Has America hit Ba-rock bottom?
I know that some of you think that Fox news makes stuff up but.... you just can't make this stuff up folks ;)
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/06/09/newsweek-editor-obamas-sort-of-god/
Oh, yeah. Only 1 way to go, up
Side Score: 22
|
 |
No, not yet. Give it time
Side Score: 6
|
|
|
|
|
4
points
As usual totally taken out of context. "“In a way,” says Newsweek editor Evan Thomas, “Obama is standing above the country. Above … above the world … “He’s sort of God.”" That is really dishonest journalism to use the term loosely. Using the quote like that makes it seem like he was trying to say that Obama is an omnipotent, omniscient being. But clearly this was not what he was saying. Evan Thomas was talking about one of the differences between Reagan and Obama. Reagan was very nationalistic and quite often expressed chauvinistic sentiments. Thomas says that Obama has been expressing the message that we are more than just America. That there are more important beliefs than patriotism, like humanism. According to Thomas Obama is "going to bring all different sides together." He has therefore risen above nationalism and in that way "he is sort of god." Fox News instead tries to lie, because that is what this amounts to, and say that Thomas said that Obama is a spiritual deity to be worshiped. O Fairness Doctrine, Fairness Doctrine, wherefore art thou, Fairness Doctrine. Side: Oh, yeah. Only 1 way to go, up
1
point
I had to stop and think about the deeper meaning behind your statement: O Fairness Doctrine, Fairness Doctrine, wherefore art thou, Fairness Doctrine. First: It is arrogant for someone to think that they know what is best for everyone and try to dictate it through legislation. People are not getting enough liberals ideas because they don't want it so lets force it down their throats because it's good for them. Second: It acknowleges the fact that liberal shows have failed where conservative shows have thrieved and so liberal shows need to be subsidized. The successes of conservative shows are perceived as a threat. Maybe conservatives are the majority. Third: Legislation must be used to supress the majority (even though this is seemingly contrary to democracy) in order to boost the minority. The majority must not decide, legislation must be used to stop the majority from deciding. This is so freaking ass backwards and so freaking agaisnt democracy that it makes me wonder how we ever got to this state of affairs. Side: No, not yet. Give it time
3
points
The Fairness Doctrine had nothing to do with liberal shows failing. It forced holders of broadcast licenses to show both sides of controversial issues. Nothing to do with suppressing the majority. And it is quite the opposite of being against democracy. Journalism is at the heart of the democratic process. An informed public is absolutely necessary for democracy to function. Forcing news companies to show both sides of controversial issues properly informs the public. Side: Oh, yeah. Only 1 way to go, up
|
2
points
4
points
What does this video have to do with anything? I think comparing Obama to god is dumb (then again I'm an atheist), but the point he was making is valid. Obama is looking at the bigger picture. He understands how the rest of the world views the U.S. and is doing his best to improve that image, and show that we can live up to the values we claim to stand for. It's good to have someone in the white house who understands that we are a global community, and, whether we like it or not, are going to have to get along. I'm not sure I understand this debate at all Joe...maybe I'm the one whose dumb for taking you too seriously. Side: Oh, yeah. Only 1 way to go, up
I know that some of you think that Fox news makes stuff up but.... you just can't make this stuff up folks ;) Odd that you should use that as an example Joe... since they basically "made it up." Try looking at the actual source, instead of Faux's interpretation of the actual source. At any rate, any bottom we hit at this point would be a Bush bottom, since not one of Obama's policies has had time to take effect. And even the bank bailouts were on Bush's watch. I know, I know "Ba-rock bottom" sounds so catchy, and it's really really hard for you guys not to use it, I mean why should accuracy interfere with such a clever pun? I was watching faux yesterday because sometimes I like to take a trip to crazy town, and I noticed that Stay Puff looking Doe ball Newt spewing hypocricies once again, something about not wanting to be a citizen of the world, blah blah. Ignoring that it's impossible, that any amount of thought would show it to be impossible, and that not being a citizen of the world would be just dumb even if it were possible, here's what the last Republican who was actually worth anything had to say about it... "I speak today as both a citizen of the United States and of the world. ... My people have sent me here today to speak for them as citizens of the world" - President Reagan (6-19-1982) Now when I say the "the last Republican who was actually worth anything" I don't mean he was right about much of anything, from the overpopulated prisons, to city streets overrun with homeless people who should be in mental hospitals instead of on the streets, they have a direct correlation to intellectually faulty ideas like a "war on drugs" and that even the mentally sick are somehow capable of "pulling themselves up by their bootstraps." That aside, at least as faulty as the majority of his policies were, he stood for something other than the opposite of whatever that guy said. Side: No, not yet. Give it time
1
point
|
