Yes We Can, But... Obama on Jon Stewart Show

To which I replied, what's the point?

Without casuality, who cares what people are watching?

It means little. It's sort of like a great work of literature, say Turgenev's Fathers and Sons. You can do a poll and pretty quickly find out that the vast majority of people reading that book are better educated and better informed. Is that particular book the critical factor that makes them so? That's doubtful, so Fathers and Sons looks less important as some kind of measuring stick, and if that's true, then the contrary is true, too. Reading a bad book isn't what makes people dumb or uninformed.

In one case cited, the difference between Stewart and O'Rielly was negligible. Something like three or four points? So again, what's the point of even mentioning all of this?

I don't equate popularity with correctness at all (I saw Transformers, and it was a terrible fucking movie -- see the point?), but I also don't subscribe to the tired notion that anytime people don't agree with me it's because they are dumb or uninformed.

The simple fact is the more people have learned about the healthcare bill, the more they do not like about it. Whether that judgment is right or wrong is tougher to say, but it's their healthcare. And at the very least, it reveals how poorly Obama has communicated with voters or responded to their wishes (not many wanted him to deal with healthcare; jobs were far more important). But then this WH has become tone deaf on a number of issues, which still surprises the heck out of me. They did much better campaigning.

Sure, they are. It's called MSNBC and Air America (until it went under).

Or you can read Krugman and Dowd and Rich in NYT. These folks aren't lying, per se, but they aren't giving you much of anything but bias and agenda-driven bullshit, something you seemingly don't understand -- or haven't in the past anyway. And, of course, you think the Right is LYING, simply because they have a different viewpoint. So does, Ice. And yet, you wonder where the animosity and partisanship comes from? And you both blame one side? Keep calling people liars. I hear that helps with dialogues...

Meanwhile, both sides are advancing their agenda, and neither really cares if fairness or complete honesty get trampled in the process. And it's been this way for some time. I posted a complaint about the infamous Petraues moveon ad in another thread. There's a perfect example of the Left lying and missrepresenting the truth. I could name dozens of others. Or you could go to one of the web's fact-check sites or so on and so forth...

If I defend them more often than I chastise them it's simply because the Lefties on this site who are the vast majority tend to say really stupid and baseless things about them.

To give another parallel, arguing that Bush is not a war criminal, as I have done on several occasions, does not make me a Republican or a Bush-lover. It just means that I am not as waaaayyyy out there on the Left as the boob arguing he is a war criminal. Something similar is happening here with the Tea Party, who I do not support. Period.

As for facts, you like to post opinions backed by opinions and call them facts. So no, I don't agree with those. And won't.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You are making a strawman.

OH yes you do. Instead of offering relevant facts you alway offer a popularity standard as undeniable proof.

I suppose you have some proof to support your claim? All data indicates that people like most of the components of the bill but dislike the overall bill. And that would seem to indicate they have been misled by the right wingers and their industry backers.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...ovisions-popular-but-overall-bills-unpopular/

You are keen to blame Democrats and Obama here and it is telling that you have no criticism for Republicans and their industry backers. Obama went way out of his way to communicate and bend over backwards to accomodate the right wing. His fault here is he went too far trying to accomodate interests who had no interest at all in working with him and in the process alienated his base. The one thing george II was very good at was doing whatever his base asked of him.

Sure, they are. It's called MSNBC and Air America (until it went under). [/QUOTE]

Yeah...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I think you just broke yet again your credibility. MSNBC has a few shows that are not right wing whacko...consituting about 4 one hour news shows during the week days that are not pushing the conservative agenda (Maddow, ED, Olberman, Matthews) and none of those personalities use the truth with wreckless abandon as you find on Fox and Clear Channel.

Air America was never national in its coverage and never had more than a few channels. You cannot seriously compare that to the national 24 hour coverage 7 days a week afforded by Fox and Clear Channel.

Your words are yet again betraying you. Yeah these people are not lying...neither are Matthews, Maddow or any of the other non conservative TV personalities. And they do support their positions with evidence and reason...something alien to the likes of limbaugh, beck, et al.

The fact checking sites mainly and consistently site the right wing for flagrant abuses of truth.

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/

You have been asked many times to show exacly how the Petraues ad was lying and you have failed to offer such proofs. Undoubtably you will find people on the Democrat side who have stretched the truth but not as wreckless as one routinely sees on the right.

When an indivual applies the same logic and reasoning consistently across the board, I consider that individual unbiased. However, when a certian line of reasoning and observation applies only to one group and not the other, that is bias. And you my friend are deeply biased.

We all know, your girlfriend and her parents are Tea Party subscribers.

People who believe that george II is a war criminal have a right to their opinion. Just because you disagree or think they are extreme does not make them so. It says more about you than it does them.

I am no fan of george II. But the charge that he is a war criminal is really just not relevant. He will never be prosecuted for anything he did while in office.

LOL,, I post facts all the time my friend with links to sources. Now just because you don't like them does not mean they are not there. For example, how many times have I cited economic data, unemployment numbers, new job less claims? The answer, a lot. And you like to dismiss them with those poplularity polls that you are now trying to walk back.

You have never posted a fact or at least I have never wittnessed such an event. You are projecting.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No, I'm writing metaphors, and in the process, showing how odd Ice's insistence on mentioning that was -- and ultimately that it proves little or nothing.

I offer it as one standard. Not the standard. I hold plenty of views that are far from popular and would never advocate the Republic or reason or anything else subscribe to the whims of masses. But I also don't think "they" are always dumb and uninformed if "they" don't agree with me. That's a liberal trait, and you and Ice exemplify it in spades.

We could play poll wars, but why bother? Your own link shows a majority against it. The numbers were slightly in favor when it passed, and have since turned negative.

I have plenty of criticism for them, starting with the fact they are all in the pocket of the prescription drug and insurance companies. But they weren't the people offering this bill that gives more money to both. That was Obama and the Dems.

You've broken nothing.

And I'm not going to get into a pointless debate about what we think of the Media, most of which I don't watch and could not comment about. But I can count. Fox News is one network. CNN, MSNBC and all three major news networks have been shown to favorite Democrats. So, too, does NPR and overwhelming amount of newspapers.

I also have my own years of personal experience in the Media, during which time I can count on one hand the number of times I met people who had voted Republican in their life. As I've said before, the reasons Fox stands out, the reason it is so obnoxious to people like you, is because it is so out of the norm, in terms of Media. And it would not have a reason for existing or a product to market if there was not a demand for conservative media in this country being met somewhere else.

About the only real argument you have is radio, where Conservatives seem to dominate. Though, in DC, liberal radio far out numbers conservative.

You might not agree with Limbaugh and Beck, but they do make arguments. Again, Joe, nobody here is really "lying." People are just presenting things in a way that makes their case appear the most logical. I don't watch any of these people because it's all opinion-based garbage, if you ask me.

Why because they don't agree with your reality?

See, I think the issue here is that news has become so mixed up with opinion that people like you can no longer seperate the two. It's about HOW a story is reported, not the facts that are reported. So if something is reported from a perspective you agree with, it's "factual." If it's reported from a perspective you're hostile toward, then it's "lies." You're failure to understand and appreciate the nuance of what is really happening is why you can offer people like Krugman as "factual" and attack others when they post opinion pieces on a different tack and still feel as though you are somehow in the right. You aren't. And you should grow up and realize that.

Seriously? Can you read? I posted the link to where the article was fact checked in that thread, Joe.

So says you.

Suuuuurrreee, Joe. Sure.

OMG -- that must make me a fucking Nazi, right? And apparently when you apply logic and reason and observation to me you totally are ignorant of something called guilt by association and the fact it's a fallacy! Seriously, Joe. Stop. You're embaressing yourself.

Uh, huh.

Says nothing about them. Nothing at all.

You cherrypick facts and graft opinion on them. Or you post a Krugman column and claim it's true and that no other interpretation of the column or of any data is possible. Here's a small clue. That's CALLED BEING AN IDEOLOGUE.

I have NEVER posted a fact? Suuuuuurrrreee, Joe. I just sit here and lie all fucking day? Because I am a right-wing, Tea Party, Republican, right? And we're all dumb liars...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No you are writting idiotic nonsense and trying to pass it off as being intellect. That is why all of your arguements are opinion only totally berift of reason and facts. You use ad hominem and strawman as subsitute for reason and fact.

You are a fake mr. CIA man.

That no doubt is why you always use the masses as justification for your positions.

Two, no one is saying that the masses are always wrong if they don't agree with someone. That is a typical limbaugh type strawman. But the masses are wrong if their conclusions fly in the face of reality, reason and fact which is clearly the case for those following Fox and the limbaughs of the world.

Bottom line, you cannot prove your claim. The more people know about healthcare reform, the more they like it.

No it was the Republicans who put public money in the pockets of insurance companies and drug companies via the Medicare Prescription Drug program in 2003. And when the Democrats voted to use that money instead for the Healthcare Reform Law/Obamacare the industry and Republicans squeeled and are still squeeling like stucked pigs.

You are right, I have broken nothing. You did.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I think you just broke yet again your credibility. MSNBC has a few shows that are not right wing whacko...consituting about 4 one hour news shows during the week days that are not pushing the conservative agenda (Maddow, ED, Olberman, Matthews) and none of those personalities use the truth with wreckless abandon as you find on Fox and Clear Channel. - Joepistole

And where is the evidence to support this opinion? Where is the reasoning? Answer, there is none...just as with any of your numerous other opinions.

As has been pointed out to you this liberal MSNBC that you like to refer to has a morning show lasting 4 hours every day that is conservative to the core called Morning Joe hosted by Joe Scarborough former Republican Congressman. And some how in that twisted mind of yours you equate that with liberalism? Joe was party of Newts Contract with America program..very radical conservativism.

There may be people in the media who are liberal. But here is the difference. Those "liberal" people are honest brokers. They don't present or favor one side over the other. They are professionals, not politicians.

No, they spread fear and lies. You are going to need a lot of lipstick to put a nice face on that pig.

AH, NO. Because they are pushing an agenda based on lies. Instead of creating arguement based on reason and fact you are creating a strawman just like limbaugh and his ilk do every day.

I think the only one mixed up here is you my friend. I could care less about how a story is reported as long the story is presented with all relevant facts That means not cherry picking - reporting only the information that supports your position and ignoring the material that runs counter to the theme being pushed which is what Fox and limbaugh do all the time.

Differing perspectives are good things, reasoning and facts are good things countezero. It is only radical extremist people like you who have problems with differing perspectives, fact and reason. You are yet again projecting your insecurities onto others.

LOL, yeah seriously. This is yet again very typical of you. When pushed for evidence you shit and run like a dog with his tail between his legs rather than produce evidence to support your opinions and claims.

Yeah says me and any other unbiased observer of American politics.

Originally Posted by joepistole
When an indivual applies the same logic and reasoning consistently across the board, I consider that individual unbiased. However, when a certian line of reasoning and observation applies only to one group and not the other, that is bias. And you my friend are deeply biased.

I think my previous statement speaks for itself and is self evident.

You are broadcasting your insecurities again my friend. Going back to the old strawman arguement that has served you, limbaugh and many other right wing extremists so well over the course of the years.

You are the one who is always refering to your associations with Tea Partiers as evidence that they are not extreme...not me. Your association with Tea Partiers does not mean they are not extreme....smart boy.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I used this arguement in sarcasim. When you originally tossed it out in defense of Tea Partiers....you didn't recognize your arguement as lame. When I tossed it back at you, you quickly picked up that it was a lame arguement. That my friend means you are not totally brain dead. But it does mean that you are very biased and not the unbiased soul you like to represent yourself to be. You have been caught yet again red handed.

That is right, just because people hold differing opinions from yours, it does not mean they are extremist as you have previously labeled those folks.

Well if you think I cherry pick, now is the time to show it. I challenge you to show where I have engaged in cherry picking. I can post a Krugmann column and claim it's true because it is. Krugman backs his opinion up with decades of scientific research. You an others like you want to justifiy your irrational positions by raising the Austrian story as an excuse. Austrians are anti-observation and reason. It is like the old evolution debate. You and those like you are non the side of the monkey...and against science and Darwin.

Perhaps you are confusing gaps or errors in your knowledge with cherry picking. Put up or shut up countezero.

Ah, yeah. But not everybody is a dumb liar. There are many honest Tea Partiers, Republicans, Independents and Democrats out there. But there is also a lot of ignorance and misinformation. And with you I think it is mostly ignorance and arrogance.

 

Its peoples own fault for thinking he was the second coming, heck even Jesus Christ him self could not fix this nation! I blame amercia, they become so god dam stupid, heck soon they will put in power the very same people that made this mess simply because the other guys couldn't fix an economic model that as been souring for 30 years!

 

You have consistently retailed their propaganda - right down to the the same vocabulary as recommended in memos from Republican campaign strategists and adopted on cue by the minions throughout the media (socialist, then marxist - to note a recent amusing transition), the same errors of fact and context repeated for hypnotic framing by other Republican propagandists (both sides do whatever) and so forth.

No one is talking ancient history here. The exact opposite - in olden times, the Reps were not monolithic either. Today, and since about 1994 essentially, they are. The Dems aren't.

That is false. The opposite is true, except for the very well informed: and those people blame the Republicans for the flaws.

The only way to make that assertion is to be pretending that the disinformation campaign launched against the bill - starting with the name "Obamacare", for a product of Congress not dictated to it by the White House - has an equivalent mirror image on the "other side".

Also false. Compre the careers of Dan Rather and Brit Hume, the hiring of Karl Rove vs - vs - - anyone, I guess.

Again the false claim of symmetry - the act of talking into a camera is not at issue. Lies and misinformation are the issue.

They aren't lying per se. So they are on an entirely different level, doing something quite different, from Fox& Friends.

Take a basic stats course.

Whose? Nobody I know thought he was the second coming.

A whole lot of people think other people - an entire "side" of people - thought he was the second coming. Where did they get that idea, and why are they so focused on the satisfaction of those other people being wrong? ( wrong too, maybe? You gotta know that under it all, the people who voted twice for W can't quite get comfortable in their minds).

 

Your say: "since i know what one person said\thinks, i now know what another ten million would say. Thats what the numbers work out too. Understand that much?

I'll tell you somehting right now: The radical yahoo's on the LEFT are going to make him loose.

 

Sure, Ice.

Whatever.

I'm sure you're prepared to make direct comparisons between my comments to Republican propaganda -- itself a loaded term (does Democratic propaganda exist in your world, one wonders)? And then you'd be able to prove, somehow, that if there was a similarity, that denoted partisan agreement from the person who is telling you he is not a partisan, as opposed to self-determination?

To who? Rahm Emmanuel. Sydney Blumenthal. James Carville. Donna Brazille. Should I go on? Political hucksters and agents of agenda exist on both sides of the aisle, buddy. You just think one group is right, the other wrong. Congratulations. You're an ideologue.

I've never seen anyone on this site post anything resembling a "lie" from the media outlets they detest, despite several attempts at doing so. That's because when the parties "lie" they are much more clever than presenting abject falsehoods. As I told Joe, the issue here is that news has become so mixed up with opinion that people like you can no longer separate the two. It's about HOW a story is reported, not the facts that are reported. So if something is reported from a perspective you agree with, it's "factual." If it's reported from a perspective you're hostile toward, then it's "lies."

To a certain degree this is not your fault. Few, if any, news outlets are reporting stories without opinion grafted into them. Which is why I avoid television altogether and try to read the Wires and a balance of newspapers, some leftish, some rightish. We know what you read...

 

Yes, you have.

One set of sides "side" cares about whether its hucksters are dealing in facts and reality, while the other unitary "side" supports its hucksters in promoting dishonest propaganda and deliberate misinformation and flat lies.

One set of sides, when caught in error or even a mistake in support of a fact, is embarrassed - may even fire someone. The side at issue is not embarrassed - will not even necessarily quit repeating known falsehoods, let alone fire somebody over them. (The runup to and first year of the Iraq War provides innumerable examples).

It's about the news media fully coopted by Republican corporate interests "reporting" in such a way as to lie, mislead, misinform, confuse, make vulnerable, and ultimately betray its audience, with respect to the facts and events of the common reality.

Right and wrong don't even enter the picture, at this stage. The Republican Party and its media support has been taken over by people who do not care whether they are right or wrong, factually.

 

STFU

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

:roflmao:

 

I'm going to hold the Republican Party supporters responsible for their votes.

And when they try to say "the Left made me do it", I'm not even going to bother to laugh at them.

Nobody is holding a gun to their heads, and making them do foolish and damaging things for petulant and childish reasons. I watched them vote for W twice, before that elect and re-elect Reagan, in between times put a full bore effort into wrecking the US government under Clinton, as they are attempting to do under Obama. They live in the wreckage, and it's all someone else's fault - they never yet have shown the slightest remorse, the slightest regret for the consequences of their political behavior.

Apparently, like an alcoholic, the bigot white male vote has to bottom out - wreck the whole place, bankrupt the country and put themselves in the hands of uncurbed greed and authoritarian misrule for a while - before they realize that ignorance and reactionary violence simply don't work.

 

No, I haven't. I've seen people post opinions they do not agree with or the framing of a particular issue they believe is inaccurate. Lies are something entirely different. And you know better.

I get it. You believe that. Endlessly repeating it doesn't make it so. Nor does it persuade me in the slightest.

And Clinton-Lewinsky doesn't provide plenty of easy counters? Who walked the plank there, Ice? How many people were fired for lying, abetting a lie and trying to destroy the people who weren't lying?

You're inability to remember reality would be astounding if I didn't know you better...

The fact you can type that (with a perfectly straight face, one imagines) and actually believe it speaks volumes about your disconnect from reality. A Republican media? Despite all indications to the contrary?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

People will wonder if a political party cannot win fairly.

So now your a bigot. Congratulations.

Dont you see that it is you who looks a lot like an authoritarian because if it walks like a duck....etc.

 

I think it telling that you and buffalo roam have to go back decades to find a Democrat when trying to establish some sort of equlivancy of transgression. You don't have to go back more than a decade to find a Republican/Tea Partier engaged in active lying and disinformation. That happens every day on Clear Channel and Fox News.

 

I think that Conservatives are smarter. Based on that, i am beginning to become more conservative in the past few years actually.

 

Harry Reid lied not three weeks ago.

 

Your smarterness shows John99.

 

Political leanings probably have nothing to do with intelligence, the reasons one becomes more conservative with aging vary, but certianly is not that your growing new brain cells. Reason maybe link to how older people become resistant to change and how they become more selfish having to care for a family, make ends meet, etc.

http://ann.sagepub.com/content/415/1/176.short

 

Oh, care to show where he lied or is this yet another in a long line of unsubstanciated claims?

 

Agreed and being more knowlegable is probably a contributing factor. But in the end the human animal is driven more by his/her primal emotions than knowledge or reason. So every decision in the end is an emotional decision. Some of us are more rational than others. I suppose in the end it is in our DNA. Some of us are more capable in that regard than others.

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/weird/Scientists-May-Have-IDd-Liberal-Gene-105917218.html