Ratcheting back a notch or two?

[Revoltingest]

Well, those were certainly a waste of time.

Of course.
I could cite others, but I know that they too would reach the wrong conclusion for you.

 

[Magic Man]

Of course.
I could cite others, but I know that they too would reach the wrong conclusion for you.

It's not that they reach the wrong conclusion. They just didn't show any good evidence for their conclusion.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Just because Obama is not as liberal as you doesn't mean that he is not a liberal.

No, Obama is pretty close to a moderate. I wouldn't say a completely centered moderate as he does have some liberal leanings, but I certainly wouldn't label him a liberal.

As far as the Hitler thing, while Bush is ahead in the race, neither one really comes close. While Bush did break many international laws to invade Iraq, all while seemingly ignoring the Taliban and Afghanistan (which is why we went to war in the first place), and he instilled the belief that we must give up civil liberties for security ("Those who sacrifice liberties for security deserve neither" also proves the right really doesn't know anything about the Founding Fathers), he still wasn't a Hitler. Obama has just stalled to much, and hasn't done a very good job at leading the Democrats. Although I suspect that may partly be due to the fact that he lacks seniority in the Capitol Hill scene.

 

[Revoltingest]

No, Obama is pretty close to a moderate. I wouldn't say a completely centered moderate as he does have some liberal leanings, but I certainly wouldn't label him a liberal.

As far as the Hitler thing, while Bush is ahead in the race, neither one really comes close. While Bush did break many international laws to invade Iraq, all while seemingly ignoring the Taliban and Afghanistan (which is why we went to war in the first place), and he instilled the belief that we must give up civil liberties for security ("Those who sacrifice liberties for security deserve neither" also proves the right really doesn't know anything about the Founding Fathers), he still wasn't a Hitler. Obama has just stalled to much, and hasn't done a very good job at leading the Democrats. Although I suspect that may partly be due to the fact that he lacks seniority in the Capitol Hill scene.

If I didn't know better, reading your last paragraph, I get the impression that you
think Obama is just a less capable Hitler than Bush. Now, that's faint praise!

I still maintain that unless someone wears a funny mustache & builds gas chambers
for millions, it's best to completely avoid comparisons with Hitler.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

As for the "liberal media bias" debate, it's worth noting that, depending on the time frame and the person speaking, the media has been accused of a wide variety of biases:
Liberal bias
Conservative bias
Pro-Israel bias
Anti-Israel bias
... and on and on ...

Until there is a way to quantify the accusation, there really is no resolution to the debate.

Personally, I see today's media as being slightly right leaning, while I see the internet as being slightly left leaning. Then again, I lean slightly left on social issues, so my bias is coloring my views.

 

[Engyo]

Personally, I see the media being slightly profit-leaning. Each media outlet has their niche, and they pander to their markets, and their advertisers. They lean politically across the spectrum, depending on what they think will gain them market share and thus advertising dollars.

 

[Revoltingest]

As for the "liberal media bias" debate, it's worth noting that, depending on the time frame and the person speaking, the media has been accused of a wide variety of biases:
Liberal bias
Conservative bias
Pro-Israel bias
Anti-Israel bias
... and on and on ...

Until there is a way to quantify the accusation, there really is no resolution to the debate.

Personally, I see today's media as being slightly right leaning, while I see the internet as being slightly left leaning. Then again, I lean slightly left on social issues, so my bias is coloring my views.

With bias perception, the observer is key. A hard-core bleeding heart lefty would see the media as being right leaning. A knuckle walking right winger
would see the opposite. The trick is to measure which way the media lean with respect to some average of values. I thought this study took that approach.
Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist / UCLA Newsroom
Mball didn't like this article cuz of lack of evidence, but then he read only the article, & not the study itself.

Were I to examine the media from my perspective, they're all statists with some differences on just how they want to oppress us. I see the media as sort
of left leaning. But it's pretty worthless for me to judge them by my standards, eh?

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Personally, I see the media being slightly profit-leaning. Each media outlet has their niche, and they pander to their markets, and their advertisers. They lean politically across the spectrum, depending on what they think will gain them market share and thus advertising dollars.

Well said, Engyo.

And I don't think anyone can really argue against that.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

But it's pretty worthless for me to judge them by my standards, eh?

... and now you expect us to believe that you have standards?

Quite revolting.

 

[Magic Man]

Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist / UCLA Newsroom
Mball didn't like this article cuz of lack of evidence, but then he read only the article, & not the study itself.

The article talks about the study, doesn't it? They used things like how many times someone mentions the NAACP to determine their conclusion. That's not a very good way to judge who's left-leaning and who's not. But more than that, all you have to do is watch or read different news outlets to get the answer, which is what I've done.

 

[Revoltingest]

The article talks about the study, doesn't it? They used things like how many times someone mentions the NAACP to determine their conclusion. That's not a very good way to judge who's left-leaning and who's not. But more than that, all you have to do is watch or read different news outlets to get the answer, which is what I've done.

I never said it was perfect. I welcome you to provide better studies.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If I didn't know better, reading your last paragraph, I get the impression that you
think Obama is just a less capable Hitler than Bush. Now, that's faint praise!

I don't think either one is Hitler. Bush comes closer to a Hitler comparison, but it's still very weak. Many leaders have invaded other nations in a similar manner, and many have done worse. But they didn't wipe out untold millions of people. Bush merely used a false sense of security and the guise of religion to try to get people to back his illegal actions. Obama has just had a hard time setting things into motion.

 

[Magic Man]

I never said it was perfect. I welcome you to provide better studies.

I doubt there are any good studies out there, but that doesn't mean we should use flawed ones.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't think either one is Hitler. Bush comes closer to a Hitler comparison, but it's still very weak. Many leaders have invaded other nations in a similar manner, and many have done worse. But they didn't wipe out untold millions of people. Bush merely used a false sense of security and the guise of religion to try to get people to back his illegal actions. Obama has just had a hard time setting things into motion.

Yet there is no end in sight for the wars & expanding government control even 2 years after Bush left office.
If he slightly resembles Hitler to you, then Obama would slightly resemble Hitler Junior. I just don't buy it.

Btw, I think this is the most times I've ever typed "Hitler" in one day.

 

[LuisDantas]

Shouldn't some comment be made about the role of the GOP and the Congress in this current situation?

 

[Revoltingest]

Shouldn't some comment be made about the role of the GOP and the Congress in this current situation?

Yes. Please do.

 

[Mister_T]

You also can simply ignore the message on the billboard. As far as getting your message out, I would put billboards pretty low on the list.

Maybe it's different here in the L.A. area, but actually billboards are quite in-your-face and are a great source of advertising, which is why so many people use them: They're big, flashy, attention grabbing....they're kind of hard to miss, especially if you live next to one; it's hard to have some one take that down if you don't like it there. To put it another way, if your neighbor across the street was burning crosses or had a big middle finger erected on his front lawn, you always have the option of not looking at it, right? Hopefully you're seeing the principle here.

I think the point is (which goes to the broader point I am making against the OP) is that only conservatives are the only 'divisive' ones. When liberals compare Bush to Hitler there is no outcry about liberals being 'divisive' or 'extreme' but when some conservatives get extreme in their rhetoric then we are all told to take a deep breath. It's all very interesting.

Joe, as a liberal I have spoken out against Bush/Hitler comparisons by people who share my political views and so have many other liberals. How many conservatives though are paying attention to that, rather than dismissing it so they have a talking point loaded into the chamber?

 

[LuisDantas]

Yes. Please do.

I'm a foreigner that relies on the Internet for forming opinions about USA politics, you know.

But since you invited me to pitch in on this matter... from what I have read it seems that the GOP isn't taking the loss of the presidential elections at all well. It is currently driven with a surprising determination to paint itself as quite at odds with Obama, apparently without realizing or caring what that does to the country. As a result, changes have been disappointingly slow (mainly due to congress obstruction) and criticism (teabaggers and the like) has been impressive, not the least due to its general lack of coherence.

The GOP itself is perhaps mortally wounded. It has lost any traces of a true leadership and is now listening to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin. I was surprised that it bothered with proposing a candidate in the 2008 elections, I am surprised now that they bother to go on at all. Far as I can tell, it is now a curious and dying mix of old horses who don't want to be forgotten and dangerous, inflamatory climbers who see some sort of opportunity in the general sense of insecurity and loss.

Congress, from what I have read, is mainly interested in posing to electors right now. Many of its members seem to interested above anything else in lying their hearts out in a very dramatic way, so that votes remember their names and confuse them with some sort of courageous "rogue" worth voting on.

Yet for all their failures, those two interconnected groups are still needed for anything of political significance to be done at the Federal level in the USA. IMO the current situation is a strong signal that some structural change in the model of representation is called for. Unfortunately, such a change would have to come from a grassroots level, which makes it either unlikely, slow or painful. Probably a bit of each.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Yet there is no end in sight for the wars & expanding government control even 2 years after Bush left office.
If he slightly resembles Hitler to you, then Obama would slightly resemble Hitler Junior. I just don't buy it.

As for the war, Obama has put withdrawal orders for both Iraq, which is happening, and Afghanistan which last I heard is supposed to start happening next year. Although many people have been calling back when Bush was still in office that Iraq will become a long term outpost like South Korea.
As for the expanding government, it really depends on how you see it. The Patriot Act is one of the worst bills signed in under Bush, and I was very disappointed that Obama didn't completely kill it off. As for the health care bill, personally I don't see so much as an over sized government as I do the government taking care of it's citizens. After all, we should get more than just laws and taxes from our elected officials. As for the health care bill that was passed, the insurance companies need reform. As for the auto industry, the government may have become the majority stock holder for some of the companies, but those companies were quickly destroying themselves and are very vital to the American economy. I don't like it, but like the original round of bail outs things would have gotten so much worse if it didn't happen.

Shouldn't some comment be made about the role of the GOP and the Congress in this current situation?

They need to quit opposing everything the Democrats propose just because it's what the Democrats proposed. The childish "us vs. them" mentality that the GOP Congress has is going to destroy this country quicker than anything else can.

 

[Revoltingest]

... from what I have read it seems that the GOP isn't taking the loss of the presidential elections at all well. It is currently driven with a surprising determination to paint itself as quite at odds with Obama, apparently without realizing or caring what that does to the country. As a result, changes have been disappointingly slow (mainly due to congress obstruction) and criticism (teabaggers and the like) has been impressive, not the least due to its general lack of coherence.

The GOP itself is perhaps mortally wounded. It has lost any traces of a true leadership and is now listening to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin. I was surprised that it bothered with proposing a candidate in the 2008 elections, I am surprised now that they bother to go on at all. Far as I can tell, it is now a curious and dying mix of old horses who don't want to be forgotten and dangerous, inflamatory climbers who see some sort of opportunity in the general sense of insecurity and loss.

The worm has turned before, & for both parties. With 2 parties, they fight for what they believe, but modifying their message & beliefs so they will get over 50% of the vote. As the pendulum swings back & forth, they each try to cope, sometimes too much & sometimes too little. Nothing changes except in the very short run.

Congress, from what I have read, is mainly interested in posing to electors right now. Many of its members seem to interested above anything else in lying their hearts out in a very dramatic way, so that votes remember their names and confuse them with some sort of courageous "rogue" worth voting on.

I agree with you except for the "right now" limitation.

Yet for all their failures, those two interconnected groups are still needed for anything of political significance to be done at the Federal level in the USA. IMO the current situation is a strong signal that some structural change in the model of representation is called for. Unfortunately, such a change would have to come from a grassroots level, which makes it either unlikely, slow or painful. Probably a bit of each.

I can't think of a significantly better system.