The Demonizing of America


Off-Topic Discussions

51 to 88 of 88 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

Kirth Gersen wrote:

David,

Sorry for not replying sooner; I just found this post.

In short, it's not only the "liberal mainstream media" that are to blame (although they certainly get half of it). But the (just as mainstream) conservative media are equally and unashamedly as bad. And, yes, everyone -- believe it or not, radio IS a communication medium, just as TV is. And given the number of listeners of some of these shows, to claim they're not "mainstream" is disingenious at best.

I agree completely. While I do listen to conservative talk radio, I spend a lot of time questioning whether they actually know what they are talking about, particularly when I listen to Glenn Beck. When I had my satellite radio, I also listened to a lot of liberal talk radio. I found them to both be equally entertaining, although I found at least one of the liberal talkers I listened to to be racist, mysogonist, and offensive.

As a study I once had my government students listen to one hour of conservative talk radio and one hour of liberal talk radio. Despite mot of my students being left of center ideology, they all agreed that conservative talk radio seem more informed, rational, and entertaining. It is an issue that crosses the entire political spectrum.

To give you an example of what I consider good news coverage, I like the McNeil Leher News Hour. Even though they are biased left of center from my viewpoint, I feel that they do an excellent job of covering the issue with more depth than just a few sound bites. I also enjoy listening to the news on NPR because they spend a large amount of time on each story rather than just a few seconds to a minute. Even though both of these sources are more liberal than conservative in my opinion, they both do a good job of discussing and informing. They also do a really good job of covering the pros and cons of each issue they discuss. These are both examples of what I would call good news sources.


David Fryer wrote:
To give you an example of what I consider good news coverage, I like the McNeil Leher News Hour. Even though they are biased left of center from my viewpoint, I feel that they do an excellent job of covering the issue with more depth than just a few sound bites. I also enjoy listening to the news on NPR because they spend a large amount of time on each story rather than just a few seconds to a minute. Even though both of these sources are more liberal than conservative in my opinion, they both do a good job of discussing and informing. They also do a really good job of covering the pros and cons of each issue they discuss. These are both examples of what I would call good news sources.

I grew up with the McNeil Lehrer Report, so I'll personally leave them out -- I feel like I need to compare post-Fairness Doctrine sources to post-Fairness Doctrine sources, and memories of past MNL reports might skew my view. NPR puts me to sleep; I like the in-depth coverage, but I hate the way they'll announce "and so the stock option index of Kyokistan is up 15%, with more detailed coverage coming in just a moment when our correspondent comes on line, and by the way the Americans just elected a new president... Ah, here's Nigel Tuffnel in Kyokistan! Hello, Nigel!" Reuters is my personal favorite: they mostly just broker facts to other news agencies, so they tend to stick to the point.

David Fryer wrote:
As a study I once had my government students listen to one hour of conservative talk radio and one hour of liberal talk radio. Despite mot of my students being left of center ideology, they all agreed that conservative talk radio seem more informed, rational, and entertaining.

I agree they seem that way, which explains their much greater popularity. But one can easily seem to be rational and informed, while meanwhile spouting nothing but lies, with made up numbers to support them.

The Exchange

THE CONSEQUENCE OF NOT HAVING UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE

"In December of 1927, Hickman, nineteen years old, showed up at a Los Angeles public school and managed to get custody of a twelve-year-old girl, Marian (sometimes Marion) Parker. He was able to convince Marian's teacher that the girl's father, a well-known banker, had been seriously injured in a car accident and that the girl had to go to the hospital immediately. The story was a lie. Hickman disappeared with Marian, and over the next few days Mr. and Mrs. Parker received a series of ransom notes. The notes were cruel and taunting and were sometimes signed "Death" or "Fate." The sum of $1,500 was demanded for the child's safe release. (Hickman needed this sum, he later claimed, because he wanted to go to Bible college!) The father raised the payment in gold certificates and delivered it to Hickman."

"At the rendezvous, Mr. Parker handed over the money to a young man who was waiting for him in a parked car. When Mr. Parker paid the ransom, he could see his daughter, Marion, sitting in the passenger seat next to the suspect. As soon as the money was exchanged, the suspect drove off with the victim still in the car. At the end of the street, Marion's corpse was dumped onto the pavement. She was dead. Her legs had been chopped off and her eyes had been wired open to appear as if she was still alive. Her internal organs had been cut out and pieces of her body were later found strewn all over the Los Angeles area."
-"Fate, Death and the Fox", crimelibrary.com

What role does Universal Healthcare play in a society? Beyond the treatment of such a sociopath at an early age when the symptoms began to manifest and protecting the victim Hickman from exposure to to the very thing that created his mental illness, it provides a psychological sea wall to the whole of society that tells them that life has value and that self is not a trait of civilization.

Dark Archive

First off, similar crimes have occured in countries with Universal health care. In fact there is nothing in this horrific story that would have changed if universal heath care existed in the United States. therefore this is exactly the type of inaccurate, misleading, and dishonest rhetoric that we are discussing. Second of all, isn't this the wrong thread for this crap?


David Fryer wrote:
First off, similar crimes have occured in countries with Universal health care. In fact there is nothing in this horrific story that would have changed if universal heath care existed in the United States. therefore this is exactly the type of inaccurate, misleading, and dishonest rhetoric that we are discussing. Second of all, isn't this the wrong thread for this crap?

It's Yellowdingo, David. You can't expect him to be on-topic. Or to make sense. Just roll with it.


I would think that what is wrong with the demonization of America would be obvious. As the Great Satan, the USA is clearly Lawful Evil. Make the world stop hurting me with it's ignorance!

Spoiler:
No, I just couldn't stand it. On this page, it's practically brand new!

Dark Archive

True. However, the blatent explotation of such a horrific crime really ticks me off, both as a father and as an ex-cop. To me, to try and say this monsterous act would not have occured if we had universal health care cheapens the tragedy the family suffered and is more dehumanizing than not providing health care for everyone could ever be. It's like the wack jobs that protest soldier's funeral in my mind.

Dark Archive

Spoiler:
More importantly I was lead investigator on a similar crime, so I'm sensitive to the whole situation to begin with. we never caught the bastard who did it.

The Exchange

David Fryer wrote:
True. However, the blatent explotation of such a horrific crime really ticks me off, both as a father and as an ex-cop. To me, to try and say this monsterous act would not have occured if we had universal health care cheapens the tragedy the family suffered and is more dehumanizing than not providing health care for everyone could ever be. It's like the wack jobs that protest soldier's funeral in my mind.

And tomorrow when the same thing is in a report to the US president along with charts and an assortment of Data proving the benificial psychological improvements to society of Universal Healthcare, you will likely give it a High Distinction.


David Fryer wrote:
First off, similar crimes have occured in countries with Universal health care. In fact there is nothing in this horrific story that would have changed if universal heath care existed in the United States. therefore this is exactly the type of inaccurate, misleading, and dishonest rhetoric that we are discussing. Second of all, isn't this the wrong thread for this crap?

Angering you is how he gets his jollies David, don't feed the yellow dingus troll.

Dark Archive

Patrick Curtin wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
First off, similar crimes have occured in countries with Universal health care. In fact there is nothing in this horrific story that would have changed if universal heath care existed in the United States. therefore this is exactly the type of inaccurate, misleading, and dishonest rhetoric that we are discussing. Second of all, isn't this the wrong thread for this crap?
Angering you is how he gets his jollies David, don't feed the yellow dingus troll.

Sorry, I missed the sign. Time to get out the flame proof underwear.


Fight, fight, fight!


Peeks in, checking for business.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens Subscriber
DoveArrow wrote:


I'll let you in on a little secret. If you don't like the media- if you honestly think they're the cause of all our social ills- there's this little button on almost any television, computer, or radio made anymore that says 'Power.' If you press it once, the evil media intelligentsia will no longer be able to reach you with their messages of propaganda.

Tell your friends about it. :-)

Well, I found this little secret quite a while ago ;-) And I don´t read newspapers covered with headlines half a page high, as well. I just think that many people can´t be bothered with thinking for themselves, rather feeding on some regurgitated stuff fed to them.

I don´t think the media is the root of the problem, rather, a willing accomplice in the name of a "good story". I thought that my post was clear enough to show that I mainly blame the political caste nowadays.

The current federal minister (or is secretary?) of family affairs is introducing a law which allows a federal police institution to block websites from viewing. Officially, this aims at the abomination that is child porn - it goes without saying that this should be fought will full force. But once an instrument is introduced that can be used to block websites, going from blocking illegal content to blocking unwanted but legal content is only a small step. What´s more, Sweden has had four years of experience with this kind of blocking. The Swedish police states that the blocking of websites has done nothing to reduce the amount of this stuff produced, while a German child protection society just checked a list of 20 websites allegedly containing that stuff, and had 16 of them offline within a few days, by simply notifiying the ISP. It is already illegal to post that stuff anyway, of course, so there is no need for this kind of law.

But this minister will have this law, no matter how much it is shown that this law is completely superfluous and potentially harmful. She fights critics with basest ad-hominem attacks, alledging that the critics support child porn.

That is what I call inept politicians. I´m not sure if that minister is indeed so stubborn that she believes her own BS, or if she consciously lies to the populace to introduce a censorship tool. Guess which party my vote does not go to...

Stefan

The Exchange

Patrick Curtin wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
First off, similar crimes have occured in countries with Universal health care. In fact there is nothing in this horrific story that would have changed if universal heath care existed in the United States. therefore this is exactly the type of inaccurate, misleading, and dishonest rhetoric that we are discussing. Second of all, isn't this the wrong thread for this crap?
Angering you is how he gets his jollies David, don't feed the yellow dingus troll.

Only you would think a point of view you dont like is a TROLL. If I want my point of view censored and spun so it sounds Like I support the regime - I'll send a letter to the Editor of my local newspaper.


yellowdingo wrote:
Only you would think a point of view you dont like is a TROLL. If I want my point of view censored and spun so it sounds Like I support the regime - I'll send a letter to the Editor of my local newspaper.

[edited for unneccesary anger]

You know what YD, I'm going to nip this is the bud. I apologize for impugning you with the troll moniker. I posted in anger, never a wise thing. You have every right to post whatever you want, so feel free. I will not comment on it any more.

I should really listen to my own advice.


Stebehil wrote:

Well, I found this little secret quite a while ago ;-) And I don´t read newspapers covered with headlines half a page high, as well. I just think that many people can´t be bothered with thinking for themselves, rather feeding on some regurgitated stuff fed to them.

I don´t think the media is the root of the problem, rather, a willing accomplice in the name of a "good story". I thought that my post was clear enough to show that I mainly blame the political caste nowadays.

The current federal minister (or is secretary?) of family affairs is introducing a law which allows a federal police institution to block websites from viewing. Officially, this aims at the abomination that is child porn - it goes without saying that this should be fought will full force. But once an instrument is introduced that can be used to block websites, going from blocking illegal content to blocking unwanted but legal content is only a small step. What´s more, Sweden has had four years of experience with this kind of blocking. The Swedish police states that the blocking of websites has done nothing to reduce the amount of this stuff produced, while a German child protection society just checked a list of 20 websites allegedly containing that stuff, and had 16 of them offline within a few days, by simply notifiying the ISP. It is already illegal to post that stuff anyway, of course, so there is no need for this kind of law.

But this minister will have this law, no matter how much it is shown that this law is completely superfluous and potentially harmful. She fights critics with basest ad-hominem attacks, alledging that the critics support child porn.

That is what I call inept politicians. I´m not sure if that minister is indeed so stubborn that she believes her own BS, or if she consciously lies to the populace to introduce a censorship tool. Guess which party my vote does not go to...

Stefan

Here in America the panic at the sexualization of children is quite rampant. I'm sorry to see that it is also spreading throughout at least some parts of Europe. Do you guys have problems with ... I can't believe I ever have to type this ... sexting?

Over here we've been arresting teenagers and throwing them in jail/putting them on lifetime sexual predator lists because they have been making and distributing "child pornography". By taking pictures of themselves naked. Sigh.


Angry Fanboy wrote:
Fight, fight, fight!

I like soundbites!!!


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens Subscriber
David Marks wrote:

Here in America the panic at the sexualization of children is quite rampant. I'm sorry to see that it is also spreading throughout at least some parts of Europe. Do you guys have problems with ... I can't believe I ever have to type this ... sexting?

Over here we've been arresting teenagers and throwing them in jail/putting them on lifetime sexual predator lists because they have been making and distributing "child pornography". By taking pictures of themselves naked. Sigh.

Well, it is not that mad (yet). This is more a case of a politician running rampant with her personal crusade against what she percieves is an ever-growing million-dollar market (which it isn´t). I´m not sure if she is just incompetent or truly malignant, but she tries to introduce a handy tool for internet censorship. What´s more, the blacklist used by the federal police was supposed to be not available to any control outside the police itself in the first draft of the law - not even judges or the parliament. This was amended after protests. Still, a complaint of unconstitutionality is to be filed on the grounds that this law is capable of impeding several basic rights at once: Protection of communication, the right of informational self-determination, freedom of information, freedom of vocational choice (in case of the ISP). All these rights are protected by our constitution, the Grundgesetz. Reducing or even negating these constitutional rights is only tolerable in very narrowly defined circumstances (with very good reason), and preventing possible crimes (as opposed to preventing planned crime that can be proven) is definitely ruled out.

The general populace is very sensitive to real or imagined crimes against children these days, but not over the top like your example.

Stefan


David Fryer wrote:
True. However, the blatent explotation of such a horrific crime really ticks me off, both as a father and as an ex-cop. To me, to try and say this monsterous act would not have occured if we had universal health care cheapens the tragedy the family suffered and is more dehumanizing than not providing health care for everyone could ever be. It's like the wack jobs that protest soldier's funeral in my mind.

I'm all in support of universal healthcare, but I have to agree that the story above is apalling. To suggest that universal healthcare would have prevented this tragedy is absolutely absurd. There are plenty of people, with adequate access to healthcare services, that still commit egregious atrocities. I don't remember the exact details, but I remember reading a story about a young man who told his psychologist that he identified with the character of Michael or Jason (I can't remember which). Despite the fact that this young man was being treated for his delusion, he still wound up killing several people.

There are plenty of solid arguments for why we should have universal healthcare. This agrument is not, and should not be, one of them.


DoveArrow wrote:


I'll let you in on a little secret. If you don't like the media- if you honestly think they're the cause of all our social ills- there's this little button on almost any television, computer, or radio made anymore that says 'Power.' If you press it once, the evil media intelligentsia will no longer be able to reach you with their messages of propaganda.

Tell your friends about it. :-)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

DON'T DO THAT!!!!!
MY RATINGS ARE ALREADY SPIRALING DOWN THE CRAPPER!!!

I'M MELTING!!!!MELTING!!!MELLLLLTTTINNNNNNGGGGGGGG!!!!!

Dark Archive

Ok lets cut the crap
Republicans lets start with this. If you honestly think that the democrats are trying to make the US a communist country at best you just are naive at worst you are clinically paranoid.
Democrats lets start with the stupid paranoid ideas that the republicans caused 911 and invaded Iraq for oil. Thats absolutely stupid and again your either Naive or clinically paranoid.
AND IF YOU THINK EITHER PARTY IS TRYING TO DESTROY AMERICA YOUR AN IDIOT AND NEED TO PULL YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS.
Frankly you both need to grow up and stop listening to those instigators on television and yes I mean you Bill Oreilly and Rush Limbaugh. And I also mean you Michael Moore and John Stocil. Seriously turn off your television some of them are just feeding you ridiculousness and if you took a minute to think you'd see that.

Scarab Sages

Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean that my parents aren't really aliens who shed their human skins at night and consume copious amounts of dryer lint.

Dark Archive

Did you know that blue M&Ms can cure paralysis? No, really, it's true.


Just checked back at the Healthcare thread. My mistake. For those participants in the U.S. old enough to vote, you can gauge each person's party affiliation with 100% accuracy by reading any one (1) of their posts. Like I said, the debate isn't about health care at all. It's about whose "side" gets to "win."

David -- Everyone in the world avidly describes him or herself as a "moderate," but for that label to apply in reality, it would imply an ability to see pros AND cons of any given issue. I see absolutely no examples of that on the Healthcare thread, just as I see no examples of that when it comes to climate change, evolution/creation, or any other topic-of-the-day.

Liberty's Edge

Depends on your definition of "party affiliation."
Me, I just don't think what they're proposing will work. If anything, the current gaggle in Washington is driving me towards the GOP.


Kirth Gersen wrote:

Just checked back at the Healthcare thread. My mistake. For those participants in the U.S. old enough to vote, you can gauge each person's party affiliation with 100% accuracy by reading any one (1) of their posts. Like I said, the debate isn't about health care at all. It's about whose "side" gets to "win."

David -- Everyone in the world avidly describes him or herself as a "moderate," but for that label to apply in reality, it would imply an ability to see pros AND cons of any given issue. I see absolutely no examples of that on the Healthcare thread, just as I see no examples of that when it comes to climate change, evolution/creation, or any other topic-of-the-day.

I tend to vote Dem locally and Rep national. What party am I affliliated with?


pres man wrote:
I tend to vote Dem locally and Rep national. What party am I affliliated with?

Given that your posts are 100% in line with Republican standpoints on all issues I've seen on the boards, without any exception I can recall...


Kirth Gersen wrote:
pres man wrote:
I tend to vote Dem locally and Rep national. What party am I affliliated with?
Given that your posts are 100% in line with Republican standpoints on all issues I've seen...

Which just happen to be national issues ...

And actually I do not. I often times like some of the Dems ideas, but not all of them. Unfortunately in politics you either get the whole thing or nothing. Take the healthcare debate. I support the idea of covering all americans but I don't want to see a government insurance program. Instead I want to see mandatory issurance. The National Dems don't want that idea, either take the government insurance or shut up. It is not me who is not open.


pres man wrote:
The National Dems don't want that idea, either take the government insurance or shut up. It is not me who is not open.

Have those "geniuses" in Washington decided that a Swiss-style system (private care, privately managed but held to a government-mandated system of uniform regulation) cannot work? If the Dems have taken that off the table (as maybe a workable compromise), then more fool them. One party is as bad as the other.

EDIT: Apologies, pres man, I was a bit out of line in calling you out there. Bad form on my part. The whole issue has got me miffed at everyone on both sides of the fence, as usual.

The Exchange

"Our Words are backed with nuclear Weapons!"

FBI chief declares Scotland's decision to release Lockerby Bomber on compasionate grounds 'outrageous'. Time for Obama to return from holidays in the Commonwealth nation of the Bahamas and censure this 'lacky' for stepping out of place.

The Exchange

Patrick Curtin wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:
Only you would think a point of view you dont like is a TROLL. If I want my point of view censored and spun so it sounds Like I support the regime - I'll send a letter to the Editor of my local newspaper.

[edited for unneccesary anger]

You know what YD, I'm going to nip this is the bud. I apologize for impugning you with the troll moniker. I posted in anger, never a wise thing. You have every right to post whatever you want, so feel free. I will not comment on it any more.

I should really listen to my own advice.

Thats OK Pat...[bearhug] I Wubsi Wub wub you too![/wedgie]


pres man wrote:

Which just happen to be national issues ...

And actually I do not. I often times like some of the Dems ideas, but not all of them. Unfortunately in politics you either get the whole thing or nothing. Take the healthcare debate. I support the idea of covering all americans but I don't want to see a government insurance program. Instead I want to see mandatory issurance. The National Dems don't want that idea, either take the government insurance or shut up. It is not me who is not open.

Pres, I believe current health care reform does have a mandate for health care insurance (I assume that is what you were saying). I'm not sure where you have the idea that you take the government insurance or shut up; the current proposal simply creates a public health insurance plan that those buying health care on the individual market can choose. There will be many (MANY!) more private insurance plans, and they will cover many (MANY!) more individuals.


Kirth Gersen wrote:

Have those "geniuses" in Washington decided that a Swiss-style system (private care, privately managed but held to a government-mandated system of uniform regulation) cannot work? If the Dems have taken that off the table (as maybe a workable compromise), then more fool them. One party is as bad as the other.

While the Swiss system is currently completely private, with government mandates and regulations, my understanding is that at its outset, it looked much like the current proposals in Congress, including a public health insurance plan. It was only recently that they dismantled their public plan when it became obvious it was no longer needed.

Edit: This post, and my last one, rightly belong in the health care thread, and not this one. I'm going to copy them over, pres and Kirth, and will try to only post future responses here.


David Marks wrote:
pres man wrote:

Which just happen to be national issues ...

And actually I do not. I often times like some of the Dems ideas, but not all of them. Unfortunately in politics you either get the whole thing or nothing. Take the healthcare debate. I support the idea of covering all americans but I don't want to see a government insurance program. Instead I want to see mandatory issurance. The National Dems don't want that idea, either take the government insurance or shut up. It is not me who is not open.

Pres, I believe current health care reform does have a mandate for health care insurance (I assume that is what you were saying). I'm not sure where you have the idea that you take the government insurance or shut up; the current proposal simply creates a public health insurance plan that those buying health care on the individual market can choose. There will be many (MANY!) more private insurance plans, and they will cover many (MANY!) more individuals.

Sorry David, I wasn't as clear as I could have been. I mean if you don't want the public option in the plan, then you are being told to shut up, even if you want other things that are in the plan. Hopefully that clears up the confusion.

I'll post this in the other thread, just wanted to clear up any additional confusion here.


David Fryer wrote:
True. However, the blatent explotation of such a horrific crime really ticks me off, both as a father and as an ex-cop. To me, to try and say this monsterous act would not have occured if we had universal health care cheapens the tragedy the family suffered and is more dehumanizing than not providing health care for everyone could ever be. It's like the wack jobs that protest soldier's funeral in my mind.

If it makes you feel any better - I agree with you. That filthy post is complete b~!@*@#! for the reason you site. I'm ashamed to have such an individual on 'my team'.


Yeah, I think I am going to take a vacation from posting political. Just really not feeling the love (not that there was much to be had.). In the end I come here for the games, and I shouldn't let politics ruin my fun activity. I'm not getting anywhere in the middle of the road, and I'm tired of the Conservative moniker, when I'd vote hand in hand with many ultra liberals on any 'social' issue like gay marraige or church and state.

51 to 88 of 88 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / The Demonizing of America All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.