Only you know that, MO. You talk about the news being so bad that you can't the truth. Well, if there is an outright lie than of course. However, there is no vast left-wing conspiracy on the truth. You have fuck ups like Dan Rather's on Bush's service in the Coast Guard which an outright lie. You don't get crap like that often.
Last edited by Busyman™; 06-02-2007 at 02:25 PM.
My point was the blatant abuse of knowledge.
I don't have a personal problem with filtering the BS.
The question is where to go to get an unbiased view.....again.
It is a question. That's all.
I'll ask you this. Do you think Dan Rather knew it was a lie while reporting it?
It doesn't have to be a vast conspiracy. It's men being men positioning themselves for dominance.
This is a good point towards what the Libs. don't seem to understand.
Human Nature.
You can't fix things with more government and regulations on the people.
Last edited by MaxOverlord; 06-03-2007 at 12:38 AM.
You just keep pushing. You just keep pushing. I made every mistake that could be made. But I just kept pushing..... Descartes
I was only bleeding one point into another.
Whether you believe in a left or right conspiracy is only true as far as it is at it's base a struggle for dominance....which in turn is human nature.
Truth in media will be spun to whatever side you want to have dominance.
The Fairness Doctrine,for example,is a regulation the Dems want to impose on what they perceive as a right wing dominance of the airwaves.
This has nothing to do with "Fairness."
In a free market society such as ours demand drives supply.
There happens to be a much much larger demand for conservative voices on the airwaves........the Dems call this "UnFair."
Enter the Fairness Doctrine.
They know they can't win in an open debate of ideas so they must "level the playing field." More Regulations....
Do you see where I'm going with this?
And yes this is a free-for-all.
It's individual pursuance of perfection and growth as related to ones idea of freedom and achievement.
You just keep pushing. You just keep pushing. I made every mistake that could be made. But I just kept pushing..... Descartes
Oh I understand why the Fairness Doctrine is there. From what I gather, he with the most money would win. I dunno how fair the Fairness Doctrine actually is though.
On one side, you have some young bright up-and-comer running for office. On the other you have the established politician that's been on TV before and can afford to run numerous personal attack ads thoroughly crushing any voice the young up-and-comer has. The established politician is bankrolled by big business.
Funny you said something about demand for conservative voices. I rather hear neo-cons too when many of the current ones talk much shit....and I think that's the reason. I'm laughing or saying, "I can't believe people believe that shit" but at the same time there are people that go. "Hey he's got a point."
Is it fair to stifle the demand, probably not.
Should the most money automatically mean a bid to the White House? No
Should there be a levelled playing field? Probably. How it's done is debatable.
I personally don't want Dems or Repubs ruling. I want it balanced.
Chavez is a tad too fond of pro-Government street rallies for my taste and I am not entirely convinced all his economic policies are sound. However, he is a genuinely popular politician who has a big support base and was elected as fairly as many around the world and a lot more fairly than most. Nor, to my knowledge, has he any desire to wipe any specific race from the face of the planet or invade any other country - so I think I will hold on the Hitler comparison.
He wouldn't be my choice of leader but I respect the Venezuelans right to choose him and I have no doubt he is a lot better than many previous Central and S American leaders.
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum
If it was more than just a slogan it would be what we need, however for us to be able to decide.............................the reporting has to be accurate.
As it stands, much like the "fair and balanced" slogan, it's meaningless.
I mean, if even their slogans aren't accurate
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
Bookmarks