It would appear that conservatives have abandoned the idea of “smaller government”. It would appear that your definitions need to be adjusted.
[/quote]
Radley Balko is a Libertarian, so keep his perspective in mind. Also, note there is a difference between “conservative” and Republican – a very big difference in some cases.
As to “conservative,” I would guess that, kind of like “liberal,” it’s an fuzzy definition, given there isn’t really a “conservative” platform to which one can point. Also, I think one needs to delineate between an economic conservative and a cultural conservative, as they don’t necessarily overlap in their values.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
If your justification is that everyone else is “leftist”, that is your opinion. As far as PROVING it, I do not have access to nor would I even know how to find transcripts of their shows to show you how biased they are. [/quote]
There is proof of CBS’s and the NYT political bias. I’m not justifying anything - it’s proven fact that the elitist media demonstrated left-wing bais during the election.
You stated that Fox News was ‘clearly’ biased. No proof. Just YOUR interpretation of what you saw on TV.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Professor X wrote:
If your justification is that everyone else is “leftist”, that is your opinion. As far as PROVING it, I do not have access to nor would I even know how to find transcripts of their shows to show you how biased they are.
There is proof of CBS’s and the NYT political bias. I’m not justifying anything - it’s proven fact that the elitist media demonstrated left-wing bais during the election.
You stated that Fox News was ‘clearly’ biased. No proof. Just YOUR interpretation of what you saw on TV.
I think you are the one spouting opinion as fact.
[/quote]
This is easy to solve, show me the method you have used to PROVE the bias of CBS and NYT and I will use the same method to see if I can prove the bias of FOX news. Unlike BB, I don’t scan political web sites and articles for this information. My area of study is biology, not politics. Yes, it is my opinion that they are biased, however, I don’t see how anyone could watch that network on a regular basis and not come to the same conclusion.
Fox was viewed as having as much right wing bias as the other networks were viewed as being left-wing.
But does that make Fox any less a news org. that the other networks? A look at the ratings would suggest that people like this right-wing stuff exponentially more than they like the same-old same-old from the left wing shills.
Fox was viewed as having as much right wing bias as the other networks were viewed as being left-wing.
But does that make Fox any less a news org. that the other networks? A look at the ratings would suggest that people like this right-wing stuff exponentially more than they like the same-old same-old from the left wing shills.
[/quote]
So in other words, you credit them as a news organization because people flock to controversy? This is the reason sales for Destiny’s Child’s Cd’s went up when they kicked two girls out of the group. Ratings now dictate worthy news reporting? I won’t deny that ratings are what any news program desires and shoots for, but that doesn’t indicate who has more worthy skills at reporting and remaining unbiased while showing both sides to a story. This is the same reason people listen to shock jocks on the radio and stare at car wrecks on the freeway.
I brought up FOX news because they are clearly biased towards the right. You didn’t have to bring them up for me to associate them with conservatives. [/quote]
One conservative voice in a field of very biased liberal media is not allowed huh? I still don?t see what this had to do with this discussion.
I thought you said you were not accepting the liberal term. If I made a statement about liberals and it applies to you, then does that mean you are saying you are a liberal? As far as generalizations go, the whole liberal/conservative thing is a generalization.
But have you never read, ?I hate Bush because?? on this forum? I have. When I started pointing it out, suddenly people quit saying it, and wondered why I was saying they hated Bush. But they kept up the personal attacks. He can?t talk, his IQ is low, he?s a puppet.
I complain about this because it avoids the issues. Nobody wants to talk about the issues. 90% of the posts I have done here was because of some unfounded hate for Bush.
Yes, yes. Tell you friends. Discuss the issues, not the person.
[quote]Again, it seems as if you can judge but if anyone with a different view point does the same thing, you are quick to call them out on it. There is a term for that.
[/quote]
Really? I think you need to read more of my posts. Sorry if pointing out things to people is judging them. Also I never said not to judge people, I said not to hate. There is a difference.
Now just make sure that ?term? does not apply to you.
It would appear that conservatives have abandoned the idea of “smaller government”. It would appear that your definitions need to be adjusted.
[/quote]
I thought we weren?t supposed to believe Fox news.
Also I don’t understand why you posted this. You do know I have repeatedly stated that Bush is a Liberal don’t you? (And recently that tme is a Conservative) You are not confusing the Republicans with Conservative are you?
I disagree with this writer calling this “big government conservatism” because big government is liberalism.
When you insult the Administration, you insult most Americans.
Stop it.
JeffR[/quote]
When I insult the administration? Please, list the insults I made in this thread towards the administration. I want to re-read every last insult I made about this administration in this thread that made you write this.
It would appear that conservatives have abandoned the idea of “smaller government”. It would appear that your definitions need to be adjusted.
I thought we weren?t supposed to believe Fox news.
Also I don’t understand why you posted this. You do know I have repeatedly stated that Bush is a Liberal don’t you? (And recently that tme is a Conservative) You are not confusing the Republicans with Conservative are you?
I disagree with this writer calling this “big government conservatism” because big government is liberalism.
I would expand on this but I have to go.[/quote]
You don’t understand why I looked at one of your definitions, went to a web site that even one poster who seems to agree with your stance even proved to be biased towards conservatives to find support for why your definitions may be off, and you don’t understand why I posted that in this thread? Gee, if most conservatives voted for Bush, yet most conservatives disagree with his stance on “big government”, even though this seems to be one of the major changes of this administration, why would most conservatives ignore such a huge factor and vote for Bush again? I am just trying to understand your point of view.
By using it’s popularity, I was merely trying to point out that Fox isn’t as evil as you try to make it sound with your off-handed remarks.
You do this quite often - someone questions you and you begin a circular argument that makes me so dizzy I can’t figure out exactly what point it is you are trynig to make.
This was my point before the tilt-o-whirl ride: You imply that Fox News is not credible because of it’s 'bias’to the right. Even if that is true, how is it less a news org than the others who tilt decidedly to the left?
Is a leftist news org more credible than a right wing simply because of its political tilt?
Is a leftist news org more credible than a right wing simply because of its political tilt?
[/quote]
No, not at all. If either is biased, their attention to detail and accurate reporting when it comes to both sides of a story is skewed. Since you also recognize that they are biased, it means that some of their information, though I watch about as often as MSNBC, is skewed in that political direction. I also don’t watch much CBS news and I don’t read the NYT.
You don’t understand why I looked at one of your definitions, went to a web site that even one poster who seems to agree with your stance even proved to be biased towards conservatives to find support for why your definitions may be off, and you don’t understand why I posted that in this thread? [/quote]
So you are saying that you posted it because he had one definition different then mine, so it makes it true? Just because one person is a conservative does not mean I automatically agree with him.
Although I believe he is pointing out some illogic in the Republican Party. That now they are in power, they are suddenly big government. Actually that is a problem. Just because a party gets into power, does not mean they should dump their political philosophy, or values.
But I actually believe that one of the reasons Bush won was because he is not a conservative. He has pushed the party so far to the left that the left had to move even further to the left to compensate, instead of finding an ally in politics.
Oh, that?s simple. The choices were big government and lower taxes, or even bigger government with a large increase in taxes. If I disagree with Bush, it makes no sense to vote for the person who goes even further in the wrong direction.
Also there is more then just the government spending and taxes. When I look into what the Democrats or Liberals propose, I don’t agree with a lot of it, and much of it scares me.
For example this attack on Christmas. Now I am an atheist, but when I became an atheist, I decided I wasn?t giving up Christmas. I don’t care about any religious meaning. To me it is about family, and caring about others. Yet some people want to eliminate it as though it is some form of torture, and I don’t understand why.
Now I will say that when some Christians find out that I still celebrate Christmas, they begin telling me that I can?t be an atheist and celebrate it, and since I do, I am not an atheist. (Then I annoy them by pointing out that Christmas was actually celebrated even before the birth of Christ. It wasn?t attached to him until later to help convert some groups.)
To me I see too many liberals (ok, I am not saying all) as trying to change the world into some utopia based on opinion without facts. Almost all of the fringe political groups pushing agendas are liberals, and many are connected to the Democratic party in some way.
Many of them start with an honestly good cause, such as animal rights. Animals do need to be treated right. But when they turn into PETA, and start throwing blood on people, and want to make it illegal to eat meat, and consider it cruelty to take silk from silk worms, they are going off the deep end.
The environment is another example. Yes we need to find cleaner fuels, and get away from oil dependence. But again there are any number of groups that are taking it way to far. We can keep improving things slowly without destroying the economy at the same time.
Just two examples of this extremism that I fear. Now I keep hearing about extremism on the right, but I really don?t see it as much. Yes it exists, but is not barely as strong or vocal as on the left. Some see a tax cut as extremism, and personally I cannot understand that. Or simply being a Christian as being an extremist. I see a lot more good coming out of the Christian faith then bad.
My daughter, in a rebellious phase decided she wanted to go to church, and knowing I was an atheist thought I disapproved, and would not let her. When she tried to argue the point, I told her I didn?t have a problem with it, that there were a lot worse things she could be getting involved in, and I didn?t worry about the effects of church on her. (You should have seen her face, expecting an argument, and showing I wasn?t on her side, and finding out I not only was I not arguing, but also that she had my acceptance. Kind of funny actually.)
Any of the fears of the left about the right, I have found little substance to, and too often complete lies, fabrications, or a twisting of the truth. Or the time I heard a local candidate complain about what the Republican candidate would do, and had a list of terrible things, of which I agreed with.
While I consider myself to be a conservative, that is only because me beliefs tend to fit that profile. But I do not choose an opinion based on what is conservative or liberal, but on my own beliefs, and logic. Too many people decide what to think only because their party tells them to. This is a complaint about both sides. Nobody is right all the time, and nobody is wrong all the time.
To me I see too many liberals (ok, I am not saying all) as trying to change the world into some utopia based on opinion without facts. Almost all of the fringe political groups pushing agendas are liberals, and many are connected to the Democratic party in some way. [/quote]
Well said. It seems that people’s ideologies that lean to the left base their opinions on “what ifs” and some distant philosophy that sounds good on paper(PETA being a good example) but doesn’t hold any ground in the real world. Look at New York City and the coastal cities of California. These people seem so far removed from society as a whole, with a massive narcicisstic overtone attached to their opinions.
For example this attack on Christmas. Now I am an atheist, but when I became an atheist, I decided I wasn?t giving up Christmas. I don’t care about any religious meaning. To me it is about family, and caring about others. Yet some people want to eliminate it as though it is some form of torture, and I don’t understand why.[/quote]
I haven’t heard about this! Could you elaborate Mage? I’m non-Christian and I like Christmas (well, not the retail hell). Family + gluttony + presents = good times! I mean, who doesn’t like presents?
[quote]
Too many people decide what to think only because their party tells them to. This is a complaint about both sides. Nobody is right all the time, and nobody is wrong all the time.[/quote]
True. I know several people who vote or go to a church just because their family did. Not to say that is bad, but it seems these folks do it out of momentum, not because it’s what they believe in. I wonder if they even consider the issues/beliefs or just follow because it’s easy?
“It seems though that management generally doesn’t pay as much as they (the employees) think they should, or give enough vacation (some of the lowest in the industrialized world) and CEO’s make more money annually, compared to the other employees, than ever before. Combined with things like Enron and WorldCom and the lack of punishment against the people who did it leads a lot of people to distrust corporations. This leads to company theft of all kinds, copies, office supplies, expense accounts, etc., because people feel as if they are owed things that they have not received. I’m not saying that Corporations are across the board “EVIL” or anything, but I do think this is how some people feel.”
I agree this is how people view things, however, I read an article somwhere a little while ago about the best jobs for men. Job satisfaction, job security, pay, all of these factors and more went into determining what jobs were the best.
#1 (no not porn star) Heavy equipment operator. #2 ok here was the porn star #3 School teacher I believe
wanna know what came in dead last? CEO of a corporation.
Why? #1 LONG hours #2 Immense Pressure (remember these guys aren’t the boss they answer to a board of directors) #3 job security (average CEO was employed for less than 1 full year
So you are saying that you posted it because he had one definition different then mine, so it makes it true? Just because one person is a conservative does not mean I automatically agree with him.
Although I believe he is pointing out some illogic in the Republican Party. That now they are in power, they are suddenly big government. Actually that is a problem. Just because a party gets into power, does not mean they should dump their political philosophy, or values.[/quote]
So I assume this means you agree with what I wrote before? If so, why the attempt to argue every point I make?
[quote]
But I actually believe that one of the reasons Bush won was because he is not a conservative. He has pushed the party so far to the left that the left had to move even further to the left to compensate, instead of finding an ally in politics.[/quote]
I am sure there are quite a few who would disagree with your opinion that Bush is NOT conservative and that he won due to his liberal actions in office. The bottom line is, the definitions tossed around this forum to label people before the issues are even understood clearly don’t fit into the square shaped box many would like them to. I even got one reply in this thread where another poster told me to stop insulting the current administration. That just goes to show that many don’t even read posts or even try to understand what the other has to say if they happen to hold a different opinion. That seems to be running rampant lately, the attitude that you are either with us, or you are a traitor to the country if you don’t agree with the current administration’s every move or post signs in your front lawn that you are conservative. Regardless, you stated your position well in this last post. I have to give you credit for that.
So I assume this means you agree with what I wrote before? If so, why the attempt to argue every point I make? [/quote]
Actually if I respond to a post, I often try to respond to most of it. But not always argue. But I do disagree with you. You were stating that conservatives believe in larger government, while I say that means they are not true conservatives. Maybe we should be using the term moderate a little more in relation to this.
Oh definitely. But I believe it is true. If he becomes more liberal, conservatives have nowhere else to go, but the more moderate people won?t find him as distasteful. But with Kerry going too liberal, he didn?t have as strong a sway on the moderates as Bush.
This is also why Schwarzenegger won California. Many conservatives were really upset that Schwarzenegger was even running, and calling himself a Republican. (I got such a kick out of that.) But I doubt a more conservative person could have won. (I was rooting for Gary Coleman.)
JeffR should have said where he thought you were insulting the administration. Maybe it was about the statement of “forcing” values and beliefs on people.
I don?t have a problem with critiquing the current administration, in fact we should. But then again our critique can be critiqued, and so on.
Forgive me but I still don?t know who said that if you disagree with the administration, you are a traitor. Anyone who would actually say that is wrong, but I haven?t seen it myself. Granted I don’t read every single post, as I actually have a life. But I have read the accusation quite a bit from the “non-conservative” side. (That better?) I keep getting the impression that if you don?t agree with not supporting the war, that means you are calling them traitors, or un-American.
Now if I can bring up Fox again. I see you were watching the morning show. They are usually very conservative on that show. If you watch the short news segments they are very balanced. And if they have guests on, often there will be a debate between liberals and conservatives. But the three main hosts are conservative. But also the most funny.
But they sometimes have Juan Williams on as a sub, and he is a big time liberal who also works for NPR. There is also Ellen Ratner, Geraldo Rivera, Alan Colmes, Jane Hall, and Neal Gabler just to name a few. These are all self professed liberals or Democrats. There are also a lot of those who I just cannot tell what they are.
Most of the time they make sure to have a balance between liberals and conservatives. The big difference between this channel and all the others is that they actually allow conservative ideas on the air. And don?t just get condescending to those ideas.
Years ago I would read the news paper, and noticed that whenever there was negative information about a Republican they put an (R) after their name, but didn?t do the same for the Democrats. Yet when they had a positive statement about these politicians, the (D) came out, and the (R) disappeared. Now this was a while ago, and I really haven?t noticed it recently. But this is the types of bias that has existed in the media for years.
When Fox News came on, they had, and as far as I know still have, a liberal and a conservative in charge, equally. That way it was balanced. But when all the conservatives in the news media discovered a news channel that was not condescending to conservative ideas, they just flooded over there.
I see the big difference as being that I get the liberal side from Fox, but from the liberal media, I have a harder time of finding the same offered to the conservatives in as equal amounts.
Forgive me but I still don?t know who said that if you disagree with the administration, you are a traitor. Anyone who would actually say that is wrong, but I haven?t seen it myself. Granted I don’t read every single post, as I actually have a life. But I have read the accusation quite a bit from the “non-conservative” side. (That better?) I keep getting the impression that if you don?t agree with not supporting the war, that means you are calling them traitors, or un-American. [/quote]
Taking JeffR for example, it doesn’t have to be said in those exact words for that point to be made clear. To people like JeffR and often Zeb, if you even hint at not agreeing with this current administration, suddenly you need to stop insulting Americans because most Americans voted for Bush. That indicates one thing, that these people who disregard any and every independant thought outside of the “conservative” mindset actually believe that this is the act of being a traitor to the country. That was why I even had to mention that I was in the military in that other ridiculously huge thread. The exact words never have to be said for the message to be clear. I am sure your mother could look at you as a kid and you would get the message that you need to clean your room. Did she have to write it out for you? I suppose you just stood there until she grabbed a pen, wrote it down on pastel colored construction paper and slapped you with it.
[quote]
By the way, do people call you Tiny?[/quote]
Professionally, only if they want some serious problems. Frat brothers have called me worse.