Get Out And Vote!

[7StringedBeast]

The liberal media, the default answer of conservatives

rumborak

No its the truth..Yellow Journalism runs rampant in the Liberal papers

The news media in general is hugely failing the American public.  It doesn't matter if it's conservative or liberal.  They are both spreading bias to their side.  News is not supposed to have a slant either way.  Good journalism is neutral.  American News networks are not here to inform, they are here to deliver a product they like to call "News" if that news draws people they get money from ads.  So, the more polarized they become the more people who watch.  It's become entertainment.  None of it can be taken seriously.  

The problem is, the media should be helping our situation by making us all more informed.  Instead its doing its job to brainwash the easily persuaded.  All this is done with the intent on getting more money.  That's all it is.

[rumborak]

I can't wait to hear what the "liberal papers" are.

Does it matter? It's the scapegoat of the conservatives to distract their followers of their own internal problems, and people like EPICVIEW eat it up with a ladle and repeat it everywhere.

rumborak

[EPICVIEW]

I can't wait to hear what the "liberal papers" are.

NY Times... Washington Post.. LA Times... on and on..

[EPICVIEW]

The liberal media, the default answer of conservatives

rumborak

No its the truth..Yellow Journalism runs rampant in the Liberal papers

The news media in general is hugely failing the American public.  It doesn't matter if it's conservative or liberal.  They are both spreading bias to their side.  News is not supposed to have a slant either way.  Good journalism is neutral.  American News networks are not here to inform, they are here to deliver a product they like to call "News" if that news draws people they get money from ads.  So, the more polarized they become the more people who watch.  It's become entertainment.  None of it can be taken seriously.  

The problem is, the media should be helping our situation by making us all more informed.  Instead its doing its job to brainwash the easily persuaded.  All this is done with the intent on getting more money.  That's all it is.

weall said I agree.. thats why I ask people to find out who is funding the message

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

I think a lot of the signs of bigotry (ACTUAL signs, not signs as in "indications") at the Stewart rally, were intended to be tongue-in-cheek, which was kinda the point (to a degree) of the whole rally.  I didn't see anything that I would've called outright bigoted or racist and I saw a LOT.  Granted, I didn't see it all.  As PC said, they were insulting the ridiculousness of the media who take every opportunity to tell you what to be afraid of.  On both sides.

It reminds me of that bit in "The American President" where Michael Douglas says "And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections."  15 years ago and that sentiment still rings true and always will.

[rumborak]

I can't wait to hear what the "liberal papers" are.

NY Times... Washington Post.. LA Times... on and on..

Good thing there is FOX. Photoshop is the true way of journalism.

rumborak

[EPICVIEW]

I can't wait to hear what the "liberal papers" are.

Does it matter? It's the scapegoat of the conservatives to distract their followers of their own internal problems, and people like EPICVIEW eat it up with a ladle and repeat it everywhere.

rumborak

Id apprecaite that If you have nothing nice to say to me..to ignore me..really..I am very very well educated on the subjects I choose to take part in here



I have been nothing but nice and respectful to you..

[EPICVIEW]

I think a lot of the signs of bigotry (ACTUAL signs, not signs as in "indications") at the Stewart rally, were intended to be tongue-in-cheek, which was kinda the point (to a degree) of the whole rally.  I didn't see anything that I would've called outright bigoted or racist and I saw a LOT.  Granted, I didn't see it all.  As PC said, they were insulting the ridiculousness of the media who take every opportunity to tell you what to be afraid of.  On both sides.

It reminds me of that bit in "The American President" where Michael Douglas says "And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections."  15 years ago and that sentiment still rings true and always will.

Eric Cantor as Hitler was a bit much dont ya think? that one bothered me.. I dnt see how thats at all funny..

and great post SGC

[Perpetual Change]

NY Times... Washington Post.. LA Times... on and on..

The liberal bias of the New York times is really bringing the paper down in quality, imo, but the journalism found anywhere outside the editorial page is still quite good, and unbiased, and they do bring a number of conservatives to write editorials. Like Mitt Romney, for example. The Washington Post as a liberal paper really just comes out of left-field, because it's a neo-con rag. The LA Times was formed to slander union members, and then it became a real newspaper, and now its just like any other paper with a slightly liberal op-ed page. But anyway, of course now I have to ask, what are the good papers?

[Tick]

I think a lot of the signs of bigotry (ACTUAL signs, not signs as in "indications") at the Stewart rally, were intended to be tongue-in-cheek, which was kinda the point (to a degree) of the whole rally.  I didn't see anything that I would've called outright bigoted or racist and I saw a LOT.  Granted, I didn't see it all.  As PC said, they were insulting the ridiculousness of the media who take every opportunity to tell you what to be afraid of.  On both sides.

It reminds me of that bit in "The American President" where Michael Douglas says "And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections."  15 years ago and that sentiment still rings true and always will.

How ironic is it that Richard Dreyfuss played Bob Rumson.
What was his slogan? Something like..."I'm Bob Rumson, and I'm running for president!"
 

[EPICVIEW]

I agree PC^

The gray lady is going to go under...damn shame they ruined that once great and objective paper..now its just a rag.. circualtion is so far off it may go out of business..

[7StringedBeast]

I think a lot of the signs of bigotry (ACTUAL signs, not signs as in "indications") at the Stewart rally, were intended to be tongue-in-cheek, which was kinda the point (to a degree) of the whole rally.  I didn't see anything that I would've called outright bigoted or racist and I saw a LOT.  Granted, I didn't see it all.  As PC said, they were insulting the ridiculousness of the media who take every opportunity to tell you what to be afraid of.  On both sides.

It reminds me of that bit in "The American President" where Michael Douglas says "And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections."  15 years ago and that sentiment still rings true and always will.

Eric Cantor as Hitler was a bit much dont ya think?

No one should ever compare anyone else to Hitler.  Unless the compared person has actually supported genocide or blaming an entire country's problem on 1 race of people.  Seriously, comparing someone to Hitler is like holding a sign saying, I have no real argument for why I believe the way I do, I just do what I hear other people telling me to do.  Seriously, it might be the lamest most ignorant political statement anyone can make.

[Perpetual Change]

I agree PC^

The gray lady is going to go under...damn shame they ruined that once great and objective paper..now its just a rag.. circualtion is so far off it may go out of business..

So wait, what papers are good? Granted, asking "what newspaper is still good" is like asking "what 80s hair metal band still put out good on a good show," I'd still like to know what you consider to be an objective paper. As un-ideal as the NYT is, it's still pretty much as close as things get to being at least presently objectively and fairly covered.

[EPICVIEW]

Their is a mob mentality here against Epicview because he goes against the popular view of the board.

That's absolutely not true. Every thread epicview enters turns into a shitstorm, and it's not because of the regulars here who have regular civil discussions where vast disagreements occur every day.  It's because epicview derails every thread into a discussion of "Obama's connections," and doesn't respond to counterpoints in a way that shows he's actually considered anything at all, if even read them.

I try to read all posts.. but I cant respond to all of them.. to me each thread runs its course , then we start a new one with a fresher subject, but it all boils down to Politics..and thats Obama today..and it all now does go back to Obama.. I see things in a big macro picture..

[EPICVIEW]

NY Times... Washington Post.. LA Times... on and on..

The liberal bias of the New York times is really bringing the paper down in quality, imo, but the journalism found anywhere outside the editorial page is still quite good, and unbiased, and they do bring a number of conservatives to write editorials. Like Mitt Romney, for example. The Washington Post as a liberal paper really just comes out of left-field, because it's a neo-con rag. The LA Times was formed to slander union members, and then it became a real newspaper, and now its just like any other paper with a slightly liberal op-ed page. But anyway, of course now I have to ask, what are the good papers?

Wall Street Journal is amongst the best..

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

Eric Cantor as Hitler was a bit much dont ya think? that one bothered me.. I dnt see how thats at all funny..

and great post SGC

I personally don't think it's any more or less appropriate than likening Obama to Hitler.  Again, probably prodding at that comparison by doing the same.  The tea partiers did it first, I believe:



As 7SB pointed out, it's never appropriate.

[EPICVIEW]

I think a lot of the signs of bigotry (ACTUAL signs, not signs as in "indications") at the Stewart rally, were intended to be tongue-in-cheek, which was kinda the point (to a degree) of the whole rally.  I didn't see anything that I would've called outright bigoted or racist and I saw a LOT.  Granted, I didn't see it all.  As PC said, they were insulting the ridiculousness of the media who take every opportunity to tell you what to be afraid of.  On both sides.

It reminds me of that bit in "The American President" where Michael Douglas says "And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections."  15 years ago and that sentiment still rings true and always will.

Eric Cantor as Hitler was a bit much dont ya think?

No one should ever compare anyone else to Hitler.  Unless the compared person has actually supported genocide or blaming an entire country's problem on 1 race of people.  Seriously, comparing someone to Hitler is like holding a sign saying, I have no real argument for why I believe the way I do, I just do what I hear other people telling me to do.  Seriously, it might be the lamest most ignorant political statement anyone can make.

right on my bro!

[chknptpie]

Tea partiests are to Republicans as extremists are to religions.

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

How ironic is it that Richard Dreyfuss played Bob Rumson.
What was his slogan? Something like..."I'm Bob Rumson, and I'm running for president!"
 

Great movie.  I love when Douglas finishes his speech by saying "I'm Andrew Shepherd and I AM the President."

[EPICVIEW]

To my memory the Hitler image being used started as slandere on GWB..

[7StringedBeast]

Eric Cantor as Hitler was a bit much dont ya think? that one bothered me.. I dnt see how thats at all funny..

and great post SGC

I personally don't think it's any more or less appropriate than likening Obama to Hitler.  Again, probably prodding at that comparison by doing the same.  The tea partiers did it first, I believe:



As 7SB pointed out, it's never appropriate.

This is complete BS at its finest.  I am not an Obama supporter btw.  This kind of campaigning is ridiculous and just hurts our country.  People love getting inflamed, and thats what that poster is meant to do.  Inflame people to gather support.  It's utter crap.  We just have no good choices in this country anymore.  And anyone who might have good ideas is either not popular in the MEDIAS eyes enough for them to cover them and make money from it, or that person just isn't rich enough to fund a huge campaign.  

We need campaign financing caps in this country.  Just like pro sports teams have salary caps.  All campaigns can only spend x amount of dollars.  Make campaigns about IDEAS and not fucking money.  God damnit I'm pissed off at this country right now.

[Tick]

If you think I endorse that, I just want to point out, I do not.

[EPICVIEW]

Tea partiests are to Republicans as extremists are to religions.

or are they reformers?

[rumborak]

For being reformers they would have to have a clear-cut political stance, which to my knowledge they still don't.

rumborak

[7StringedBeast]

If you think I endorse that, I just want to point out, I do not.

Haha no way man.  I know you don't endorse stuff like that!  I think you are a great poster.

[El Barto]

We need campaign financing caps in this country.  Just like pro sports teams have salary caps.  All campaigns can only spend x amount of dollars.  Make campaigns about IDEAS and not fucking money.  God damnit I'm pissed off at this country right now.

One of the big problems is what I pointed out in my fuck democracy thread.  Our system is incongruous with free speech.  I really don't see any way to have fair elections in this country without curtailing speech.  Now, in the case of corporations, this doesn't bother me.  Corporations shouldn't have personhood.  But with people it's a different story.  A group of Highland Park assholes can pool together $100k to blow on attack ads in Delaware, and this is both problematic and necessary.  I don't know what the solution is, but things are a real mess right now.  

[Perpetual Change]

I'll bet it's just a rebranding, and no difference will be brought to the table. Sure, the tea-party may have got its start by astro-turfing libertarian-esque ideas the Republican Party lost sight of after Reagan, but it's been so infiltrated by now that soon enough of the young, up and coming libertarians will be talked into the support of the war and the continued denial of rights to homosexuals and other minorities.

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

If you think I endorse that, I just want to point out, I do not.

Haha no way man.  I know you don't endorse stuff like that!  I think you are a great poster.

For the record, I don't think that either, so I hope I didn't make any implication that I may have thought that.  If so, I apologize. 

[EPICVIEW]

Id like some real confirmation that bilboard is not a photoshop..as the tea party is AGAINST that imagery and do not even allow plackards or signs at rallies..something dont feel right about that billboard..

was everyone this upset by Code Pink signs of GWB as Hitler?...

and of course Im against any use of that sort of imagery

[7StringedBeast]

We need campaign financing caps in this country.  Just like pro sports teams have salary caps.  All campaigns can only spend x amount of dollars.  Make campaigns about IDEAS and not fucking money.  God damnit I'm pissed off at this country right now.

One of the big problems is what I pointed out in my fuck democracy thread.  Our system is incongruous with free speech.  I really don't see any way to have fair elections in this country without curtailing speech.  Now, in the case of corporations, this doesn't bother me.  Corporations shouldn't have personhood.  But with people it's a different story.  A group of Highland Park assholes can pool together $100k to blow on attack ads in Delaware, and this is both problematic and necessary.  I don't know what the solution is, but things are a real mess right now.  

This might be crazy but try and stay with me on this...  What if all campaign financing was strictly controlled by the government.  More rules and regulations on campaigning.  Forcing politicians to present a clear cut document of their views and plans that could be easily distributed to the people who would need to read it.  Making a campaign spending cap.  Ending donations for campaigns by private corporations.  Make a donation cap.  

Ban television ads altogether.  This is so we can hopefully raise the "IQ" of the actual campaign process.  More nationally televised debates/forums.  

Somehow make it easier for people with real ideas, who actually have smart intellectual fixes to be heard.  Deconstruction of the 2 party system.  We need more alternate voices to get heard.

I have always believed that somewhere in this country is the perfect person to turn our country around, but they just aren't into politics cause they aren't that type of person to get into all that bullshit that politics is.  

What we need is to get the politics out of government if that makes any sense, because politics today is a fucking joke.

[EPICVIEW]

For being reformers they would have to have a clear-cut political stance, which to my knowledge they still don't.

rumborak

You really dont know what their stance is??  but you know they are radical right? LOL

[rumborak]

https://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/07/tea-party-billboard-comparing-obama-with-hitler-lenin-removed-in-iowa/1

FYI, I know very well they *supposedly* stand for small government, but it's not a convincing stance, since it is, as I said, mostly a smoke screen for a lot of different motivations inside the Tea Party movement. It for example serves as a smoke screen for your own completely irrational hatred for Obama, which we have witnessed numerous times on this board.

rumborak

[EPICVIEW]

https://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/07/tea-party-billboard-comparing-obama-with-hitler-lenin-removed-in-iowa/1

FYI, I know very well they *supposedly* stand for small government, but it's not a convincing stance, since it is, as I said, mostly a smoke screen for a lot of different motivations inside the Tea Party movement. It for example serves as a smoke screen for your own completely irrational hatred for Obama, which we have witnessed numerous times on this board.

rumborak

it sound to me like the Tea Party took it down themselves and said it was not acceptaable... which is nice to see in some ways

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

It IS nice to see, but they knew what they were doing.  Get the billboard up long enough to make your point, incite fear and anger in people, then say "oops, our bad, guess that wasn't a good idea", after the damage is done and your (very ridiculous) point is made.

[EPICVIEW]

It IS nice to see, but they knew what they were doing.  Get the billboard up long enough to make your point, incite fear and anger in people, then say "oops, our bad, guess that wasn't a good idea", after the damage is done and your (very ridiculous) point is made.

I think im some ways it was a local group of Tea Party that kinda gave a dose of what they did to GWB back at them.. the issue is the Tea party has no real leader....was there a date on that article? Id bet it was a while back..