Author Topic: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News  (Read 26224 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12786
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #105 on: September 27, 2011, 10:46:32 PM »
2 things on journalism:  (1) I'm not saying the profession is corrupt and dishonest because of Fox.  I'm saying it is generally corrupt and dishonest as a whole because of every major news outlet and because of a general dishonesty in the profession, at least when it comes to certain types of news.  (2) Just because the profession itself is a mess doesn't mean that all journalists out there are.  There are a number of upstanding individuals in the profession.

Supreme Court nominees

The power to appoint judges is perhaps the single biggest reason a left-leaning president should never, EVER be allowed to occupy the white house under any circumstances. 

Well, I've gotta say, I find this just as off-the-wall as Super Dude's "against conservatism on principle" remark.

 :corn

Yes, but the difference is, I'm right and he's wrong.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2011, 12:31:04 PM by bosk1 »
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #106 on: September 27, 2011, 10:52:23 PM »
Gotcha on the journalism thing.

As far as the nominees go, though, don't you think it's more of a problem that the Supreme Court has so much power to shoot down legislation to begin with? I decided Law School wasn't for me pretty early on, but I did take a Constitutional Law course and came out of it thinking "Judicial Review" itself was on pretty shakey ground in terms of being Constitutionally justified (that's playing along with this whole idea that the Constitution is scripture, which I don't subscribe).

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12786
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #107 on: September 27, 2011, 10:55:09 PM »
As far as the nominees go, though, don't you think it's more of a problem that the Supreme Court has so much power to shoot down legislation to begin with?

Yes, but not just the Supreme Court.  The lower courts as well, to a lesser extent.  That's why I think the power to appoint is a problem for presidents who are insane left of center.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #108 on: September 27, 2011, 11:13:00 PM »
Maybe. I'd say the role of the president has been exaggerated to such a great degree that there's a plethora of powers that are abused by presidents on both sides. Seems like it being a left vs. right president thing is pretty much inconsequential. Whether the current president is bending the rules in a way that suits where'd you'd like to see the nation go or not doesn't matter. The fact that he can do it is a symptom of a illness that started longer ago.

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 30567
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #109 on: September 27, 2011, 11:20:46 PM »
As far as the nominees go, though, don't you think it's more of a problem that the Supreme Court has so much power to shoot down legislation to begin with? I decided Law School wasn't for me pretty early on, but I did take a Constitutional Law course and came out of it thinking "Judicial Review" itself was on pretty shakey ground in terms of being Constitutionally justified (that's playing along with this whole idea that the Constitution is scripture, which I don't subscribe).
Personally,  I'm a big fan of judicial review.  Never really understood the contempt for it. 
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16265
  • Gender: Male
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #110 on: September 28, 2011, 05:54:38 AM »
I mean I think it's unfair to say all journalism is dishonest, corrupt, and the like, but on the whole I agree.  Let's just say when faced with either option, I say yes.

And what's wrong with rejecting a political faction on the basis of disagreeing with its philosophy?  I disagree with the general way in which this faction's philosophy interprets and understands the world at large and governance in particular, therefore I will not support people or policies based around it.  I don't see what's so bizarre about that.
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.
:superdude:

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #111 on: September 28, 2011, 06:23:36 AM »
I mean I think it's unfair to say all journalism is dishonest, corrupt, and the like, but on the whole I agree.  Let's just say when faced with either option, I say yes.

And what's wrong with rejecting a political faction on the basis of disagreeing with its philosophy?  I disagree with the general way in which this faction's philosophy interprets and understands the world at large and governance in particular, therefore I will not support people or policies based around it.  I don't see what's so bizarre about that.

You said you disagree with conservatism on principle, not Republicans. If you would have said the latter, it would have made a little bit more sense.

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16265
  • Gender: Male
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #112 on: September 28, 2011, 06:53:07 AM »
And Republicans subscribe to a conservative philosophy.  I disagree with the conservative philosophy in its principle, and with Republicans in their application of that principle.
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.
:superdude:

Offline Orion1967

  • Posts: 406
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #113 on: September 28, 2011, 09:22:11 AM »
Yes.
1.  Make your own outlines.  Then check them against commercial outlines.  Don't believe any professor who says you should never use a commercial outline.
2.  Don't memorize your outline.  Learn your outline.
3.  In answering essay questions, lay out the rule and set it off in bold, underline, whatever.  Apply the facts to the rule and argue to a conclusion.  Then address why another conclusion is either equally valid or not valid. 

Okay, your turn.
<offtopic>
I wish I had asked you how to do well on the LSATs...  I was considering a major life change and going to Law school and completely fucked my LSATs...  Have since come to my senses and am pursing my masters in information security (same field I work in) but damn those LSATs were the hardest test I have ever taken.
<ontopic>
Cool Story Bro. 

Tell it again

Offline Genowyn

  • That name's pretty cool, and honestly, I'd like to change mine to it.
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5288
  • Gender: Male
  • But Hachikuji, I've told you over and over...
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #114 on: September 28, 2011, 11:46:08 AM »
I fail to see what's so confusing about someone disagreeing with conservatism on principle...how else would one disagree with an ideology, exactly...?

...my name is Araragi.

Offline ehra

  • Posts: 3362
  • Gender: Male
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #115 on: September 28, 2011, 12:18:38 PM »
Because "conservatism" is such a ridiculously broad term that I don't get how someone could possibly be against it "on principle."

Offline Genowyn

  • That name's pretty cool, and honestly, I'd like to change mine to it.
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5288
  • Gender: Male
  • But Hachikuji, I've told you over and over...
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #116 on: September 28, 2011, 12:20:46 PM »
If you're opposed to the reduction of government, to moral legislation, to tax breaks for corporations, etc? If you are in opposition to every facet of conservatism, then you can be opposed to it on principle.

...my name is Araragi.

Offline ehra

  • Posts: 3362
  • Gender: Male
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #117 on: September 28, 2011, 12:26:52 PM »
If you are in opposition to every facet of conservatism

Because "conservatism" is such a ridiculously broad term that I don't get how someone could possibly be against it "on principle."


Offline Genowyn

  • That name's pretty cool, and honestly, I'd like to change mine to it.
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5288
  • Gender: Male
  • But Hachikuji, I've told you over and over...
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #118 on: September 28, 2011, 01:14:13 PM »
The same could be said of any political ideology, yet nearly everyone seems to be fine with people automatically opposing the left...

...my name is Araragi.

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16265
  • Gender: Male
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #119 on: September 28, 2011, 01:25:53 PM »
Everything Genowyn has said so far. I realize it's a broad term, so does perhaps limiting it to mean conservatism as it has manifested itself in the US in the last few decades make sense?
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.
:superdude:

Offline ehra

  • Posts: 3362
  • Gender: Male
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #120 on: September 28, 2011, 03:14:06 PM »
The same could be said of any political ideology, yet nearly everyone seems to be fine with people automatically opposing the left...

When did I say I was ok with anyone doing that? And who the hell is "everyone"?

This is why I hate when people use thoe terms at all. They stop attacking the issues or arguments they disagree with and they just turn it into pithy arguments against a vague, ill defined "them." And then you point out what they're doing and they use that crappy "well THEY do it too!" argument that we just got done making fun of when people use it to defend Fox.

Offline Genowyn

  • That name's pretty cool, and honestly, I'd like to change mine to it.
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5288
  • Gender: Male
  • But Hachikuji, I've told you over and over...
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #121 on: September 28, 2011, 06:07:23 PM »
The same could be said of any political ideology, yet nearly everyone seems to be fine with people automatically opposing the left...

When did I say I was ok with anyone doing that? And who the hell is "everyone"?

This is why I hate when people use thoe terms at all. They stop attacking the issues or arguments they disagree with and they just turn it into pithy arguments against a vague, ill defined "them." And then you point out what they're doing and they use that crappy "well THEY do it too!" argument that we just got done making fun of when people use it to defend Fox.

Most of P/R  :lol

...my name is Araragi.

Offline ehra

  • Posts: 3362
  • Gender: Male
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #122 on: September 28, 2011, 06:50:52 PM »
You seem to be reading a different forum from me then, because things tend to be pretty even sided.

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #123 on: September 28, 2011, 07:24:03 PM »
@Genowyn and Super Dude

I'm not sure what "conservative" means to bosk, so I won't speak for him, but for me the word has implications that go beyond what right-wingers in America are railing about. Conservative, to me, goes all the way back to Confucius. Ultimately, it means putting familial good before the good of society; approaching traditions with reverence and respect rather than bane; being prudent and cautious rather than taking huge risks. And so on. So, with that in mind, it does seem weird to me that someone would reject that kind of thinking on principle, rather than just specific applications of it. But whatever floats your boat.

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16265
  • Gender: Male
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #124 on: September 28, 2011, 08:31:28 PM »
Oh, see I limit my definition to American conservatism.  Although on principle I also tend to not subscribe to ideologies/philosophies that are a couple centuries old or more because I believe they no longer have relevance after a while, and considering Confucius' are on the order of millennia, those are right out.
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.
:superdude:

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #125 on: September 28, 2011, 10:13:13 PM »
Oh, see I limit my definition to American conservatism.  Although on principle I also tend to not subscribe to ideologies/philosophies that are a couple centuries old or more because I believe they no longer have relevance after a while, and considering Confucius' are on the order of millennia, those are right out.

I'm just pointing out that the conservative tradition doesn't begin with America. It's a retrospective way of looking at things that has meaning and merit outside the US political spectrum.

But I don't see why how old something is should be important. I expect two-thousand years from now Confucius' core ideas will still be around while no-one will really remember much about the platform of the Democratic Party of the United States which you seem to think is more or less infallible.

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16265
  • Gender: Male
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #126 on: September 29, 2011, 05:50:50 AM »
I don't think it is; I just happen to think the platform and underlying philosophy is more relevant to the world we live in today. Things Plato says about the allegory of the cave and about the just republic are interesting, endurable and relatable too, but I'm not going to try to govern 21st-century America with it. Do you understand what I'm trying to say?
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.
:superdude:

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #127 on: September 29, 2011, 09:38:32 AM »
I don't think it is; I just happen to think the platform and underlying philosophy is more relevant to the world we live in today.

I'd be curious to hear what that actually is.

Do you understand what I'm trying to say?

Not really. Honestly, it sounds like you're just trying to discount every Republican by saing the conservative way of thinking itself is inherently flawed or useless, because it's old or something. That's a jarringly black-and-white way of looking at politics, and the reason we're having the problem with government we're having now, because instead of actually working to find the common philosophical framework to meet relevant issues head-on, the intelligentsia of both parties just smugly assert the total corruption of the other from on high. It's a process that completely lacks any real philosophy at all, and instead is an endless round of semantic bickering and dishonest appeals to whatever is trendy at the moment.

But I guess I'll wait for you to answer the first question.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2011, 09:46:04 AM by Perpetual Change »

Offline Orion1967

  • Posts: 406
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #128 on: September 29, 2011, 11:28:21 AM »
Just to define the term for those that are tossing it around....

Definition of Concervatism:

1 capitalized a: the principles and policies of a Conservative party b: the Conservative party


2 a: disposition in politics to preserve what is established
    b: a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change; specifically: such a philosophy calling for lower taxes, limited government regulation of business and investing, a strong national defense, and individual financial responsibility for personal needs (as retirement income or health-care coverage)


3: the tendency to prefer an existing or traditional situation to change

Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conservatism
Cool Story Bro. 

Tell it again

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12786
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #129 on: September 29, 2011, 11:38:54 AM »
I don't think it's the textbook definition that is at issue.  I think it is more how the definition is applied in the context of 2011 U.S. politics, and what it means in that context.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 30567
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #130 on: September 29, 2011, 11:40:32 AM »
And it seems to me that "every man for himself" pretty much sums it right up.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Orion1967

  • Posts: 406
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #131 on: September 29, 2011, 11:42:33 AM »
I don't think it's the textbook definition that is at issue.  I think it is more how the definition is applied in the context of 2011 U.S. politics, and what it means in that context.
Oh I don't know I think the textbook definition is pretty much spot on...  "...lower taxes, limited government regulation of business and investing, strong national defense, individual finanvial responsibility..."   I would say pretty much the pillars of conservative beliefs no?
Cool Story Bro. 

Tell it again

Offline Orion1967

  • Posts: 406
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #132 on: September 29, 2011, 11:46:13 AM »
And it seems to me that "every man for himself" pretty much sums it right up.
I wouldn't say to the extreme, no.  I would say more of smaller government, less open-ended freebie programs, governmental fiscal responsibility (balanced budget would be cool) and a strong national defense with the emphasis of enabling every man to provide for himself.
Cool Story Bro. 

Tell it again

Offline antigoon

  • Not Elvis
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 10293
  • Gender: Male
  • This was a triumph.
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #133 on: September 29, 2011, 11:48:46 AM »
You may be right, I just wish there could have been more action taken to reverse that stuff. By doing nothing, it's like the Obama administration turned what was then right-wing crazy into bipartisan consensus.

This article from the LA Times explains my point better than I can. It's not perfect, but check the bold.

Obama: A Disaster for Civil Liberties
Quote from: Jonathan Turley
Civil libertarians have long had a dysfunctional relationship with the Democratic Party, which treats them as a captive voting bloc with nowhere else to turn in elections. Not even this history, however, prepared civil libertarians for Obama. After the George W. Bush years, they were ready to fight to regain ground lost after Sept. 11. Historically, this country has tended to correct periods of heightened police powers with a pendulum swing back toward greater individual rights. Many were questioning the extreme measures taken by the Bush administration, especially after the disclosure of abuses and illegalities. Candidate Obama capitalized on this swing and portrayed himself as the champion of civil liberties.

[...]

Obama failed to close Guantanamo Bay as promised. He continued warrantless surveillance and military tribunals that denied defendants basic rights. He asserted the right to kill U.S. citizens he views as terrorists. His administration has fought to block dozens of public-interest lawsuits challenging privacy violations and presidential abuses.

But perhaps the biggest blow to civil liberties is what he has done to the movement itself. It has quieted to a whisper, muted by the power of Obama's personality and his symbolic importance as the first black president as well as the liberal who replaced Bush. Indeed, only a few days after he took office, the Nobel committee awarded him the Nobel Peace Prize without his having a single accomplishment to his credit beyond being elected. Many Democrats were, and remain, enraptured.

It's almost a classic case of the Stockholm syndrome, in which a hostage bonds with his captor despite the obvious threat to his existence. Even though many Democrats admit in private that they are shocked by Obama's position on civil liberties, they are incapable of opposing him. Some insist that they are simply motivated by realism: A Republican would be worse. However, realism alone cannot explain the utter absence of a push for an alternative Democratic candidate or organized opposition to Obama's policies on civil liberties in Congress during his term. It looks more like a cult of personality. Obama's policies have become secondary to his persona.

https://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-turley-civil-liberties-20110929,0,7542436.story

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 30567
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #134 on: September 29, 2011, 12:03:29 PM »
Obviously I agree with all of that, although I don't think it does justice to how badly Obama's hosed us all,  but I have to disagree with his final conclusion.  Simply put, there is no alternative because of the nature of this terrible system we've built around us.  I'd love nothing more for an actual civil libertarian to come along, but it's not a possibility.  Opposing Obama,  which I think would be a damn find thing in principle,  would simply result in President Perry, and that'd be a much worse option; Obama at least feigns an interest in constitutionality.  The Republicans are too interested in nominating a whack-job, thinking this their opportunity,  so there won't be a decent option from them, either. 
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline antigoon

  • Not Elvis
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 10293
  • Gender: Male
  • This was a triumph.
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #135 on: September 29, 2011, 12:10:04 PM »
I agree that there are no simple solutions here, but what good is a feigned interest?

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12786
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #136 on: September 29, 2011, 12:29:44 PM »
Simply put, there is no alternative because of the nature of this terrible system we've built around us.   

As much as we disagree over what a "better option" would consist of, I agree with this general point absolutely, and it's quite depressing.  As purely evil as the Democratic party is, the Republican party simply doesn't have anyone in the running who I would consider a good option for Chief Exec.  But the problem is deeper than that.  The Exec. aside, the other two major branches of the government are themselves so deeply mired in a corrupt 2-party system that it almost doesn't really matter to a high degree who is in the White House.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline AcidLameLTE

  • Nae deal pal
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11134
  • Gender: Male
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #137 on: September 29, 2011, 12:56:33 PM »
The fact that you think the Democratic party are "evil" is kind of weird.

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 30567
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #138 on: September 29, 2011, 01:05:06 PM »
I agree that there are no simple solutions here, but what good is a feigned interest?
As opposed to callous disregard?  I'd rather have someone who at least feels compelled to pay lip service than one who's just plainly doesn't give a shit.

Simply put, there is no alternative because of the nature of this terrible system we've built around us.   

As much as we disagree over what a "better option" would consist of, I agree with this general point absolutely, and it's quite depressing.  As purely evil as the Democratic party is, the Republican party simply doesn't have anyone in the running who I would consider a good option for Chief Exec.  But the problem is deeper than that.  The Exec. aside, the other two major branches of the government are themselves so deeply mired in a corrupt 2-party system that it almost doesn't really matter to a high degree who is in the White House.
Yeah, I share your depression.  There's really just no way for things to get better, I think. And pretty much the only difference between any potential candidates is, of course, their effect on the third branch, and that's obviously where we'll disagree the strongest.  We'll both despise the system and the candidates, but quietly root for the asshole who'll appoint our types of judges.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12786
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: Take back any benefit of the doubt you ever gave Fox News
« Reply #139 on: September 29, 2011, 01:07:50 PM »
:lol  Good summary.

The fact that you think the Democratic party are "evil" is kind of weird.

How so?

:democrat:
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."