Fox News vs. Reality

[Oso Mocoso]

There have been a bunch of posts bashing Fox News in various threads. I wanted to create a thread to collect them. If you have any screencaps or videos of Fox News abusing facts or being douche bags then please post them here.

Amsterdam is a Hellish Nightmare of Drugs & Whores

Fox News Regarding Black America

And this one is sort of unrelated, but it's just a good demonstration of a news channel that doesn't have its shit together.

Fox News Epic Fail

[kuranes]

A guy I know has repeated the commonly heard phrase about how media is "liberal controlled" and how many of them are "nut jobs" etc. I asked him what he thought of Phil Donahue, who always seemed pretty unbiased to me, but whose personal preferences were admittedly and decidedly Leftist. I mentioned to him how Phil got sort of pushed out of his last newscasting gig by upper tier types who felt that he was not being "patriotic" enough. My acquaintance said he thought Phil was a "nut job", but he feels Dennis Miller is a middle of the road guy. Miller is currently running a radio show similar to Mancow. Kind of a Howard Stern Lite, with right leaning tendencies. Going for those "rush babes" I guess. I thought to myself that if the guy I know considered Phil Donahue a "nut job" then there was little hope of ever getting him to listen.

[Technical]

How novel! Reminds me of the guy who dropped out of math class, BUCK FUSH button on his cap, and all--5 months into the Obama administration.

[kuranes]

How novel! Reminds me of the guy who dropped out of math class, BUCK FUSH button on his cap, and all--5 months into the Obama administration.
I was wowed in a similar way by Palin's goodbye speech the other night.

* razzes Tech*

I remember how upset you were on the night of the election results over at Type C. Poor Risen is still expecting any moment to have some Brown Shirts show up and confiscate his guns, I bet...

"Your papers please, citizen..."

[Technical]

I remember how upset you were on the night of the election results over at Type C. Poor Risen is still expecting any moment to have some Brown Shirts show up and confiscate his guns, I bet...

"Your papers please, citizen..."
The dems gave up on that for the time being. Not for idealogical reasons, mind you, but because it's important enough to a lot of "moderates" that they've decided not to be outwardly anti-gun.

[kuranes]

The dems gave up on that for the time being. Not for idealogical reasons, mind you, but because it's important enough to a lot of "moderates" that they've decided not to be outwardly anti-gun.

I agree with much of the conservative POV on gun ownership. I'm not a lockstep leftie. I disagree with other liberal views too, but everytime I've asked conservatives on either site to talk about what they find absurd in their own conservative platforms, you can really hear the crickets chirp.

* Kuranes sees he's getting OT - tosses in an afterthought *
I've noticed that Fox has a lot of "action hero" movies ( despite how Hollywood is vilified as an instrument of the Left ) running.

[Oso Mocoso]

http://ceasespin.org/ceasespin_blog/ceasespin_blogger_files/fox_news_gets_okay_to_misinform_public.html

Fox News won a court case giving them the legal right to lie and call it news.

Amazing.

Also: Fox New does math

http://tpmtv.talkingpointsmemo.com/?id=3060320

Yeah, totally forgetting about that whole "per million inhabitants" thing.

[Qfwfq]

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y127/Dee_from_ott/fox.jpg

[rhuarch]

I agree with much of the conservative POV on gun ownership. I'm not a lockstep leftie. I disagree with other liberal views too, but everytime I've asked conservatives on either site to talk about what they find absurd in their own conservative platforms, you can really hear the crickets chirp.

* Kuranes sees he's getting OT - tosses in an afterthought *
I've noticed that Fox has a lot of "action hero" movies ( despite how Hollywood is vilified as an instrument of the Left ) running.

I lean somewhat conservative and I see the "Patriot Act" as a dangerous intrusion on our rights. In fact to be honest I am pretty disappointed by the republican party in general lately. They've been completely taken over by religious fundies.

[kuranes]

I lean somewhat conservative and I see the "Patriot Act" as a dangerous intrusion on our rights. In fact to be honest I am pretty disappointed by the republican party in general lately. They've been completely taken over by religious fundies.
* shakes his hand *

Good ol' Pat Robertson and the 700 Club, I suppose ? Or Ralph Reed ? I forget who's the big man nowadays....there's even some secret organization I heard about...will try to remember their name...
Edit - here it is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_for_National_Policy

OTOH - There was some guy who was recently put in charge of being the National Evangelical Church spokesman who seemed not too extreme that I heard one day on NPR.

Somebody mentioned on Type C a book ( called "Who Really Cares" I think ) that had research indicating that Conservatives are more likely to give money to the needy, too, despite all of the Leftist egalitarian rhetoric, but...the guy who posted it agreed that this charity was often at the behest of religious organizations hoping to convert people. * shrug *

Oso - scary video about Fox and Murdoch.....they're getting....technical on us....;)

[md5fungi]

http://ceasespin.org/ceasespin_blog/ceasespin_blogger_files/fox_news_gets_okay_to_misinform_public.html

Fox News won a court case giving them the legal right to lie and call it news.


That's terrible. Not so much the "Fox News lies" thing, but the fact that they have a legal right to lie.

[nonrandian]

I'll never forget during the last presidential debates...

fox news said that McCain won two of the debates with an 82% approval rating. Yeaahh... right. LOL

[kendoiwan]

Redundant title, no?

[nonrandian]

Here you go guys. Not so much unrealistic as it is just depressingly humorous; tragic.

Turtles and Otters

I particularly like "if they [turtles] carried guns and protected our country" LOL

Also, inferred: American turtles are better and have more of a right to life than other turtles (not to mention liberty, and the pursuit of happiness).

"didn't we talk about thealalalaalala about the southern sea otter" lmao

[zero]

^^^ that physically hurt...

[bass_n_treble]

This channel does exactly what John McCain did to lose the election: only cater to uneducated, emotionally retarded religious bigots.

EDIT: Any other news channel really isn't much better. It's just that Fox's screw ups tend to be the most egregious and they (subjectively) have the most childish personalities/anchors who are on the other side of the political spectrum from me, so I have a gut reaction (as in regurgitation, preferably projectile) when I see Bill O'Reilly's face "stirring up the foundation" or Glenn Beck trying to win an Oscar.

[CEOofRawness]

Jesus Christ I hate Fox News.

Terrists need to blow these guys up already.

[Technical]

This channel does exactly what John McCain did to lose the election: only cater to uneducated, emotionally retarded ... bigots.
That's what every politician who ever won has done too.


EDIT: Any other news channel really isn't much better.
C-SPAN isn't bad. But the others, yeah. MSNBC is just Fox News in reverse, far left-oriented.

[pocohauntus]

The reason this thead exists here.. are because I have a problem with Faux News. I blame others for that.

[Oso Mocoso]

Any other news channel really isn't much better.

I really have to disagree there. CNN is still pretty retarded, but they never ended up as the defendant in a lawsuit where they were defending their right to outright lie and call it news. To me, that's a significant difference.

[meanlittlechimp]

C-SPAN isn't bad. But the others, yeah. MSNBC is just Fox News in reverse, far left-oriented.

MSNBC is far from left. They just seem that way to you, because you voted for McCain.

[Technical]

MSNBC is far from left. They just seem that way to you, because you voted for McCain.
You're all the same, you know. Resorting to the easiest arguments you can find, because your simple notions lead you to believe the guy who says he means well is going to save the world. Well fuck that shit.

[meanlittlechimp]

You're all the same, you know. Resorting to the easiest arguments you can find, because your simple notions lead you to believe the guy who says he means well is going to save the world. Well fuck that shit.


Bill Moyers is left. The Nation is left. When the Neo-cons fabricated WMDs as a bullshit reason to go into Iraq. MSNBC was eating it up. When the majority of dipshit republicans thought Saddam was responsible for the Trade center, MSNBC was doing nothing to dispel the notion.,

To go any more right than Fox - is joining a white supremacist group.
No one from the left actually takes MSNBC seriously.

I'm not sure what you're even saying or what that has to with my original comment.

[Technical]

Bill Moyers is left. PBS is left.

When the Neo-cons fabricated WMDs as a bullshit reason to go into Iraq. MSNBC was eating it up.

To go any more right than Fox - is joining a white supremacist group.
No one from the left actually takes MSNBC seriously.
Thanks for destroying your own position for me, so I don't have to. *hi-five*

[meanlittlechimp]

You appear to claim those who supported Obama over McCain did so because we have this irrational view of him as some sort of Messiah.

Instead of making ridiculous assumptions on why you voted for McCain (I'll give you a chance); can you explain your reasons for doing so? Maybe you can enlighten us from our brainwashing.

I don't think I've met right wing INTPs before and I'm seriously interested in how it can even occur.

[Jonah Davids]

You're all the same, you know. Resorting to the easiest arguments you can find, because your simple notions lead you to believe the guy who says he means well is going to save the world. Well fuck that shit.

No one claims Obama is going to, or must, save the world. No one.

Leave that strawman alone! Of course you're probably going to ignore this and continue to blurt out whatever fallacious nonsense you feel like. But I'm here to inform you how wrong you are to do so.

[wittySynonym]

No one claims Obama is going to, or must, save the world. No one.

Leave that strawman alone! Of course you're probably going to ignore this and continue to blurt out whatever fallacious nonsense you feel like. But I'm here to inform you how wrong you are to do so.

Seconded
:highfive:

[camille]

Thanks for destroying your own position for me, so I don't have to. *hi-five*

FOX News should change their site address to:

www.yourenexttobeblamed.com

[Qfwfq]

Here you go guys. Not so much unrealistic as it is just depressingly humorous; tragic.

Turtles and Otters

I particularly like "if they [turtles] carried guns and protected our country" LOL

Also, inferred: American turtles are better and have more of a right to life than other turtles (not to mention liberty, and the pursuit of happiness).

"didn't we talk about thealalalaalala about the southern sea otter" lmao


So fox is also racist against turtle nationality? I can't stand these guys. When I watch the news here in Canada, there is not a single station that delivers news in that tone. Nobody is yelling at you. Nobody is shouting their own personal opinion at you. And there's alot less flashy graphics.

It's like they make the news entertainment over there. Sometimes I flip the channel to Detroit news, which we get in Ottawa, and whenever they're talking about a forest fire or a catastrophe it's like the circus just came to town. I'm happy with our monotone, more objective, less in your face, broadcasters here.

[ciphersort]

I don't think I've met right wing INTPs before and I'm seriously interested in how it can even occur.

I'm guessing that you haven't been hanging out with many intelligence analysts. Oh well, INTPc will do in a pinch I suppose.

...intelligence... analyst... hahaha... always cracks me up

[Usehername]

I heard that when Bush was "elected" over Al Gore, his cousin was a higher-up at Fox News, and they were the ones that began broadcasting that Bush won, which led to him taking office even though Gore actually won.

[Technical]

You appear to claim those who supported Obama over McCain did so because we have this irrational view of him as some sort of Messiah.

Instead of making ridiculous assumptions on why you voted for McCain (I'll give you a chance); can you explain your reasons for doing so? Maybe you can enlighten us from our brainwashing.

I don't think I've met right wing INTPs before and I'm seriously interested in how it can even occur.


No one claims Obama is going to, or must, save the world. No one.

Leave that strawman alone! Of course you're probably going to ignore this and continue to blurt out whatever fallacious nonsense you feel like. But I'm here to inform you how wrong you are to do so.


Seconded
:highfive:


Bill Moyers is left. The Nation is left. When the Neo-cons fabricated WMDs as a bullshit reason to go into Iraq. MSNBC was eating it up. When the majority of dipshit republicans thought Saddam was responsible for the Trade center, MSNBC was doing nothing to dispel the notion.,

To go any more right than Fox - is joining a white supremacist group.
No one from the left actually takes MSNBC seriously.

I'm not sure what you're even saying or what that has to with my original comment.


I heard that when Bush was "elected" over Al Gore, his cousin was a higher-up at Fox News, and they were the ones that began broadcasting that Bush won, which led to him taking office even though Gore actually won.
I told you you were all the same.

[Qfwfq]

How are they all the same?

[Technical]

How are they all the same?
Have you listened to the left lately? Well there's your chance. As far as I can tell, I'm at least coming up with my own arguments.

[Madrigal]

I don't think I've met right wing INTPs before and I'm seriously interested in how it can even occur.

There are lots of right wing INTPs. :D Just that I think Tech is ISTP.

If anything at least the right makes me laugh sometimes. I have never seen such pathetically unprofessional journalism as I saw on Fox news. And I've seen some bad journalism, from diferent countries, from banana republics, many places. Fox news takes the cake. I find it very hard to believe there are people watching it without getting hysterical. I bet it makes Honduran state channels look professional right now.

[Curtis24]

This is off-topic, but while we're on the subject of types and political views..

I once posted an MBTI clone(the one at humanmetrics) at a right-wing political forum; vast majority scored as INTJ.

I suspect most of them were ISTJs were mistyping themselves... still pretty interesting. "The Art of Speed Reading People" claims that surveys show SJs tend to be conservative.

[Technical]

There are lots of right wing INTPs. :D Just that I think Tech is ISTP.
Riiight. Haven't heard that one before.

[Qfwfq]

I'm not sure where I stand. Socially, I'm left. But when it comes to economics, I believe in private ownership, heavy regulation(really heavy, like market capitalization limits heavy), and a large middle class/redistribution. I'm probably still left.

Then again... I might change my mind about all that later. What was I saying again...

[last_caress]

my workplace is decidedly conservative. there are several folks who have displayed prominently in their cubes, election bumper stickers that say, "jesus in '08".
I haven't encountered too many political discussions thankfully, but one guy when discussing cars said he wouldn't buy a ford because they support "the gay agenda".

[Jonah Davids]

I told you you were all the same.


Have you listened to the left lately? Well there's your chance. As far as I can tell, I'm at least coming up with my own arguments.


Riiight. Haven't heard that one before.

And they are fallacious arguments, as I pointed out, and as you predictably ignored.

Not original enough for you? Not unique and special enough for your tastes? Aw. As if it's my obligation not just to poke holes in your shitty little arguments, but to do so in ways that no one else ever has. Ways that make you feel young again. Ways that touch you in that special place and make you cry like a virgin again.

Sorry Suze. Beggars can't be choosers. You take what you get and you're lucky for it.

[gardnerj]

the dude with the otters and turtles has a point though. The rest of the world can save the turtles in their part of the world. It's not our responsibility to shell out 80% of our turtle fund to save them. Plus, we have dominion over animals. I think we need to get our own shit straight first. Then you could say, "Where's the line?" I don't know. But he was a dick, obviously.

[nonperson]

shell out 80% of our turtle

:grin:

[md5fungi]

The conservatives I've met in real life who I respect, and who stick to their guns and more importantly, logic, also think Fox News is a hot, steaming, pile of cow terds.

[ALittleGirl]

.

I do not wish to criticize your views when I ask: Why did you vote for McCain?
I am merely curious; especially since you avoided answering the question and instead commented upon other members' political stances.

[meanlittlechimp]

As far as I can tell, I'm at least coming up with my own arguments.

What was your own argument exactly, that we're all the same?

Did I miss something? If you can point me to your political arguments, I would sincerely like to read it. I'm genuinely curious about right wing IXTPs and what led them to their conclusions.

I've spent considerable time researching the right wing nature of IXTJS (and have learned some interesting and consistent causes of their conservatism), and would like to read what you have to say.

[Technical]

I do not wish to criticize your views when I ask: Why did you vote for McCain?
I am merely curious; especially since you avoided answering the question and instead commented upon other members' political stances.
It's not any specific love for McCain. I'm effectively Libertarian, which means I'm anti-Obama in a major way.

What was your own argument exactly, that we're all the same?
It's the modus operandi of modern left wingers to say things like "I'm surprised there are even people who vote for [Non-Democrat]. It doesn't make any sense. Who are these people, in the mountains of Missouri, wearing overalls and straw hats?"

[meanlittlechimp]

The conservatives I've met in real life who I respect, and who stick to their guns and more importantly, logic, also think Fox News is a hot, steaming, pile of cow terds.

I agree. The odd thing is the smart ones I know always have the small government argument. Which is ludicrous since both Bushes and Reagan borrowed almost half our GDP to finance their idiotic military excursions. http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

They increased our government (via military expenditures - to defend freedom and our way of life against scary places like Nicaragua, El Salvador and Panama). Since it wouldn't be popular to raise taxes to pay for this - they simply borrowed it - to let future generations bite the bullet.

Which now just the interest rate on said debt dwarfs all other expenditures with the exception of one category - the military. McCain said the single most idiotic thing of the entire 08 campaign. He said he would freeze spending in all categories except one - the military. No wonder he graduated bottom of his class after daddy got him into school.

Smart conservatives are basically misguided Libertarians (or view themselves Goldwater conservatives). Dumb conservatives vote that way because they love Jesus, Guns and a host of other irrelevant issues.

Conservatives bitch about the pennies spent on food stamps, and textbooks and ignore the 3 trillion that will be spent on the Iraq war, and claim they're the small government party. They have the delusion; social programs are dragging down our economy and creating our issues when the numbers (by a huge factor) is our military spending.

Essentially most republicans, (besides the bible thumpers, racist and redneck varieties); vote that way because they think they'll be taxed less.

They just don't understand we're simply running up our credit cards and when the bill collectors come, taxes will have to be raised in a massive way for the half services we receive today.

[md5fungi]

I agree. The odd thing is the smart ones I know always have the small government argument.

I don't think it's odd as much as a different point of view.

Even if you disagree with small government in general (I do), is it really that hard to see how it would be appealing? Convincing arguments for it do exist, you know.

[Dark Razor]

A couple years ago I could briefly receive Fox News over satelite television, at first I thought it was some kind of 24h parody channel, turned out it was not!
Though I find it difficult to believe that there are people mistaking their program for actual news though.

I especially like the over-the-top flashy animations and "swooosh" sound effects of American News channels, it gives their program an endearing Starship Trooperish style.

[iwakar]

A couple years ago I could briefly receive Fox News over satelite television, at first I thought it was some kind of 24h parody channel, turned out it was not!
Though I find it difficult to believe that there are people mistaking their program for actual news though.

I especially like the over-the-top flashy animations and "swooosh" sound effects of American News channels, it gives their program an endearing Starship Trooperish style.

It's saying something when my 3 year old nephew finds their dramatic broadcasts as colorful and interesting as Dora the Explorer.

[Oso Mocoso]

Essentially most republicans, (besides the bible thumpers, racist and redneck varieties); vote that way because they think they'll be taxed less.

They just don't understand we're simply running up our credit cards and when the bill collectors come, taxes will have to be raised in a massive way for the half services we receive today.

Err ... I consider myself a moderate or a conservative, but I agree the Republican party is odious. Is there no party that actually delivers on the promise of a small government which spends money efficiently? Basically both parties seem abhorrent to me. Like many of our generation, I seem to fall into the category of an "independent voter". But honestly, I'd like to be a Republican if they lived up to their stated platform. The Democrats don't live up to their own stated ideals either, but what they actually do in practice seems less harmful than the antics of the recent ruinous Bush administration. I don't see how anyone who grew up during the Bush years could possibly vote Republican.

[Curtis24]

Err ... I consider myself a moderate or a conservative, but I agree the Republican party is odious. Is there no party that actually delivers on the promise of a small government which spends money efficiently? Basically both parties seem abhorrent to me. Like many of our generation, I seem to fall into the category of an "independent voter". But honestly, I'd like to be a Republican if they lived up to their stated platform. The Democrats don't live up to their own stated ideals either, but what they actually do in practice seems less harmful than the antics of the recent ruinous Bush administration. I don't see how anyone who grew up during the Bush years could possibly vote Republican.

And they probably won't, either. People's politics are generally formed by what's going on in the world in their early 20s; at least according to an Intro to American Democracy course I once took. We just have to wait until all the people who did grow up during the Bush years start voting en masse.

A little off-topic, but another interesting thing is that "Generation Y" has almost unanimously accepted gay rights. John McCain's campaign manager, Steve Schmidt, actually came out and said(after the election) that the Republican Party needs to embrace gay marriage simply for its own long-term survival.


Former top McCain adviser Steve Schmidt is planning to use a Friday speech to the Log Cabin Republicans to urge the GOP to drop its opposition to same-sex marriage.

"I'm confident American public opinion will continue to move on the question toward majority support, and sooner or later the Republican Party will catch up to it," Schmidt plans to say according to excerpts provided to ABC News.

Schmidt's push for Republicans to endorse same-sex marriage comes as his party is grappling with a string of gay rights victories in Iowa, Vermont, and Washington, D.C.

Schmidt's former boss, Arizona Sen. John McCain (R), continues to oppose same-sex marriage while also opposing a federal constitutional amendment prohibiting it.


http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/04/mccain-guru-urg.html

[pioneer_167]

Err ... I consider myself a moderate or a conservative, but I agree the Republican party is odious. Is there no party that actually delivers on the promise of a small government which spends money efficiently? Basically both parties seem abhorrent to me. Like many of our generation, I seem to fall into the category of an "independent voter". But honestly, I'd like to be a Republican if they lived up to their stated platform. The Democrats don't live up to their own stated ideals either, but what they actually do in practice seems less harmful than the antics of the recent ruinous Bush administration. I don't see how anyone who grew up during the Bush years could possibly vote Republican.

This is exactly the problem, and unfortunately, it's only exacerbated by our vehement protection of the two-party system. I've always agreed with the republican ideals of smaller government. But, like you said, the party isn't and hasn't delivered on that since, well, long before I was born. If we weren't so tightly bound to our precious two-party system, perhaps another party, like the libertarian party or even plain old independents, would ACTUALLY have a chance to get in positions where they could make a real difference.

[meanlittlechimp]

Err ... I consider myself a moderate or a conservative, but I agree the Republican party is odious. Is there no party that actually delivers on the promise of a small government which spends money efficiently? Basically both parties seem abhorrent to me. Like many of our generation, I seem to fall into the category of an "independent voter". But honestly, I'd like to be a Republican if they lived up to their stated platform. The Democrats don't live up to their own stated ideals either, but what they actually do in practice seems less harmful than the antics of the recent ruinous Bush administration. I don't see how anyone who grew up during the Bush years could possibly vote Republican.

I don't think there has been a small government party since the 19th century.

I think it breaks down to this: Social issues, Dems are clearly superior (unless you're a dumb redneck). Economic issues, they are only slightly better.

Bush Sr., voted against the civil rights act of 1964. Republicans as far as social issues represent everything xenophobic, religious and backwards in this country.

As for economic issues. the right has destroyed our economy and caused our massive debt through military spending. They did exactly what Eisenhower warned against when he left office. http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html

The recent financial meltdown is going to be nothing compared to the combined pressure of ridiculous and massive military expenditures which created an insanely large debt, that when combined with a shoddy health care system - will crush us over the next few decades. When the baby boomers start retiring and the service of our debt (through the growing interest rates) will cripple us. Every economist or smart policymaker is well aware of this.. It's a ticking time bomb that will go off.

Health care and military spending are two sides of the same problem. The reason the war will cost us 3 trillion dollars is health care for returning vets (and their dependents). In 1970, there was still thousands collecting benefits from the civil war!

The right's approach to lower taxes on the wealthy and borrow massive amounts of money to fund our imperialistic excursions will be our downfall. During the Reagan/Bush years we borrowed 70% of our GDP. Their must be a contraction when this debt is paid. The longer we wait and the larger the debt grows the larger the contraction will be.

Fixing health care and reducing our debt load is the only smart thing to do. The problem is the Dems are only attempting to fix the former and not the latter.

I doubt anyone will try to fix the latter, since one would have to raise taxes while reducing federal services simultaneously - which some politicians WANT to do, but they'll know they can't be elected doing so. It's not just the politicians fault, it's the stupidity of the masses.

[meanlittlechimp]

It's not any specific love for McCain. I'm effectively Libertarian, which means I'm anti-Obama in a major way.

It's the modus operandi of modern left wingers to say things like "I'm surprised there are even people who vote for [Non-Democrat]. It doesn't make any sense. Who are these people, in the mountains of Missouri, wearing overalls and straw hats?"

That's not a reason to vote for McCain. Libertarians don't believe in borrowing the majority of our GDP to increase the military. Libertarians are fiscal conservatives which don't believe in big government - which is exactly what an expanded military is (and what McCain stated he would do).

What exactly is libertarian about McCain?

It seems many former right wingers just use libertarian to label themselves at the embarrassment and incompetence of Bush.

Libertarian social ideals are far more closely aligned with Dems than the Republicans who spent billions on a ridiculous drug war and erode privacy rights under anti-terrrorism scare tactics with the passage of the ridiculous patriot act.

[Curtis24]

I would also think Libertarians would reject the Republicans' extensive program to legislate social morality.

[last_caress]

I would also think Libertarians would reject the Republicans' extensive program to legislate social morality.

the whole association of libertarians with todays republicans baffles me given those and above reasons. the reality manifested is so starkly incongruent with republican ideals. I think it mostly comes down to gun control issues.

[C.J.Woolf]

I don't think there has been a small government party since the 19th century.
Of course. There is too big a constituency for big government: not just those who favor it philosophically, but those who profit from it. Special interests have an advantage over the public interest; they're more motivated.

[pioneer_167]

the whole association of libertarians with todays republicans baffles me given those and above reasons. the reality manifested is so starkly incongruent with republican ideals. I think it mostly comes down to gun control issues.

I think it stems from a desire to bring the republican party back to its roots which are very libertarian in nature. I think it would also be a much more popular party if such were the case.

Somewhere along the line, republican became equated one-to-one with religious christian values and then, even worse, pushing those values onto everyone.

[meanlittlechimp]

I think it stems from a desire to bring the republican party back to its roots which are very libertarian in nature. I think it would also be a much more popular party if such were the case.

Somewhere along the line, republican became equated one-to-one with religious christian values and then, even worse, pushing those values onto everyone.

Which republican administrations do you think exhibit these ideals? Certainly not Nixon, Reagan, or the Bushes. Goldwater maybe, but he was never elected.

I think the typical paradigm is they're small party when it comes to schooling, infrastructure, and other federal programs, but they are the opposite when it comes to the military industrial complex, which dwarfs all the other programs in spending by a HUGE factor.

The small party misnomer is what gets smart people to ever consider the party in the first place. Which I admittedly was guilty of in high school, I didn't change my mind until I studied economics and looked at the actual numbers.

I thought the economy superseded all the other issues; even though I was against everything else in the republican party (gun control, drug wars, birth control, abortion, religion etc). The reason being that if our economy goes in the shitter, this country will go extremely right wing, xenophobic and religious anyways, causing far more strife and even intellectual backwardness.

The Germans would have never elected Hitler without Hyperinflation. Pol Pot would have never gained any power if the US wasn't carpet-bombing them; making them go extremely right wing. Iran would have never become a theocracy without US overthrow of their democracy under Mossadegh. It's human nature to go right wing under times of chaos or poverty. You only care about funding the arts or giving minorities a chance, when there is enough bread to go around in the first place.

[pioneer_167]

Which republican administrations do you think exhibit these ideals? Certainly not Nixon, Reagan, or the Bushes. Goldwater maybe, but he was never elected.

I'm not saying any of them do. Officials from the past 100 years least of all.

You make another good point though, that even when it seems like they MAY push for small government, it's only in certain areas. Which, imo, makes the notion of small government entirely useless.

[Technical]

That's not a reason to vote for McCain. Libertarians don't believe in borrowing the majority of our GDP to increase the military. Libertarians are fiscal conservatives which don't believe in big government - which is exactly what an expanded military is (and what McCain stated he would do).

What exactly is libertarian about McCain?

It seems many former right wingers just use libertarian to label themselves at the embarrassment and incompetence of Bush.

Libertarian social ideals are far more closely aligned with Dems than the Republicans who spent billions on a ridiculous drug war and erode privacy rights under anti-terrrorism scare tactics with the passage of the ridiculous patriot act.
It's certainly debatable whether libertarian ideals are closer to democratic or republican ideals, and I hold the position they're closer to republicans'. Just a quick example being Ron Paul's party shifting.

And while isolationism, at least militarily speaking, may be the Libertarian party line, it's something I disagree with, because we're all on the same globe, and it's delusional to think what's outside the borders can be perpetually ignored.

[nonrandian]

It's like they make the news entertainment over there.

The news is entertainment in the U.S., what are you talking about? :p Sad but true.

[nonrandian]

A couple years ago I could briefly receive Fox News over satelite television, at first I thought it was some kind of 24h parody channel, turned out it was not!
Though I find it difficult to believe that there are people mistaking their program for actual news though.

It is sad to admit, even as a human, but you would be surprised. Some people are so extremist that they wont even accept FOX as the news (but stuff much more belligerent), believe it or not.... and i mean A LOT of people.

[nonrandian]

the dude with the otters and turtles has a point though. The rest of the world can save the turtles in their part of the world. It's not our responsibility to shell out 80% of our turtle fund to save them. Plus, we have dominion over animals. I think we need to get our own shit straight first. Then you could say, "Where's the line?" I don't know. But he was a dick, obviously.

I see your point, but if we don't... how can we be sure the rest of the world will? That is, if we don't, who will? Anyway, the US is the in/direct cause of most of the pollution in the world. With that in mind, it's hard to say that another person's greed is to be held more responsible over our own. At least, in my opinion.

I totally agree that humans need to get their shit together though... as a main priority, too. I'm just not confident that that will ever happen... let alone before turtles die.

[CEOofRawness]

Reminds me of Sly Fox, by Nas

Watch what you watchin', Fox keeps feedin? us toxins
Stop sleepin, start thinkin outside of the box
And unplug from The Matrix doctrine
But watch what you say, Fox 5 is watchin'

[MadamI'madaM]

Who's that blonde woman Jon Stewart always rips on?

She's a human goldmine.

Her friend with the curly black hair is tons o fun as well.

[Harion]

i don't live in the US so FOX's lies seem glaringly blatant to me
idk, maybe most republicans are just too rabid to even know they're just putty

take the healthcare reform offensive that's been blasting ever since the sensed a weakness in the obama adminstration

i can't for the fucking life of me, understand how they can even say that healthcare in UK is worse than in the US. have they actually been there and got treated there? i suggest those rallying and protesting at those town halls have their jaws broken and get it treated at an NHS center and see the difference between US and UK hospitals

un-fucking believable! the drivel i hear from this station

[CEOofRawness]

Why is UK health care portrayed as a nightmare? Because it would dig deep into the pockets of some rich folks that want to keep their nice fat paychecks.

[meanlittlechimp]

It's certainly debatable whether libertarian ideals are closer to democratic or republican ideals, and I hold the position they're closer to republicans'. Just a quick example being Ron Paul's party shifting.

And while isolationism, at least militarily speaking, may be the Libertarian party line, it's something I disagree with, because we're all on the same globe, and it's delusional to think what's outside the borders can be perpetually ignored.

McCarthyism, the Drug War, the Patriot act. With the exception of Gun Control it's pretty obvious which party meddles more in individual liberties.

Isolationism? You think we should go into massive debt to overthrow third world governments? Or are you deluded enough to think our military is to spread democracy? or fight terror?

[Zephyrus055]

Why is UK health care portrayed as a nightmare? Because it would dig deep into the pockets of some rich folks that want to keep their nice fat paychecks.

Well, I disagree. The reason they do it is because a nationalized health care would ruin the profits of pharmaceutical companies in the ensuing reorganization. So the natural reaction is to demonize other alternatives.

[Technical]

McCarthyism, the Drug War, the Patriot act. With the exception of Gun Control it's pretty obvious which party meddles more in individual liberties.
You neglect to mention economic policy, with its indirect effects far more pervasive than any of the above, and which the Democrats prefer a distinct lack of freedom in. For the record.


Isolationism? You think we should go into massive debt to overthrow third world governments? Or are you deluded enough to think our military is to spread democracy? or fight terror?
Let's focus on only one of these points, so it can be more obviously defeated. Are you claiming that fighting terrorism is never an actual reason to enter combat?

[egregious cerebrum]

How do you convince an SJ that fox news is fallacious?
and I'm talking about an SJ that asked, upon my request to order the book, God Emperor of Dune, "This isn't a terrorist instruction manual, is it?"

[excession]

You neglect to mention economic policy, with its indirect effects far more pervasive than any of the above, and which the Democrats prefer a distinct lack of freedom in. For the record.

yes, you're free to aspire to the unobtainable with your economic freedom. the rich have everything already tied up but, just to keep you salivating, the occasional poor person strikes it lucky. your economic freedom applies mainly to the top strata of your society. the rest have economic slavery.


Are you claiming that fighting terrorism is never an actual reason to enter combat?

the terrorists are probably only committing these acts because of your fucked up foreign policies. it would be cheaper, quicker and less morally repugnant if you just left them alone

[excession]

How do you convince an SJ that fox news is fallacious?
and I'm talking about an SJ that asked, upon my request to order the book, God Emperor of Dune, "This isn't a terrorist instruction manual, is it?"

shoot them and evade capture through a dramatic televised car chase

[meanlittlechimp]

You neglect to mention economic policy, with its indirect effects far more pervasive than any of the above, and which the Democrats prefer a distinct lack of freedom in. For the record.
You're comparing these indirect effects to the right's opposition to women's suffrage, the civil rights act of 1964, McCarthysim, the Drug War (and the incarceration of more people than any other industrialized nation on earth), the patriot act and forcing national guardsmen to serving multiple terms in a bogus war (and violating the original terms of service).

With the exception of gun "freedom"; so we can be free to have a higher murder rate than all of Europe, China, Japan combined - I can't imagine what indirect effects you're talking about that can compare to the xenophobia and racism exhibited by the right, for the last 100 years.



Let's focus on only one of these points, so it can be more obviously defeated. Are you claiming that fighting terrorism is never an actual reason to enter combat?

I'm saying spending 3 trillion to invade Iraq, has nothing to do with terrorism. Terrorism was just the PR used by Rove and the neo-cons; to garner support from flag waving rednecks that thought Saddam was responsible for the trade center.

We weren't fighting terror when we overthrew the constitutional democracy in Iran and installed a monarchy (it's amazing how people forget this and complain how backwards and evil they are). Nor were we fighting terror when we overthrew democratically elected Allende in Chile. Nor was it the reason we overthrew countless democracies around the globe. We weren't fighting terror in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Panama, or Grenada. Nor weren't fighting terror when we carpet bombed SE Asia.

Some might even consider massive indiscriminate carpet bombing of SE Asia terrorism. But to a hillbilly in Georgia, when you slaughter millions from a distance, it isn't terrorism. Terrorism is only when you blow up a bus; and can't afford laser guided missiles.

Do you think the massive debt caused by this military spending was somehow worth it?

[Technical]

You lost me at "Overthrew the constitutional democracy in Iran." Is it we, who are backwards, and evil, or was it Saddam Hussein? I keep forgetting, chimp, and I'm glad you're here to tell it like it is.

[Hermione]

You're comparing these indirect effects to the right's opposition to women's suffrage, the civil rights act of 1964, McCarthysim, the Drug War (and the incarceration of more people than any other industrialized nation on earth), the patriot act and forcing national guardsmen to serving multiple terms in a bogus war (and violating the original terms of service).

With the exception of gun "freedom"; so we can be free to have a higher murder rate than all of Europe, China, Japan combined - I can't imagine what indirect effects you're talking about that can compare to the xenophobia and racism exhibited by the right, for the last 100 years.



I'm saying spending 3 trillion to invade Iraq, has nothing to do with terrorism. Terrorism was just the PR used by Rove and the neo-cons; to garner support from flag waving rednecks that thought Saddam was responsible for the trade center.

We weren't fighting terror when we overthrew the constitutional democracy in Iran and installed a monarchy (it's amazing how people forget this and complain how backwards and evil they are). Nor were we fighting terror when we overthrew democratically elected Allende in Chile. Nor was it the reason we overthrew countless democracies around the globe. We weren't fighting terror in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Panama, or Grenada. Nor weren't fighting terror when we carpet bombed SE Asia.

Some might even consider massive indiscriminate carpet bombing of SE Asia terrorism. But to a hillbilly in Georgia, when you slaughter millions from a distance, it isn't terrorism. Terrorism is only when you blow up a bus; and can't afford laser guided missiles.

Do you think the massive debt caused by this military spending was somehow worth it?

Thank you for saying it all for me again. What a simple concept, getting at the truth, eh? Amazingly difficult for the rich or the permanently fearful.

[Technical]

Hermione's on your side! And the implications of that are, well... *experiences eternal bliss*

[Zephyrus055]

Part of what Chimp is saying is that our political and economic elite are motivated by the security and increase of their own wealth and power. Why is that so hard to understand? Do you actually believe they are motivated by a moral good, or that their moral excuses are anything but facades to their practical motivations?

I don't want to say they are inherently evil, but sometimes they inflict harm for their own gain or security.

[kuranes]

Glenn Beck ( of Fox ) owned.
http://www.indecisionforever.com/2009/08/14/jon-stewart-owns-glenn-beck-on-healthcare-hypocrisy/

Other loose cannons ( canons ? )
http://amfix.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/14/wingnuts-of-the-week-11/?iref=werecommend

[Technical]

Part of what Chimp is saying is that our political and economic elite are motivated by the security and increase of their own wealth and power. Why is that so hard to understand? Do you actually believe they are motivated by a moral good, or that their moral excuses are anything but facades to their practical motivations?

I don't want to say they are inherently evil, but sometimes they inflict harm for their own gain or security.
I believe that's true, but once again I must refer to my conclusion that intent is irrelevant. A system in which people fight for their own economic interests tends to benefit all, at least in regard to material.

I've gone into unusual detail on this in this thread: http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=36901

Otherwise, I might refer you to the work of people like Adam Smith, and Milton Friedman. Smart dudes, know what they're talkin' about.

[INA]

The conservatives I've met in real life who I respect, and who stick to their guns and more importantly, logic, also think Fox News is a hot, steaming, pile of cow terds.

+1

I've also met liberals who recognize the pure hackery that is the MSNBC/Chris Matthews/Keith Olbermann sideshow.

It's the ones who don't see the varied bullshit who scare me.

[meanlittlechimp]

You lost me at "Overthrew the constitutional democracy in Iran." Is it we, who are backwards, and evil, or was it Saddam Hussein? I keep forgetting, chimp, and I'm glad you're here to tell it like it is.

I lost you? because you weren't aware of that fact? Or I lost you because you can't comprehend how it's relevant, when Saddam is so evil.

You're also probably not aware we overthrew Qasim and installed the Baathists in the first place. It's hard to understand where you got lost exactly, but I'll do my best to try to explain it to you.

[Technical]

I lost you?
Yes. If one of us considers Saddam Hussein a rather mad dictator, and one an elected official with popular support, we can't have much of a conversation.

[meanlittlechimp]

Yes. If one of us considers Saddam Hussein a rather mad dictator, and one an elected official with popular support, we can't have much of a conversation.

Who claims he was elected? We installed the Baathists, which I stated repeatedly.

You have a serious problem with reading comprehension and can't make a point; because of your complete lack of knowledge of the region, or the history of US foreign policy.

[Farion]

Beck's "Otters and Turtles" video is a perfect example of what is IMO the worst thing about pretty much all of the media: they forget the difference between the letter "M" and the letter "B".

Wall Street Bailout:
700,000,000,000

Turtle Fund:
5,000,000

I am not much of an animal activist or anything like that, but I think that it's a good thing to spare some money for wildlife efforts, even if they're not in our country.

[Technical]

Who claims he was elected? We installed the Baathists, which I stated repeatedly.
Well, I stopped reading way before the end, and I wasn't paying much attention either. I'm blameless, you see, as the burden is on the speaker.

[Harion]

Well, I stopped reading way before the end, and I wasn't paying much attention either. I'm blameless, you see, as the burden is on the speaker.

reading this, i begin to doubt if the poster really is INTP. where is the use of reason in here if the poster even refuses to read through everything his opponent says? nor claiming he wasn't paying attention yet keeps coming back to quibble with chimp. he's like clamping his ears just to claim he doesn't understand what someone is telling him.

you come off to me like one of those raving republicans or those bible-lovers who when told creationism is jack shit insists it isn't because, well, just because.

what you have to understand about Iraq, is that irregardless of whether Saddam was satan or saint, the U.S. went into a country that wasn't asking for its help. you see, you can't push freedom down on other people's throat then expect them to thank you. on that note, "freeing Iranians" was a completely false pretext in invading Iraq. the U.S went into Iraq because it was running out of oil so fast that importing it alone isn't enough. it has to control the source itself. and the only reason it invaded Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia was because Iraq had the perfect escape goat in the person of saddam hussein. so now, you'll understand why Iran is so itchy about arming itself with nuclear weapons. because america has proven to the world it doesn't need compelling proof to invade a country. just the itch and the occasional megalomania.

i can go on and on but i already anticipate that we wouldn't see eye to eye. you've stuck to your beliefs without even allowing facts to dissuade you. which is kinda bewildering considering you're INTP.

[Technical]

reading this, i begin to doubt if the poster really is INTP. where is the use of reason in here if the poster even refuses to read through everything his opponent says? nor claiming he wasn't paying attention yet keeps coming back to quibble with chimp. he's like clamping his ears just to claim he doesn't understand what someone is telling him.

you come off to me like one of those raving republicans or those bible-lovers who when told creationism is jack shit insists it isn't because, well, just because.

what you have to understand about Iraq, is that irregardless of whether Saddam was satan or saint, the U.S. went into a country that wasn't asking for its help. you see, you can't push freedom down on other people's throat then expect them to thank you. on that note, "freeing Iranians" was a completely false pretext in invading Iraq. the U.S went into Iraq because it was running out of oil so fast that importing it alone isn't enough. it has to control the source itself. and the only reason it invaded Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia was because Iraq had the perfect escape goat in the person of saddam hussein. so now, you'll understand why Iran is so itchy about arming itself with nuclear weapons. because america has proven to the world it doesn't need compelling proof to invade a country. just the itch and the occasional megalomania.

i can go on and on but i already anticipate that we wouldn't see eye to eye. you've stuck to your beliefs without even allowing facts to dissuade you. which is kinda bewildering considering you're INTP.
I didn't read much of that either. How does that make you feel?

[Harion]

I didn't read much of that either. How does that make you feel?

feel? i don't have to feel it
you just proved what i said

[Technical]

feel? i don't have to feel it
you just proved what i said
I don't know what you said, so isn't that slightly irrelevant? Besides, proof is easy to come by when you have simple standards (Yet complex emotions).

[bass_n_treble]

Glenn Beck ( of Fox ) owned.
http://www.indecisionforever.com/2009/08/14/jon-stewart-owns-glenn-beck-on-healthcare-hypocrisy/

It's become obvious to me that Fox News is a singular agenda, and their personalities are not allowed to express independent thoughts of their own. That being said, this doesn't rule out that CNN functions the same way, but if I had to wager money, I'd say Glenn Beck exchanged a brainwash for a better paycheck.

[Technical]

I like this show on Fox, and they like reality, and surreality as well.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/84739/red-eye-sat-jul-18-2009#s-p1-so-i0

[ciphersort]

It's become obvious to me that Fox News is a singular agenda, and their personalities are not allowed to express independent thoughts of their own. That being said, this doesn't rule out that CNN functions the same way, but if I had to wager money, I'd say Glenn Beck exchanged a brainwash for a better paycheck.

CNN does function the same way. All news organizations down to the local newspaper function that way. If it wasn't so editors and producers would have no say... and sometimes, even they don't.

[Harion]

CNN does function the same way. All news organizations down to the local newspaper function that way. If it wasn't so editors and producers would have no say... and sometimes, even they don't.

true. worked in media so i know exactly how it is. your station's position is whatever management says it is. they'll tell you to get both sides, but they'll exercise editorial power in choosing which stories to air. if it won't raise ratings, it won't get aired. no matter how factual or how unbiased it is.