Glenn Beck Has A Dream

[phillyfan26]

CNN is by far the most reasonable and moderate of the news channels. MSNBC and Fox are both very partisan.

[daygloeyes2]

Originally Posted by U2isthebest

That would sting if I actually liked Keith Olbermann. I may agree with his political leanings, but he's no more of a journalist than the gang over at FOX. He's an entertainer and a douche-y one at that, just like Glenn.

Agreed.

[BVS]

More Beck hypocrisy?

What if it's Beck with a tax 'accident'? - Kenneth P. Vogel - POLITICO.com

[U2isthebest]

Originally Posted by VintagePunk

I've said the same thing on here numerous times, and yet the myth that we're all on the Olbermann bandwagon persists.

It just proves how many on the Right are on the Beck/Hannity/O'Reilly/Coulter/Limbaugh/Malkin/Ingraham etc. fan list. These people have about as much political insight as my cat, but they're worshipped by the GOP. It's the reason their party has no direction.

[Bono's shades]

I liked Keith Olbermann back when he was one of the few people in the media calling out the Bush administration on its b.s., but now I find him tiresome. Rachel Maddow is much funnier and far less pompous.

[U2isthebest]

Originally Posted by Bono's shades

Rachel Maddow is much funnier and far less pompous.

This.

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by phillyfan26

CNN is by far the most reasonable and moderate of the news channels. MSNBC and Fox are both very partisan.

[INDY500]

Cable News Ratings for Monday, January 11, 2010

P2+ Prime Time
FNC – 2.662,000 viewers
CNN – 648,000 viewers
MSNBC –715,000 viewers
CNBC – 296,000 viewers
HLN –595,000 viewers

5PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
Glenn Beck – 2,786,000 viewers (709,000) (1,210,000)
Situation Room—668,000 viewers (147,000) (249,000)
Hardball w/ C. Matthews —443,000 viewers (82,000) (188,000)

8PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
The O’Reilly Factor – 3,499,000 viewers (932,000) (1,600,000)
Campbell Brown – 564,000 viewers (133,000) (216,000)
Countdown w/ K. Olbermann – 909,000 viewers (232,000) (486,000)

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Look, the great thing of Fox News is it broke the monopoly of the liberal media. That's the reason why it is so wildly successful.

I once said years ago that the genius of Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch is to have discovered a niche of American broadcasting audience in news, namely, half of the American people.

And those that live in the warm liberal cocoon of pop culture and academia will never understand that.

[coolian2]

you sound like you're saying academia is a bad thing

[INDY500]

Originally Posted by coolian2

you sound like you're saying academia is a bad thing

I spent 6 years in college albiet in Oklahoma during the Reagan years. Liberal Arts that teach students how to think. Good. Liberal Arts that teach them what to think. Not so good.

For instance, speech codes on campus should be, if anything, less restrictive, not more.

[phillyfan26]

Originally Posted by INDY500

And those that live in the warm liberal cocoon of pop culture and academia will never understand that.

Half of America is stupid. Social conservatism is an inherently stupid concept.

[INDY500]

Originally Posted by phillyfan26

Half of America is stupid.

Half of America may well be less intelligent or less learned than you. But stupid? Is that how you would wish to be described by those smarter than YOU? Life is too precious to live as a misanthrope and your too young to be a curmudgeon. How's about a little brotherly love for your fellow citizens.

Social conservatism is an inherently stupid concept.

... to any teenager.

[phillyfan26]

Originally Posted by INDY500

Half of America may well be less intelligent or less learned than you. But stupid? Is that how you would wish to be described by those smarter than YOU? Life is too precious to live as a misanthrope and your too young to be a curmudgeon. How's about a little brotherly love for your fellow citizens.



... to any teenager.

I can understand fiscally conservative. But socially conservative? Anything that celebrates tradition simply because it's tradition is a stupid idea, and that's all social conservatives do. Gay marriage? They're not different from me, they're wrong. Death penalty? They're not different from me, they're wrong. Just wrong. I can prove it with facts and arguments based on realities in this world. Both of them. It's so incredibly frustrating that I have to labeled close-minded simply because I call it what it is. Close-minded is something else.

Melon is right when he says that your defense for yourself now is not a defense based on reality; rather, it's an offense against those calling it like it is, saying that the problem is them and not you.

And your only other defense is that a lot of people agree with you or people have agreed with you in the past. That's it, and it's either lazy or stupid.

[INDY500]

Originally Posted by phillyfan26

I can understand fiscally conservative. But socially conservative? Anything that celebrates tradition simply because it's tradition is a stupid idea, and that's all social conservatives do. Gay marriage? They're not different from me, they're wrong. Death penalty? They're not different from me, they're wrong. Just wrong. I can prove it with facts and arguments based on realities in this world. Both of them. It's so incredibly frustrating that I have to labeled close-minded simply because I call it what it is. Close-minded is something else.

Melon is right when he says that your defense for yourself now is not a defense based on reality; rather, it's an offense against those calling it like it is, saying that the problem is them and not you.

And your only other defense is that a lot of people agree with you or people have agreed with you in the past. That's it, and it's either lazy or stupid.

We could go waaaay off the thread on this.

What you are buying into is the same philosophy that drove the French Revolution, Nazism, Communism, The New Deal and Sixties Liberalism. All very different in their methods to be sure (eugenics, redistribution, propaganda, tyranny, etc) but all transfixed on the transformation of society, the tearing up of all institutions and traditions by the roots, to create a New Man.
While I believe man can never be perfect and thus needs institutions and moral limitations to improve the human condition. New Man philosophy believes society can only be improved by naturally virtuous humans freed from the shackles of old ideas and moral codes, traditional religion, Christian marriage and other repressive institutions. When Morality is no longer defined by oppressive hegemonies and Reason no longer hindered by superstitious thought; then, and only then, can Man reach his true potential.

That's why you and Melon disdain social conservatism. Your vision of human nature.

[INDY500]

Back to the thread, sort of.

Keith O did do a good job of taking Mark McGuire to task over his steroid confession last night. But then he always was an entertaining sports reporter. Too bad he became the poster boy for Bush Derangement Syndrome.

[phillyfan26]

Originally Posted by INDY500

We could go waaaay off the thread on this.

What you are buying into is the same philosophy that drove the French Revolution, Nazism, Communism, The New Deal and Sixties Liberalism. All very different in their methods to be sure (eugenics, redistribution, propaganda, tyranny, etc) but all transfixed on the transformation of society, the tearing up of all institutions and traditions by the roots, to create a New Man.
While I believe man can never be perfect and thus needs institutions and moral limitations to improve the human condition. New Man philosophy believes society can only be improved by naturally virtuous humans freed from the shackles of old ideas and moral codes, traditional religion, Christian marriage and other repressive institutions. When Morality is no longer defined by oppressive hegemonies and Reason no longer hindered by superstitious thought; then, and only then, can Man reach his true potential.

That's why you and Melon disdain social conservatism. Your vision of human nature.

I'm not at all about tearing up tradition. I'm against tradition for tradition's sake. There are traditions that are good: not killing people, not stealing, etc. There are traditions that are bad: discrimination, the relegation of minority groups to second class citizenship, etc.

Your accusation is that I'm for anything that goes against tradition, which would be a stupid way to look at these issues and moral codes. My point is that each issue needs to be looked at individually. Your explanation for everything seems to be, "A lot of people agree with me!" or "A lot of people have thought this has made sense for a long time!" which isn't an explanation at all, and it's exactly the lazy, illogical take on these issues that makes me and many others frustrated. You're not arguing the merits of the issue, you're arguing the perception of the issue.

My main problem with social conservatism is two-sided: a misguided nostalgia that results in said love of tradition, and a tendency to make issues black-or-white. Nothing epitomizes the latter better than the conservative viewpoint better than the death penalty issue. Conservatives see nothing wrong with the death penalty because they believe these people are guilty with certainty. But our system is not certain and has never claimed to be. At the same time, torture tactics are supported by conservatives because conservatives are sure that whoever we're torturing must be guilty and must have information, even though in most cases that isn't true. Social issues are never as black-and-white or cut-and-dry as social conservatives make them out to be.

And the comparison to Nazism is the kind of stuff that makes BVS's scattershot accusations about you occasionally ring true.

[melon]

Originally Posted by INDY500

While I believe man can never be perfect and thus needs institutions and moral limitations to improve the human condition. New Man philosophy believes society can only be improved by naturally virtuous humans freed from the shackles of old ideas and moral codes, traditional religion, Christian marriage and other repressive institutions.

Have no fear of teh libruls! Pat Robertson's here to "improve the human condition" and save the day!

Pat Robertson: Haiti 'Cursed' By 'Pact To The Devil' (VIDEO)

Televangelist Pat Robertson said Wednesday that earthquake-ravaged Haiti has been "cursed" by a "pact to the devil."

"Something happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it," he said on Christian Broadcasting Network's "The 700 Club." "They were under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon III, or whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, we will serve you if you'll get us free from the French. True story. And so, the devil said, okay it's a deal."

I find it laughable how much you're willing to concede man's flawed nature, and then put so much unquestioning trust in the institutions of man--owned and run by those same imperfect and flawed men.

I'll respond to the rest later, but, needless to say, your description of me, much like your observations regarding gay marriage, is loaded with convenient stereotypes that are completely baseless.

So much for that "wisdom."

[INDY500]

Originally Posted by melon

Have no fear of teh libruls! Pat Robertson's here to "improve the human condition" and save the day!

I find it laughable how much you're willing to concede man's flawed nature, and then put so much unquestioning trust in the institutions of man--owned and run by those same imperfect and flawed men.

Exactly why the Founders feared government growing too large and why, though they thought separation of Church and State was vital, they thought it equally vital that those individuals in government have religious principles upon which to base their decisions. That is the key, the principles upon which the institutions run.

I'll respond to the rest later, but, needless to say, your description of me, much like your observations regarding gay marriage, is loaded with convenient stereotypes that are completely baseless.

So much for that "wisdom."

I see. Pat Robertson is a crackpot. Pat Robertson does not support gay marriage. Therefore all people who don't support gay marriage are crackpots.

And I stereotype.

[INDY500]

dp

[BVS]

Originally Posted by INDY500

That's why you and Melon disdain social conservatism. Your vision of human nature.

I just dislike it because it's 99% wrong.

You're notoriously on the wrong side of history