Random Thoughts (Political Edition)

Three wrongs, and you're qualified to your very own personal seat in the Senate.
 
Pretty much. Hypocritical bastards. Like McCain railing against DADT repeal.
 
McCockCain is an ass and always was. It still bothers me that he is among the best the Republicans can run for President. What are they ones they keep locked behind closed doors like?
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/20/us/politics/20states.html?_r=2&hp
Under the proposed ?repeal amendment,? any federal law or regulation could be repealed if the legislatures of two-thirds of the states voted to do so.

...

The repeal amendment reflects a larger, growing debate about federal power at a time when the public?s approval of Congress is at a historic low. In the last several years, many states have passed so-called sovereignty resolutions, largely symbolic, aimed at nullifying federal laws they do not agree with, mostly on health care or gun control.

Tea Party groups and candidates have pushed for a repeal of the 17th Amendment, which took the power to elect United States senators out of the hands of state legislatures. And potential presidential candidates like Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin have tried to appeal to anger at Washington by talking about the importance of the 10th Amendment, which reserves for states any powers not explicitly granted to the federal government in the Constitution.

?Washington has grown far too large and has become far too intrusive, reaching into nearly every aspect of our lives,? Mr. Cantor said this month. ?Massive expenditures like the stimulus, unconstitutional mandates like the takeover of health care and intrusions into the private sector like the auto bailouts have threatened the very core of the American free market. The repeal amendment would provide a check on the ever-expanding federal government, protect against Congressional overreach and get the government working for the people again, not the other way around.?

Randy E. Barnett, a law professor at Georgetown who helped draft the amendment, argued that it stood a better chance than others that have failed to win ratification. ?This is something state legislatures have an interest in pursuing,? he said, ?because it helps them fend off federal encroachment and gives them a seat at the table when Congress is proposing what to do.?

Yes, because Nebraska doesn't have enough power we need what is effectively a second Senate.
 
McCockCain is an ass and always was. It still bothers me that he is among the best the Republicans can run for President. What are they ones they keep locked behind closed doors like?
Maybe, but at least (before '08) he seemed to have a shred of integrity. He could be counted on to at least consider bipartisanship. Now he flip flops overnight on positions he held for years and gloats about killing a budget bill just because it was 1,900 pages long.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/20/us/politics/20states.html?_r=2&hp


Yes, because Nebraska doesn't have enough power we need what is effectively a second Senate.
The GOP also wants all proposed bills to cite where in the Constitution the government has the authority to legislate over whatever the bill covers. Guess they've never heard of the Supreme Court.
 
Man, the GOP has time to propose a constitutional amendment but doesn't have time to address the START treaty, which has been in congress since april? What a rough life.
 
GOP. Grand old party. Bet they have great old fashioned parties. Heck, they don't seem to have time for anything else.
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/16/white-house-antiwar-protesters-arrest_n_797899.html


Police Arrest 131 Antiwar Protesters In Front Of White House

WASHINGTON -- Hoping to spark the country's silent majority into action, 131 antiwar protesters got themselves arrested Thursday, in one of the larger acts of civil disobedience in front of the White House in some time.

Carrying signs that frequently included question marks -- "Peace on earth?" and "How is the war economy working for you?" -- protesters organized by a Missouri-based veterans group marched up to the White House gates and refused to disperse, holding their ground for several hours on a snowy and blustery day.

Among those arrested was Daniel Ellsberg, the Vietnam-era whistleblower who leaked the Pentagon Papers as an act of protest in 1971. Thursday's arrest was his 80th.

All the arrests were appropriately peaceful although some protesters went limp, forcing police to carry them to the loaned Metrobuses waiting to take them to a booking facility. Only one protester actually attached himself to the gate with a bicycle lock.

All were charged with failure to obey lawful order, a misdemeanor, said Park Police spokesman David Schlosser.

Schlosser said the protesters would be released after either forfeiting $100 or accepting an assigned court date.

A new poll shows that a substantial majority of the country agrees with the protesters on some central points. As Amanda Terkel reports for the Huffington Post, the poll finds a record 60 percent of Americans now say the war in Afghanistan is not worth fighting.

Carrying signs that frequently included question marks -- "Peace on earth?" and "How is the war economy working for you?" -- protesters organized by a Missouri-based veterans group marched up to the White House gates and refused to disperse, holding their ground for several hours on a snowy and blustery day.

Among those arrested was Daniel Ellsberg, the Vietnam-era whistleblower who leaked the Pentagon Papers as an act of protest in 1971. Thursday's arrest was his 80th.

All the arrests were appropriately peaceful although some protesters went limp, forcing police to carry them to the loaned Metrobuses waiting to take them to a booking facility. Only one protester actually attached himself to the gate with a bicycle lock.

All were charged with failure to obey lawful order, a misdemeanor, said Park Police spokesman David Schlosser.

Schlosser said the protesters would be released after either forfeiting $100 or accepting an assigned court date.

A new poll shows that a substantial majority of the country agrees with the protesters on some central points. As Amanda Terkel reports for the Huffington Post, the poll finds a record 60 percent of Americans now say the war in Afghanistan is not worth fighting.

Story continues below
AdvertisementBefore the mass arrest, speakers at the rally, which was attended by at least 500 people, attacked the war and defended WikiLeaks and Bradley Manning, the army officer suspected of leaking secret State Department cables to the website.

Earlier on Thursday, Ellsberg told a Washington news conference that Manning and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange were no more deserving of prosecution than the New York Times, which published the Pentagon Papers in 1971, or Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward, who helped uncover the Watergate conspiracy.


I never heard anything about this protest on the news(gotta love the internets).

And this was not just anyone that was protesting, there were a few fairly big names.

http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/345

Washington Police arrested 135 of the protesters, in what is being called the largest mass detention in recent years. Among those arrested were Ray McGovern, a former CIA analyst who used to provide the president?s daily briefings, Daniel Ellsberg, who released the government?s Pentagon Papers during the Nixon administration, and Chris Hedges, former war correspondent for the New York Times.
 
This is the story I talked about a few days ago.


http://www.alternet.org/media/149193/study_confirms_that_fox_news_makes_you_stupid


Study Confirms That Fox News Makes You Stupid
A new survey of American voters shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources.
December 15, 2010 | Advertisement Yet another study has been released proving that watching Fox News is detrimental to your intelligence. World Public Opinion, a project managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, conducted a survey of American voters that shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources. What?s more, the study shows that greater exposure to Fox News increases misinformation.

So the more you watch, the less you know. Or to be precise, the more you think you know that is actually false. This study corroborates a previous PIPA study that focused on the Iraq war with similar results. And there was an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll that demonstrated the break with reality on the part of Fox viewers with regard to health care. The body of evidence that Fox News is nothing but a propaganda machine dedicated to lies is growing by the day.

In eight of the nine questions below, Fox News placed first in the percentage of those who were misinformed (they placed second in the question on TARP). That?s a pretty high batting average for journalistic fraud. Here is a list of what Fox News viewers believe that just aint so:


?91 percent believe the stimulus legislation lost jobs
?72 percent believe the health reform law will increase the deficit
?72 percent believe the economy is getting worse
?60 percent believe climate change is not occurring
?49 percent believe income taxes have gone up
?63 percent believe the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts
?56 percent believe Obama initiated the GM/Chrysler bailout
?38 percent believe that most Republicans opposed TARP
?63 percent believe Obama was not born in the U.S. (or that it is unclear)

The conclusion is inescapable. Fox News is deliberately misinforming its viewers and it is doing so for a reason. Every issue above is one in which the Republican Party had a vested interest. The GOP benefited from the ignorance that Fox News helped to proliferate. The results were apparent in the election last month as voters based their decisions on demonstrably false information fed to them by Fox News.By the way, the rest of the media was not blameless. CNN and the broadcast network news operations fared only slightly better in many cases. Even MSNBC, which had the best record of accurately informing viewers, has a ways to go before it can brag about it.

The conclusions in this study need to be disseminated as broadly as possible. Fox?s competitors need to report these results and produce ad campaigns featuring them. Newspapers and magazines need to publish the study across the country. This is big news and it is critical that the nation be advised that a major news enterprise is poisoning their minds.

This is not an isolated review of Fox?s performance. It has been corroborated time and time again. The fact that Fox News is so blatantly dishonest, and the effects of that dishonesty have become ingrained in an electorate that has been been purposefully deceived, needs to be made known to every American. Our democracy cannot function if voters are making choices based on lies. We have the evidence that Fox is tilting the scales and we must now make certain its corporate owners do not get away with it.



And as a bonus

http://www.alternet.org/media/14927...-_'shouldn't_call_itself_a_news_organization'

Fox Slammed by L.A. Times -- 'Shouldn't Call Itself a News Organization'
After several revelations of Fox's blatant bias, the rest of the corporate media may finally be catching on.
December 20, 2010 | Advertisement On Friday, the Los Angeles Times broke a taboo of sorts among mainstream news organizations by urging Fox News to ?crack down on... partisanship in its news ranks? or ?stop pretending to be an objective news source.?

The editorial was prompted by the leak of an internal Fox News memo ordering its ?reporters? to ?refrain from asserting that the planet has warmed (or cooled) in any given period without IMMEDIATELY pointing out that such theories are based upon data that critics have called into question.? The memo was sent by Bill Sammon, Fox News' Washington managing editor, in 2009 and released by Media Matters last week.

The Times noted that ?such data aren't in serious dispute among climate scientists.?

The way the data are interpreted can vary; it's legitimate for climate skeptics to reach conclusions that contradict mainstream theories. But only a crank would deny the underlying temperature data that show the Earth getting warmer ? records compiled by independent stations around the world, combined with satellite measurements and confirmed by observations of rising sea levels, vanishing glaciers and other inputs ? because to do so is to deny material and measurable facts. Instructing reporters to treat such facts as controversial is like telling them to question the laws of gravity when discussing plane crashes. The only reason for doing it is to further a partisan agenda, in this case an attempt to cast doubt on climate science in order to fend off government efforts to limit greenhouse gases.

It's refreshing to see a leading news outlet abandon the premise that Fox is a ?fair and balanced? news organization during the day, and shows its conservative slant only in its evening opinion shows. The Times editorial board noted that mainstream reporters had shrugged off an earlier memo directing Fox personnel to refer to the ?public option? as a ?government option? during the health-care reform debate because the phase tested poorly among viewers.

The establishment media had also largely ignored internal memos obtained by the Huffington Post after Democrats won control of both chambers of Congress in 2006, which urged Fox News ?reporters,? among other things, to ?be on the lookout for any statements from the Iraqi insurgents who must be thrilled at the prospect of a Dem-controlled Congress.? Similar missives had been revealed earlier by film-maker Robert Greenwald in his 2004 documentary, ?Outfoxed.? The release of this latest memorandum comes on the heels of a study released last week by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland which found that Fox News viewers are, in the words of News Corpse's Mark Howard, ?significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources.? The study also found that greater exposure to Fox News increases viewers' misinformation. So, as Howard noted, ?the more you watch, the less you know.?

Also last week, the non-partisan watchdog Politifact awarded its ?Lie of the Year? award to the claim that the health-care bill passed by Congress last year represented a ?government take-over? ? a lie that Media Matters demonstrated to have been ?repeatedly promoted? on the network's ?news? programs. Last year, the award went to the lie that the health-care reforms would lead to ?death panels,? a falsehood also advanced repeatedly on the self-proclaimed news network.

It's refreshing to see a major news outlet give up the chummy pretense of collegiality and call Fox out for what it is: a 24-hour propaganda operation for the Republican Party. Maybe other mainstream outlets will now follow suit, or at least stop uncritically repeating Fox's spin.
 
Got it. Fox News=bad ;)

China bans English words in media
21 December 2010 Last updated at 07:55 ET

China has banned newspapers, publishers and website-owners from using foreign words - particularly English ones.

China's state press and publishing body said such words were sullying the purity of the Chinese language.

It said standardised Chinese should be the norm: the press should avoid foreign abbreviations and acronyms, as well as "Chinglish" - which is a mix of English and Chinese.

The order also extends existing warnings that applied to radio and TV.

China's General Administration of Press and Publication said that with economic and social development, foreign languages were increasingly being used in all types of publications in China.

It said such use had "seriously damaged" the purity of the Chinese language and resulted in "adverse social impacts" on the cultural environment, reported the People's Daily newspaper.

If words must be written in a foreign language, an explanation in Chinese is required, the state body said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12050067

:lol:
 
Got it. Fox News=bad ;)
I won't call it bad. Bad is used too much. It's rarely appropriate, with the exception of when you're talking about Budweiser. I would call it biased in a way it's quite hard to believe. I'm the first to critisise leftist bias in European media. And I'm a leftist. But FOX is worse. Not bad. Just worse.

As for the story you linked too and quoted. They're like Iceland. A totalitarian Iceland with nukes. Oh, and just to have it said. China isn't just worse than FOX, it's.. bad. There, I said it. China, North Korea and Budweiser. All bad.
 
Last edited:
It is best to assume bias in all news media (of course) and move on from there. The only problem I have with the current discussion is that it seems that the commentators are suggesting that right wing bias is somehow "worse" than left wing bias. That is just not true. Bias is bias. Remember that bias does not just cover the facts in a story. Bias can come in the form of what stories are presented, how they are presented, etc. Accepting that one comes to the realization that Fox News needs to exist. All other news media seems to be center-left politically, a balance on the other side is appropriate and necessary.
 
It is best to assume bias in all news media (of course) and move on from there. The only problem I have with the current discussion is that it seems that the commentators are suggesting that right wing bias is somehow "worse" than left wing bias. That is just not true. Bias is bias. Remember that bias does not just cover the facts in a story. Bias can come in the form of what stories are presented, how they are presented, etc. Accepting that one comes to the realization that Fox News needs to exist. All other news media seems to be center-left politically, a balance on the other side is appropriate and necessary.
Bias can be introduced in a variety of ways, and we can certainly see that across the media and political spectrum. But Fox operates differently. It is willfully ignorant, intentionally incorrect, and does the minimal amount of reportage necessary to actually call its opinion and editorializing news coverage.

So yes, Fox News is worse. And its not a matter of its political tendencies its a matter of operations.
 
It is best to assume bias in all news media (of course) and move on from there. The only problem I have with the current discussion is that it seems that the commentators are suggesting that right wing bias is somehow "worse" than left wing bias. That is just not true. Bias is bias. Remember that bias does not just cover the facts in a story. Bias can come in the form of what stories are presented, how they are presented, etc. Accepting that one comes to the realization that Fox News needs to exist. All other news media seems to be center-left politically, a balance on the other side is appropriate and necessary.

I have seen commentators at FOX hint at the supposed fact that Obama wasn't born in America. "The birth certificate we still haven't seen". We haven't? Yeah..

There are different kinds of bias. And there are levels of bias. FOX really takes the biscut, there are some supposed truths that are just blatant lies. There are occational lies in all media, but FOX seem to have made it their business in certain cases. I've never said left wing bias is favorable. I want the truth, I'm damned tired of the left wing bias. Two wrongs doesn't make a right.
 
Just supposing he was not - so what? We have had Canadians and Irish PMs done us no harm? I wonder if this is just code for - "look he is black - you guys did not notice before." ?

I thank God for the BBC news, OK there is some 'soft left' agenda in there but it reflects the general spirit of the country I suppose. And we have a toned down Murdoch too - he has to be he has the BBC to compete against.

One last thing - if you ever get tired of Glenn "burst into tears - love country and flag" Beck can we have him? The Southslobistan Ukanian popular peoples front needs a front man. Oh and - he is so, so funny!
 
Last edited:
The President of the United States has to have been born in the United States, one of fifty states. Don't think lifting that rule would do any harm (someone born on Cuba, who escaped to the US as a 3-year old with their parents is as American as anyone else, aren't they?), however, I don't see that changed in a hundered years, and I'm not going to push it anyway.
 
A loyalist could still have become president, as a lot of American-born men were actually loyalists.

:p
 
The President of the United States has to have been born in the United States, one of fifty states. Don't think lifting that rule would do any harm (someone born on Cuba, who escaped to the US as a 3-year old with their parents is as American as anyone else, aren't they?), however, I don't see that changed in a hundered years, and I'm not going to push it anyway.
You need not be born in the states proper, but only a natural born citizen.

<---natural born outside the states
 
Top