Democracy is a popularity contest.

The judicial branch doesn’t have direct elections and is meant to act as a stop gap against democracy turning into mob rule.

I’m going to get flamed for saying this, but I think in many ways Obama’s campaign embodies the worst of our system.

If by “worst” you mean “not perfect, but better than McCain”, then, OK, sure, whatever.

Also appears as a frequent “talking point” primer on the nets.

to those who have cognitive dissonance caused by agreeing with something on Foxnews.com, shame on you. Stop acting like closed minded douches that demonize the ‘opposing side’.

Yeah, it’s not like Fox has any massive credibility issues or anything…

► No douchery to see here

kgb, just stay comfy in your dreamworld… the rest of us will handle the challenges of dealing with reality.

“Once you said this… now you say THIS. What’s wrong with you?” The overall feeling is that Balcko has somehow “caught” Obama in some misstep, etc.

I agree with #28, that Obama shouldn’t be beyond hardhitting and tough questions, but conservative propaganda on Fox news isn’t where it should come from, no matter WHO wrote it.

The right to vote is… one that shouldn’t be dismissed. I live in Australia and it’s compulsory , so that’s shaped my attitudes towards it a lot. But I think everyone should vote, crazy not to when so much is at stake. Even if it is settling for the lesser of two evils.

#2 TJIC: You say:
that arrests people for reading certain books, arrests people for writing certain letters, arrests people for starting businesses, arrests people who try to leave the country without permission from the government, arrests people who’s relatives say bad things about the government,

Could you say all those things about China? I reckon you could. Include heavy censorship and torture while we’re there.

But the Chinese are being held up to more and more scrutiny because of trade and economic ties to so many democracies, but only to a certain extent now that we’re so utterly reliant on them.

How is inviting a group of establishment campaign journalists over to your ranch estate for a BBQ “social event” even remotely appropriate?

#15 posted by trr:
#3: Err, because Obama is running for POTUS? “Politicians in general” aren’t running for President.

Oh right – they’re *running for office* and not running for president, and therefore, exempt from questions. (In other words: how is your response a rebuttal at all to what I said?)

Libertarians aren’t against public service. They’re against FORCED public service. One example would be a draft. That’s slavery pure and simple.

This is why Ayn Rand is so misunderstood. Objectivism isn’t against helping people anymore than Libertarianism is against public service. So long as it’s not forced service by The State, it’s all good.

So was slavery. Your argument is specious.

I’m not talking about their relative merits as potential commanders in chief, I’m talking about their campaigns. McCain’s campaign seems inept. Inept campaigns are not dangerous, because they are easily recognizable. Obama’s campaign, on the other hand, looks like a brilliant Madison Avenue creation, which is what bothers me. It could still have style, but the lack of substance seems highly calculated.

I take offense to your mocking quotations. Is there a need to be quite so rude?

Question #3 also employs the fallacy of many questions, but I suspect that one of the choices put forward is the correct one.

Really, are you that naive? Your enemy is your enemy, 100% of the time. This is why liberals always lose.

#60 and #25: Anyone who consistently watches Fox is a dupe. Anyone who consistently watches ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN/MSNBC is *also* a dupe. I find it amusing, though, how the left-dupes are so incensed at Fox after so many decades of dominating broadcast media with leftist propaganda and lies.

You guys keep making wild assumptions that people who don’t trust FOX news must be “left-dupe” assholes who consistently watch all the other MSM for their monolithic info diet. Well, I’ll speak for myself… guess who else I don’t trust? ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC (among many udders).

I consistently trust no one and I consistently cross-reference everyone… do you? And when I cross-reference Fox News they come out as one the most untrustworthy full of shit propaganda machines barely worthy of anything but a good laugh. Why do you have a problem with that? Do you have some better research that I need to see?

Now, what about when we cross-reference all those “leftist propaganda” machines you speak of?

Every single last one of those “liberal” stations you mention (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC) that are “so full of leftist propaganda and lies” also happen to be the very same organizations who were outright CHEERLEADERS for the fucking invasion of Iraq. That sure wasn’t very “leftist” of them, now was it? LOL I witnessed firsthand CNN (in our first invasion of Iraq) outright lie to the American public in order to push forward a military-industrial complex agenda. Boy, that sure was “leftist” of them… wow…

jlangr, the sad truth is that you’ve been brainwashed to believe that all the media you speak of is leftist propaganda machines when, in fact… overall, they are very much vehicles for the corporate right. Do a little research and look at the major defense contractors that OWN these guys! Damn dude, open your eyes… leftists??? Hahahahaha… get fucking real!!! Leftist war machines… how quaint.

The “Liberal Media” mantra is just another hollow talking point not based on fact that’s been drilled into your skull over and over (and over) until you actually start to believe the horseshit… and, ironically (and hilariously), it’s often parroted by the very same MSM to help reinforce it. Quit inhaling talking points, do some actual outside research on the matter and you’ll find out how terribly deceived you are.

I read right-wing shit, left-wing shit and every-wing shit and then I sort nuggets out with FAIR.org (I keep in mind they are left-wing shit influenced to say the least so I do counter-research on them as well). DemocracyNow.org does leave out details on issues that makes them full of shit about 5-10% of the time, but God bless ‘em.. that sure beats the hell out of vetting out the corporate media agenda that’s so full of shit 90-95% of the time that it makes me fucking sick. Also, I’m sorry to tell you that when I vet out the details of many right-wing sources (Drudge, etc.) they are full of shit at least 60-80% of the time. They love to tell many half-truths. Half-truths to me are 100% bullshit. Call me crazy, but I want ALL the facts… not your asshole agenda.

So… where do you get your information from? Don’t be shy. Do you listen to Fair.org’s Counterspin once every couple a weeks or so and vet them out to see if they are accurate? Do tell! DO TELL. Have you even ever heard of Counterspin? What do you think of them, media expert? Please quantify your liberal media assertion.

The truth of the matter is, most journalists sway to “the left”. “The Left” is just another word the corporate media gives to average Americans that seek truth beyond their propaganda. The problem is that most of the corporate controlled editors are right-wing and edit the shit out of the truth accordingly and/or many journalists are pressured not to write the complete truth because the corporate bosses will make life miserable for them… and/or fire them, of course.

Dude, haven’t you researched anything of the build-up to the Iraq war and where journalists were constantly being censored? Why did the “leftist propaganda” machine cancel Phil Donahue’s anti-war show when it was climbing massively in ratings? (C’mon.. I’d just LOVE to hear your answer on that one — sigh, c’mon… why did a “leftist propaganda” machine cancel his show at that point??)

Liberals, leftists, etc. is just another way to label and marginalize the section of the American public that actually educates themselves on issues beyond the normal MSM talking points. Why is it almost all the most numerous and most popular blogs in the world are “liberal”? Is that some conspiracy from God? Why are most teachers and professors “liberal”? Why are most scientists “liberal”? Could it be they are NOT liberal? They are just more well-read and educated and therefore a god damn threat to the status quo and therefore need some fucking demeaning labels to keep them down?

The MSM pushes a right-wing corporate military agenda overall. This has been proven over and over throughout time, but to know this… you have to be one of those wacky “leftists” that reads and researches issues a lot without hoping for a predetermined outcome. I find out uncomfortable truths all the time that make me have to rethink my stances on issues, but I’ve learned to condition my brain over time to accept these challenges as strength conditioning and not flaws. That makes me dangerous to the status quo… and the status quo is right.. I want to rape and kill it.

Have you noticed that the overwhelming majority of the blogosphere is composed of what you would call “leftists”? It’s hilarious watching the corporate right-wingers try to demonize bloggers and act like there is some conspiracy while the entire time the internet is wide open to anyone who wants to start a blog. The sad truth for you guys is that once the playing field is leveled and money from corporations are taken mostly out of the picture, you end up with… “leftists” running the show. In other words, a majority of Americans who don’t have their heads up the ass of a corporate media machine parroting talking points.

#89 posted by kgb:

The only dreamworld I may be in is that I feel it is arrogance to believe one side has all the right answers. A corollary is that I do not have the arrogance to believe that a news source is entirely worthless. Sure, they vary in how much good information they produce but that is entirely different from being of the mindset that you feel embarrassed when you agree with news source X.

Um… did you bother to read the link I included about Fox earlier? Did that slide past your skull, there? FOX isn’t a news source, they are almost entirely a propaganda machine. So, please explain how being wary of an organization so incredibly untrustworthy is acting like a closed-minded douche that demonizes the ‘opposing side’?

kgb, it is you that really needs to pull off the close-minded blinders and take a hard look at FOX and their very obvious propaganda mission. Have you researched FOX at all, I wonder?? Are you clueless to all the constant public manipulation they try to propagate? Why is it regular viewers of FOX news tend to be so misinformed on issues that sway them to support Bush policy time and time again? Coincidence?? LOL.. yeah, keep dreaming.

I don’t know, I guess some people just aren’t wired with enough critical thinking skills to see something that is so incredibly blatant. I’m sorry that reality makes you uncomfortable. But, it’s not my job to throw truth out the window in the name of bullshit “balance”.

FOX news has a horrific track record for all to see (if you are willing to see it)… there’s no need to “demonize” a demon.

one of the candidates thinks we have more than 57 states

He made a mental error in a grueling schedule. There are something like 57 caucuses he has had to go through.

Versus how all of his q’s on Obama are straight-up gotcha stuff. And a lot of it is BS gotcha. For example, as a grad student who’s gone very, very deep in the empirical economics education literature, the statement

“you said you might support vouchers and charter schools if empirical data showed that they improve education (it does).”

is such a pack of lies that it might have well been

“you said you would think about stronger moves against Iran if strong evidence had emerged that Ahmadinejad drinks the blood of baby Christians (it has).”

It’s a hit piece masquerading as objective discourse, plain and simple. And that, @25 above, is why perfectly normal people are immediately suspicious of anything that comes from Fox News.

Thank you. Come again.

Your argument remains, amazingly, still specious. Just wordier.

Bush approves execution of Army private

Yes, farm subsidies are grossly outdated (the Dust Bowl is OVER), unfair to the global food market, and ALWAYS rife with pork projects.

Yes, the Cuban embargo has to go.

Yes, Obama is a career politician meaning he has to take centrist positions despite his inane “Change” rhetoric. Yes, the system is designed this way and, yes, its f*cked.

Yes, he still has my vote.

Fox thrives on the undying arrogance of liberals. You scoff at Fox and call them a bunch of idiots, and that’s exactly what the masterminds behind the scenes want you to think. Arrogance leads to overconfidence. Well WAKE UP! Every single thing Fox does is calculated. This story is calculated to raise talking points among Obama’s supporters, to bring doubt to people on the fence, and to make conservatives hate him more.

Take this nugget: “you called the Cuban trade embargo “an important inducement for change,” a 180-degree shift from your prior position.”

In fact, Obama has not shifted position, and still supports changing policy in Cuba. This is a tiny sound bite taken out of context. But in this finely crafted form, you link to it and help spread the propaganda. Liberals will hate the new position, conservatives will hate the old position and the flip flopping, and undecideds will see him as a flip-flopper.

This finely crafted article is smart, raises seemingly valid points, and is full of propaganda. Remove the link to it and label it as propaganda. Do not accept every trojan horse you receive from your enemy.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/21472234/page/6

He says he views it as a transitional fuel.