainly prefer to call myself that, since I think labeling yourself one way or the other boxes you in a bit, but I don't think I can honestly say I'm not liberal.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-28-2008, 12:01 PM   #612
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
no, this simply isn't true. please show me examples of how CNN is "left-wing." they aren't. in fact, the network bends over backwards to try to appear unbiased and fair to the point where, if anything, they skew to the right. a perfect example has been Sarah Palin. it's not that she's committed gaffes, its that she doesn't have any basic knowledge of international affairs. so CNN covers this. and in an attempt to be fair, they bring up a Joe Biden "gaffe" where he said something silly -- the Great Depression comment -- that's factually inaccurate, sure, but has no bearing on his understanding of the vice presidency or economics as a whole. what has happened here, and happens often, is that by trying to be "fair," they do what you do -- pretend that everything is equal when, factually, they are not. and the effect of this is to pull everything, at least in this election cycle, to the right.
Obviously if CNN is switching it's because of fox news. You just admitted that they were reacting. Why were they reacting?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
the addition of Beck, when there is no left wing counterpart -- though you'll note that Beck is on CNN Headline and not CNN proper -- is a perfect example of a network panicking because someone called them left, and so they overcorrect and bring everything to the right while dumbing down the overall quality of debate.
This goes back to the above point. MSNBC didn't do that and look at their ratings. If you don't give them what they want you get low ratings.


it's because they want to lure American studios to make TV and movies in canada so they can support the canadian film industry in Vancouver and Toronto and the subsidies wind up hurting Americans.

but the point is this: go watch Jim Lehrer and tell me if you can find a more straightforward, intelligent, and, most importantly, non-hysterical newscast.

what drives cable, and what especially drives Fox News, is the sense of hysteria around any little blip on the news scene. ratings are driven not by being right or left but by giving the viewer a reason to watch, and hysteria is the best way to do that.[/QUOTE]

PBS? Are those the guys that put on the debate? They had people in the audience that were supposedly undecided and they were talking about how McCain looked old and how his gestures are like Bush. Did they even understand what any of the candidates were talking about? Talk about dumbed down politics as anything on cable news. Just Democrat talking points. I don't think they even represent the undecided in the U.S. at all. In CBC (PBS equivalent in Canada) the debate was reported practically as McCain not saying much and Obama attacking him all the time. That's not what I saw when I watched the debate. Yes, histrionic or not government news is biased towards government. The only reason why people like it is because they make the points that fit their view. So it seems fair. A conservative will find the holes. A non-conservative may think "Right on!"

Lehrer is better than Moyers but the coverage is still what it always was. They were even pushing a WWII documentary that does a moral equivalency between the U.S. and Japan. Brutal. Sounds like Clint Eastwood's point of view. I wonder if the U.S. dropped the bomb on Hilter would people be looking at that as morally equivalent?

We agree on news being mostly hysterical. Yes it is. Adding comedians doesn't help either side. People should get other sources like books which have more detail and bibliographies for further study.
__________________
purpleoscar is online now  
Old 09-28-2008, 12:12 PM   #613
Refugee
 
bonoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Edmonton, Canada- Charlestown, Ireland
Posts: 1,398
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Quote:
McCain retracts Palin's Pakistan comments
Posted: 11:15 AM ET

From CNN's Emily Sherman


WASHINGTON (CNN)— Sen. John McCain retracted Sarah Palin's stance on Pakistan Sunday morning, after the Alaska governor appeared to back Sen. Barack Obama's support for unilateral strikes inside Pakistan against terrorists

"She would not…she understands and has stated repeatedly that we're not going to do anything except in America's national security interest," McCain told ABC's George Stephanopoulos of Palin. "In all due respect, people going around and… sticking a microphone while conversations are being held, and then all of a sudden that's—that's a person's position… This is a free country, but I don't think most Americans think that that's a definitve policy statement made by Governor Palin."

Saturday night, while on a stop for cheesesteaks in South Philadelphia, Palin was questioned by a Temple graduate student about whether the U.S. should cross the border from Afghanistan into Pakistan.

"If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should," Palin said.

During Friday night's presidential debate in Mississippi, Obama took a similar stance and condemned the Bush administration for failing to act on the possibility terrorists are in Pakistan.

"Nobody talked about attacking Pakistan," Obama said after McCain accused the Illinois senator of wanting to announce an invasion. "If the United States has al Qaeda, bin Laden, top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out."

McCain emphasized Sunday, Palin "shares" his view on the matter.
Gotta love it!

She doesn't even retract it herself. McCain must be getting fed up!
__________________
bonoman is offline  
Old 09-28-2008, 12:14 PM   #614
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,730
Local Time: 01:16 PM
.... McCain has to take back Palin's words for her? Why not put HER out there to say "sorry, pardon my gaffe, not what I meant, I was blinded by cheese steaks." That's just bizarre.
__________________
corianderstem is offline  
Old 09-28-2008, 12:16 PM   #615
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 03:16 PM
So exactly who is being sexist again?
__________________

__________________
Diemen is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com