| Author |
Message |
    
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 458
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 5:47 pm: | 
|
My personal theory for quite some time has been that Americans have substituted politics for the role religion used to play in their lives. I mean this in terms of the fanatical attachment and the sense of true belief that used to be applied to religion in the past, whereas today, people pick and chose what they wish to believe or practice in a religious sense.
I think that has been evidenced by the comments posted by otherwise intelligent people here on MOL. For example, in the thread on dealing with Iran's development of nukes, some posters ignore the nature and religious beliefs of the Iranian regime, and focus on George Bush as the core problem. I am sure posters did the same thing here when Clinton was President.
It seems to me our national politics are shrill, partisan, and un-nuanced. In short, knee-jerk. If republicans are in power it is all bad. If democrats are in power it is all bad. 9-11 and national unity has been tossed out the window.
So I will throw these things out :
Jon Stewart and Steve Colbert are the same as Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. They all make their respective viewers/listeners feel "in the know", with it, and hip. They re-affirm their audiences existing prejudices and political distrust, and as entertainers basically, they happily welcome the Brinks trucks dropping off their money at the bank ,thanks to their one note audiences.
Bill Clinton blew it on Somalia and Bosnia. The fact he had some intellectually tortured form of consensual sex with an intern who was above the age of consent and basically sought his sexual interest was not an impeachable offense. It was between him and his wife, and it didn't represent the end of American morality as the republicans made it out to be. He should have been censured for his lies about it, but at best he was just another horny middle-aged character in a Roth novel.
George Bush was not objective on Iraq given Saddam's desire to off his father. Iran is the bigger issue and problem. Don Rumsfeld screwed up on the manpower requirements for an occupation for Iraq and should have been fired. Once in, Bush and the troops should have been supported and the democrats who largely voted for going into Iraq, should burn in hell for what they are doing in weakening our world-wide credibility at this point. There is a real war that millitant Islam is waging against us, and weakness is not an option.
And EVERYBODY has been a disgrace on Darfur. Can we get beyond extremist political beliefs and be a country again?
Your comments?
|
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4328
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 6:12 pm: |
|
In short, FvsF is upset because not everybody agrees that Iran is an immediate threat that requires an immediate military response.
Your comments? |
Straw Kennedy
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7225
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 6:13 pm: |
|
my comments?
libs are morons.. |
Alleygater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 2033
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 6:13 pm: |
|
To answer your question. I doubt it. |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 460
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 6:16 pm: |
|
tjohn-
I am not upset on that insofar as people with the opinions you have stated on that subject don't even enter into the calculus of decisions made by dems or repubs on such an issue. Have a nice day.  |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4926
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 6:20 pm: |
|
You're not being objective either. Point by point: Stewart & Colbert don't claim to be journalists, they are quite up-front about being comedians. Limbaugh and Hannity posture as real policy wonks, claim to be delivering facts, and take themselves totally seriously. We libs all laugh along with Jon & Steve, but conservatives in the red states get their blood boiling listening to Rush & Sean.
Note your choice of vocabulary comparing Clinton and Bush; Clinton was "intellectually tortured," Bush was "not objective." For Republicans, it wasn't as "they made it out to be." On the other hand, Democrats should "burn in hell." And again, you lump "Bush and the troops" together, as though if we criticize one we are somehow criticizing the other. Much of the liberal criticism against Bush is because we feel is is not supporting the troops -- not equipping them, not putting enough resources into veterans' care, not adequately providing for their families. This is precisely the kind of nuance you hope for, but you overlook it when it is presented to you.
And what is weakening our credibility, exactly; is it the B.S, or is it the Democrats pointing out the B.S.?
But you are correct about Darfur. Otherwise, please check your own objectivity first. |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4329
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 6:24 pm: |
|
I can't comment too much on the decision making process of politicians. Some elected officials truly struggle to do what they think will produce the best long-term outcome when faced with momentous decisions such as a decision to authorize war. Many more consult their political weathervane.
I do know that a hasty decision to settle the Iranian problem with military force will be worse than the hasty decision to settle the Iraq problem with military force.
Since nobody thinks Iran can develop nuclear weapons for a few more years, I don't quite understand this rush to war. |
3ringale
Citizen
Username: Threeringale
Post Number: 202
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 7:09 pm: |
|
My personal theory for quite some time has been that Americans have substituted politics for the role religion used to play in their lives. I mean this in terms of the fanatical attachment and the sense of true belief that used to be applied to religion in the past, whereas today, people pick and chose what they wish to believe or practice in a religious sense.
I kind of agree with this, but I would qualify it by saying that obviously not all Americans have succumbed to the temptation. But I have known Democrats and Republicans who fairly ooze an evangelical fervor and look with suspicion on anyone who doesn't toe the party line. I would add that politics can also be an extension of fashion and good manners. People can adopt political positions to feel good about themselves and be accepted and acknowledged as "cool" by the group they want to be with. On this scheme, having the wrong view on Iraq could be as big a faux pas as using the wrong fork to eat your salad.
Unfortunately, most of the problems we face in our daily lives are not really amenable to political solutions, and many, if not most, of our political problems are intractable, no matter who is in office. The problem is not so much that there is an unequal distribution of wealth, but that there is an unequal distribution of intelligence and virtue. I wouldn't advise anyone to give up on politics, but I wouldn't get my hopes too high either.
Cheers
|
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5615
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 7:41 pm: |
|
Fact -- I have actually learned something from Hannity and Limbaugh, usually bec ause they bring out news from traditionally biased services and publications that never seem to be highlighted by the Big 3 (small wonder). Hannity is empty, but Limbaugh's predictions of how the game will play out are unusually on target 80% of the time. I have learned nothing from Stewart and Colbert, who are entertainers. Limbaugh can be entertaining. Hannity is and will never be funny.
I'm surprised you think knowingly giving a false deposition in front of a judge in a sexual harassment suit that needed to be settled rather than won by the chief law enforcement officer isn't a big deal.
You want to march into Darfur but leave Saddam in place after all his killing? What are you -- a knee-jerk moderate? |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 465
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 7:58 pm: |
|
Tom- I have listened to Rush and Hannity and seen Hannity's cable show with Allan Combs and I believe like pro-wrestling, these guys know they are entertainers, its just the poor saps that listen to them that don't.
As far as Clinton was concerned, my comment was directed to his claim that oral sex, still an intimate sexual act, was not sex, insofar as he was violating his marriage vows. Come on Tom, that was an intellectually tortured standpoint. I also forgot to add how Clinton via Albright screwed up and allowed the North Koreans to develop nukes.
Tom, you are showing me you are are a nascent dem kool-aide drinker by referring to my use of words as being somehow different for the two. Can we admit that both did wrong by the American people, and say they both sucked?
That's objectivity and not knee-jerk and allows us to most importantly ENSURE we will get both parties to produce candidates that will do right by us, whoever we elect.
If you read Taheri's column today in the Post you will understand that radical islam has been conducting a low-level intensity war with us for years, and Iran wants to conduct a fuller one. If we are to be more nuanced in what the consequences are of an early withdrawal from Iraq and statements by dems to such effect, we have to suck up Bush's failures and find the right solutions for our national interests. Or is it making hay so more dem candidates can be elected next time but we have a bigger national security problem or future risk?
|
The Notorious S.L.K.
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1409
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 10:54 pm: |
|
FvF-
I am just waiting for the day when MOL ceases to be a form of pubic pyschotherapy for all the witty NYT limo liberals and Bush haters too cheap to cough up the dough to visit a real shrink.
God forbid the Dems do win in 06/08. What in the world will they talk about then?
-SLK
Straw-I have to LOL, your timing and delivery were both impeccable in your last post.  |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4931
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 11:49 pm: |
|
proudly raising the level of discourse since 2001. |
drewdix
Citizen
Username: Drewdix
Post Number: 1181
Registered: 7-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 9:20 am: |
|
To somehow elevate Limbaugh and position him as more legit than Hannity (or any other RW talk show commodity) is preposterous.
They both simply cater to their audience's social resentments, assail liberals, offload personal responsibility, and finger point ("my friends, these people..." -sound familiar, cjc?). In a very targeted and successful way.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
|
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 2905
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 10:47 am: |
|
Limousine liberals. That is really lame. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5621
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 11:30 am: |
|
drewdix -- to say basically they're all the same is ridiculous. I wouldn't make that charge against leftist broadcasters. They offload prejudices, guilt complexes, and put personal responsibility under a group policy as they cater to the Left, but some do it better than others. Randi Rhodes isn't the same as Al Franken. She's much better. Same can be said with Limbaugh versus Hannity et al. |
drewdix
Citizen
Username: Drewdix
Post Number: 1184
Registered: 7-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 1:18 pm: |
|
you could argue that RL has a better "show".
But to assign his content any additional significance than the others is....well, I guess you're just a big fan.
over & out on this one. Yikes. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5401
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 1:38 pm: |
|
Does Rush Limbaugh ever have any guests on his show? Or is it just hours of him talking and rattling papers, and taking calls from admiring listeners (interspersed with ads for get-rich-quick schemes)? |
ae35unit
Citizen
Username: Ae35unit
Post Number: 71
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 4:00 pm: |
|
Can we end jerk politics?
|
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3154
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 4:05 pm: |
|
That would eliminate most of us from posting... |
The Notorious S.L.K.
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1416
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 4:07 pm: |
|
NOhero-
Why don't you listen to the show yourself to answer your question. I promise you won't melt...
-SLK |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3284
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 4:23 pm: |
|
Can we end jerk chicken?
 |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5404
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 5:16 pm: |
|
SLK -
I have listened to the show - albeit not for hours and hours at a time. All I've ever heard was as I described in my question. I don't even recall hearing him say anything like, "Coming up, our guest ______". |
The Notorious S.L.K.
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1420
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 5:26 pm: |
|
NoHero-
I hear you. That is why I ended my Hannity ipod/podcast subscription (free). He had guests on but he is very scripted. Listening to the same thing over and over for 15 hours a week would drive anyone batty!
-SLK |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 473
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 5:32 pm: |
|
notehead-
Are you anti-Jamaican?
They do/had a great bobsled team. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page