# Fox News Brainwash



## Ned Bouhalassa (Aug 16, 2013)

I have been having (short) discussions with a couple who watch Fox news all day, literally, and I have seen first-hand the damage done:

- everything, and I mean EVERYTHING that is wrong with the US is Obama's fault. Not the administration, the person. History is being pushed aside in schools? Obama's fault. Not enough about the Constitution? Obama's fault (even though he's a constitutional scholar). 

- Benghazi is just as scandalous as Vietnam, and they can't understand why young people are not once again protesting in the streets.

- Obama has done great harm to African-Americans by focusing on Trayvon Martin (it was just a fight, after all) instead of all the black-on-black crime.

- Book sellers routinely throw out tons of perfectly-good books weekly in order to make room for the latest releases? It's Obama's fault. Seriously.

- The only media worth paying attention to is Fox News and the Wall Street Journal. Everything else is lies, lies, lies.

Oy.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 16, 2013)

It should be banned.


----------



## MarkS_Comp (Aug 16, 2013)

Your post is what is brainwash-worthy.

What you say has some truth to it -_ some_. There are some elements of Fox news - Sean Hannity for one - who blame Obama for almost everything. Same way Bush once got blamed for everything (did you forget about that, or did you conveniently leave it out of your post?)

But to say - or imply - that the entire Fox News media outlet blames Obama for everything is rediculous.


----------



## Darthmorphling (Aug 16, 2013)

Unfortunately news is no longer about news, but instead about ratings. Foxnews knows how to cater to their target audience. Plain and simple. CNN is just as bad.

Honestly, I peruse both sites to see what is going on, then I google the terms to see what other outlets are saying. One can get a much better perspective on world events that way.

I find it ironic that the "conservative" news site has the most articles on celebrity beach bodies. The conservatives really like their flesh.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Aug 16, 2013)

MarkS_Comp @ 16/8/2013 said:


> Your post is what is brainwash-worthy.
> 
> What you say has some truth to it -_ some_. There are some elements of Fox news - Sean Hannity for one - who blame Obama for almost everything. Same way Bush once got blamed for everything (did you forget about that, or did you conveniently leave it out of your post?)
> 
> But to say - or imply - that the entire Fox News media outlet blames Obama for everything is rediculous.



What are you talking about, man? I didn't make up what my friends' said! My post was not an editorial, but what was really said. :evil:


----------



## MarkS_Comp (Aug 16, 2013)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Fri Aug 16 said:


> MarkS_Comp @ 16/8/2013 said:
> 
> 
> > Your post is what is brainwash-worthy.
> ...



What am I talking about??? ME?????? Where did you say that you were only repeating your friend's thoughts, and not putting forth your own?


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Aug 16, 2013)

Oh, I see. You understood that these were my ideas. No, I'm Left of Che.


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 16, 2013)

The same can be said for the worshippers of far left Pravda outlets.

At the end of the day, these wealthy corporations and individuals who make a mint pretending there are 2 partys and a 50/50 split between the Sheep can lead these brainwashed minions down the path of the status quo.

The only difference is the real ruling class has control over the time period of when the free stuff is divvied up amongst various flocks.
Americans love being bribed with their own money.

This is why whenever a far right Crime Family is in power, most folks stay on the books and enjoy the tax exemptions and excessive oppurtunities for work.

When the far left Crime Family is in power there's far less employment oppurtunities so folks go off of the books, work for cash and take their free stuff, as it's barely enough to maintain loyalty, but this time around they kicked in free food, and extra cash, plus Strip Club EBT machines, so being a slave of the wealthy redistributors is all good too.

But to watch Fox, MSNBC, etc.etc. is a waste of life.

If one were to actually research on the shareholders and owners of these supposed "Media" outlets they might actually entertain the thought of ignoring this pathetic show. But free thinking is not really taught so much these days. Much easier to watch Maher, Leno and Stewart for the talking points. At least they find humor in the scams which they themselves also benefit from.

Let's just assume the fish we are being fed is true.
Wouldn't people be imprisoned for lying to Congress, or breaking laws, molesting chidren, stealing money...etc.?

Educated people, even people with Memories can see through the world of lies we live in.

I was born in a world of lies, but it had no effect on me.
Santa Claus was really my Dad, the Fairy Godmother was a gig my Grandmothers and mother swapped yearly.
Jesus didn't save my dying Grandparents, Aunts or Uncles.
Bush Sr. raised taxes, Clinton didn't have sexual encounters, Bush Jr. had evidence or mass destruction weapons, Obama was going to take the Trillions they get each year, and at the beginning of the Pooper Majority to create Shovel Ready Jobs, etc.

So to expect Pravda to tell you anything other than what their sponsors wish to speak of is fantasy land.

Yet the Sheep shall Clack their Hooves in approval......


----------



## TheUnfinished (Aug 17, 2013)

Fox News is an embarrassment. Pure and simple.


----------



## choc0thrax (Aug 17, 2013)

If you want real news you have to head over to Huffington Post where you can catch up on Kim Kardashian's feud with Katie Couric or learn about "Toilet Dating".


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Aug 17, 2013)

There's plenty of intelligent writing on Huff Po. Sure there's also tons of puff, but I choose to ignore it.


----------



## KEnK (Aug 17, 2013)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Sat Aug 17 said:


> There's plenty of intelligent writing on Huff Po...


Where?
To me it seems like a cross between a mirror image of Fox News and the National Enquirer.
Personally I'm very far left, so I like Maddow and Mathews on MSNBC.
But I don't consider it news as much as editorial commentary.
I like it because they make fun of the GOP and it simply makes me feel better.
Imo ABC News has become Fox Jr.
For "news" I read the NYT and The Washington Post.
People on the right decry them as "mainstream liberal", while people on the left
say they're "establishment pawns".

I think they have a pretty high journalistic standard.
Better than some independent blogger who makes stuff up.

To those who diss the NYT and WP, what's a reasonable reputable alternative?
I'd love to know.

k


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Aug 17, 2013)

Try this: http://www.alternet.org/


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 17, 2013)

Actually threads like these are the most entertaining. Nothing prooves the effectiveness of 24 hour saturation better than a good Sheepfight.

When a shepherd wants the flock to move to a new pasture, he uses dogs (politicians/lobbyists). 
Not one dog, because one dog will run at the sheep, the sheep will move aside and let him pass and then close ranks again. 

A dog from the right (GOP) and a dog from the left ( wealthy Liberals) puts pressure on the flock to stick together. 
Then, when an opening is provided for the flock in the direction that the Shepherd wants it to go, the flock flows to the new pasture for grazing. The Sheep will still be productive enough to provide the Shepards with a lucrative income to continue the Status Quo, where only they can succeed off the backs of others.

The wealthy Shepards can now enjoy their Chateaubriande on Silver Platters, with 500 dollar wine. On occasion the Sheep are grateful for just a few scraps thrown back to them.

o[])


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 17, 2013)

KEnK, beware the Washington Post's political economics reporting. It's extremely biased to the right - and I mean in their news articles, not Ezra Klein's Wonkblog.

Dean Baker's "Beat the Press" blog is mandatory reading...well, in any case, but especially for someone who reads the Washington Post.

For example:

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/they-are-qtaming-the-debtq-again-at-the-washington-post (http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/bea ... ngton-post)


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 17, 2013)

MSNBC still has some good programs, but most of the time it's not just a fluffy waste of time, it's downright boring.

I like Rachel Maddow too, but I have a hard time watching her show. Let me repeat that I don't dislike her show, because she is an appealing personality. Nor do I have a lack of good feelings for her show, it's just that it is not easy for me to watch it. I say that even though I find her to be likeable and the same for what she has to say. Sometimes people like me dislike people, and then they don't watch their shows. Other times people like me dislike shows, and don''t watch them for that reason.

No, it's for another reason that I have a hard time watching Rachel Maddow's show even though I like her. She is not among the people I dislike, and neither is her show.

She says everything at least five times, and that's not an exaggeration.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Aug 17, 2013)

Left Right and Center (podcast) is terrific.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 17, 2013)

Yup, and Matt Miller's "This Is Interesting" is pretty good too.


----------



## nikolas (Aug 17, 2013)

When I asked some friend of mine "with what image would you describe the 21st century" his reply was "Obama and Hitler holding hands". 

I guess that he's also watching fox, right? I mean OUCH!!!!


----------



## TheUnfinished (Aug 18, 2013)

I think you can only blame Fox up to a point on that one, Nikolas. That's just mental.


----------



## rgames (Aug 18, 2013)

Well I don't watch Fox so I don't know if it's any worse but I can assure you that there's plenty of brainwashing from most media sources. I get most of my news from NBC and NPR and there's *clearly* a liberal bent in both of those sources. In fact, countless studies have shown that there is a lot *more* liberal bias in the media.

There are no "Fair and Balanced" media sources. People don't want them. People want a source that regurgitates back at them what they already believe. So they go find that source and decry the others.

Back when there were only a few media sources there was more mediation (by necessity). Now, though, there are so many options that anyone can go find a source that *exactly* matches what he already thinks, so nobody ever has to face a challenge to his way of thinking.

The result is the extreme polarization we've seen over the last few decades. Everything is amplified to the extremes and you wind up with the loudest guys like Rush Limbaugh and Bill Maher pulling people with them in opposite directions beyond the edges of rational thought.
 
But here's the really insidious part about the liberal vs. conservative positions in the US: neither side cares which side you pick. They care only that you pick one. As long as they're controlling the debate, they're both going to win. If there's ever a shift away from the scripted debates that they provide (for example, the first post in this thread) then the establishment is in trouble.

But that will require that people start thinking for themselves and stop regurgitating the puke that comes from most media sources.

rgames


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 18, 2013)

NPR and NBC are not *clearly* biased in a liberal direction. Any source that talks about "entitlement reform" is biased in a conservative direction, for example. Actually, our entire political system has been way to the right for the past 30+ years, and the results have been horrible.

Anyway, while it's true that unbiased reporting only exists as an ideal, NBC and NPR don't intentionally shit on that ideal. Faux News does; it is unabashed vile propaganda.

Of course media outlets like to stage fights for ratings, but the reason for the divided country is much deeper than that. We have a winner-take-all political system that has created the perfect environment for right-wing lunatics to sell simplistic insanity to people who don't know any better. The country is divided evenly between stupid f-ing idiots on the right and rational people.

The latter category includes the few conservatives who occasionally say things that make sense - a dying breed, but one that does exist. Still, your "countless studies" that show a liberal bias are ignoring the elephant in the room: reality is liberal.


----------



## rgames (Aug 18, 2013)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Aug 18 said:


> The country is divided evenly between stupid f-ing idiots on the right and rational people.


The left has no monopoly on rationale. Left-leaners use rationale when it supports their position (e.g. climate change) and ignore it when it doesn't (e.g. health care).

Right-leaners do exactly the same.

rgames


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Aug 18, 2013)

Big fan of Al Jazeera here. It's so good, and I hear about places we NEVER ever hear about on other news networks.


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 18, 2013)

I watch all the major 'news 'outlets. As far as cable goes, I watch more MSNBC than Fox, and the reason is exactly what's been said here- I prefer people who agree with my left leaning, incredibly rational and humanstic views  .

I agree with Nick. Maddow is personally likeable, and she's one of the few who actually let her interviewees speak without interruption, which I find amazing and refreshing. I also agree that she presents all her various theses as kindergarten primers, hammering her points home too many times. 

Chris Matthews rarely lets an interviewee get a full sentence out. His ego and his overcaffeinated presentation are truly awesome to watch from an entertainment perspective, and this from someone who actually agrees with most of his views. His idiosyncracies are detractive.

If you ever watch Al Sharpton in panel discussions or interviews, you find he's a sharp guy with a good perspective on social justice and activism, but I find his show unwatchable. It's declamatory, ideological to a cartoonish degree and generally one-note throughout.

CNN- I find Blitzer colorless. Maybe bland is best for news, but he too is hard to watch. Don Lemon is just this side of brain dead. Overall, not an entertaining bunch.

Fox is an epic circus. If you like red meat and general neo-con grumbly rhetoric, there's always something fun going on, however, the most amusing program is The Five, which pretends to emulate a roundtable balanced discussion with (gasp!) humor. Who knew hating the left could be so much damn fun??

For actual news, I've trended towards the BBC, best of a bad bunch. Most of the rest is slanted commentary and hysterical noise.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 18, 2013)

And I agree with Larry, although I'm not interested in watching Faux (it's filth).

The real action is in the blogs as far as I'm concerned. I've been reading several political economists for a few years, plus there are a few I check in on from time to time. Obviously they're not news reporting, they're in-depth analysis, but I learn more from blogs that are over my head than from fluffy crap on TV.

***
Richard, you're mistaken about both climate change and healthcare - probably more than about any other issues. Those may be the two best examples of reality having a liberal bias.

Anyone who denies that climate change is being caused by man at this late date simply has his head up his ass. Sorry, there's no nice way to put it.

And think about healthcare. There is no way around it - if you are going to cover everyone and not deny people coverage when they get sick, you must have three things: community rating, mandatory insurance for everyone in the community (whether it's single payer, a public option, or private insurance), and subsidies for people who can't afford the insurance.

Not health savings accounts, not inadequate vouchers, not "reforming" Obamacare and "replacing" it with ass-sex for sick, poor, and old people...no. The only way in this universe to accomplish what I said is what I said. That is all. You lose. Now go home.

Really at the root of this is what I always say: conservatives believe that liberals are the mirror image of them. Not so. We are rational people and you are doing your best to ruin our country.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Aug 18, 2013)

rgames @ Mon Aug 19 said:


> The left has no monopoly on rationale. Left-leaners use rationale when it supports their position (e.g. climate change) and ignore it when it doesn't (e.g. health care).



Eh?

Is the logic here that it is inconsistent to appeal to both reason and humanitarianism? I'm rather fond of both.

(Being a Brit, I may be missing some subtlety of the health care debate of course)


----------



## rgames (Aug 18, 2013)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Aug 18 said:


> Richard, you're mistaken about both climate change and healthcare


I believe climate change probably does have something to do, at least in part, with human activity. So I think you're mistaken about what I think about climate change. Unless you're saying you don't think climate change has anything to do with human activity. In reality, though, it doesn't matter - there are much better reasons to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But they make too much sense and can't be argued about ad nauseum. See a trend there?

But that's all OT.

In the case of climate change, the liberals have rational thought on their side. Climate scientists have made a pretty strong case that global warming has at least something to do with human activity. So liberals use that argument and the conservatives ignore it. 

In the case of health care, the conservatives have rational thought on their side. Medical scientists have made a pretty strong case that Obamacare will do nothing more than transfer a lot of taxpayer money to the health care industry without making anyone healthier. So conservatives use that argument and the liberals ignore it.

Each side uses rational though when it supports their platform and ignores it when it does not.

rgames


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 18, 2013)

rgames @ Sun Aug 18 said:


> Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Aug 18 said:
> 
> 
> > Richard, you're mistaken about both climate change and healthcare
> ...



Ah yes, I agree that the healthcare bill is at least a partial bj to the healthcare insurers... I seem to remember the libs pushing hard for single payer, which would have been more accountable and better. Now why didn't that come about? :::scratching head:::


----------



## rgames (Aug 18, 2013)

NYC Composer @ Sun Aug 18 said:


> Ah yes, I agree that the healthcare bill is at least a partial bj to the healthcare insurers... I seem to remember the libs pushing hard for single payer, which would have been more accountable and better. Now why didn't that come about? :::scratching head:::


It doesn't matter - pick whatever type of insurance system you want. If it's government-mandated then all it's going to do is transfer taxpayer dollars to the health care industry.

Why? Doesn't it stand to reason that more people with health insurance will result in healthier people?

No. Not in the United States.

Here's why:

Uninsured health problems in the US are MOSTLY problems of choice. People choose to be overweight, and sedentary, and smokers, and and and.... and that's the fundamental issue. No amount of health insurance is going to change peoples' adherence to that lifestyle. Likewise, no amount of health insurance is going to change their lifespan or quality of life because it is so dominated by the choice to be overweight, sedentary, and a smoker.

Let's do a thought experiment: take the overweight, sedentary smoker and give him the best insurance in the world. Let's call him Bo. Now let's think about how Bo's health care world evolves.

*Scenario A:*
Bo goes to the doc (paid for by government-mandated coverage). Doc says "Bo, you need to lose weight, exercise, and stop smoking". Bo says "Ok. In the meantime, can I have some pills?" So the doc gives him a prescription for some pills (paid for by government-mandated coverage). Bo goes back to the doctor every year (paid for by government-mandated coverage) and every year the doc says the same thing: lose weight, stop smoking, get some exercise. Well, Bo never does, and he eventually winds up with a blocked artery and lung problems. So, eventually, Bo winds up in the hospital for all sorts of surgeries and treatments (paid for by government-mandated coverage) but all the medicine (paid for by government-mandated coverage) and all the treatments (paid for by government-mandated coverage) just can't overcome the simple fact that he's a sedentary, overweight smoker. And Bo eventually dies at the age of 60.

*Scenario B:*
Bo has no insurance, so he never goes to the doc. He maintains his sedentary, overweight, smoking lifestyle. Because that choice is the primary factor in his health outcome, he dies of the same heart and lung problems at age 60.

So let's review:

Scenario B: Bo lives an unhealthy life and dies at age 60.

Scenario A: Bo lives an unhealthy life, dies at age 60, and a lot of government-mandated payments go to doctors and pharmaceutical companies.

Get it? The ONLY difference is the amount of money going to the doctors and pharmaceutical companies. Bo is equally unhealthy in both scenarios.

Now of course not everyone is a Bo. But Bo is the major contributor to health care costs in the US and covering his expenses with government mandates will only bankrupt the nation while having basically no effect the nation's health.

QED

rgames


----------



## jaeroe (Aug 18, 2013)

FOX is a business, as are the others. Their business plan is to get people to tune in - all of them. Fox is just less sheepish about how they do that - they've even embraced becoming the news themselves. They have lots of viewers and as long as they do, they'll keep on doing what they do. The others are just playing catch up. It's a sad state of affairs. The 24 hour NEWS cycle has really done a disservice to journalism in this country (the US). They all have a perspective, i just fine BBC, NPR, PBS, and CNN International (NOT the ridiculous US CNN channel), Economist and NYT to at least have a clue of what journalism even means. Journalism is becoming a legend - a myth of yore.

In politics (and finance) and NEWS we have major problem of incentives in the US. Not looking too bright a future without addressing this - no one has the balls or efficaciousness to do it.

One thing about the right that has really frustrated me though, especially of late, is their contempt of science. It's really frightening and a terrible step backwards. The shear number of politicians who try to speak on the matter who don't even understand basic scientific concepts (difference between theory and hypothesis) is a pretty good indication of how screwed we are.


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 18, 2013)

rgames @ Sun Aug 18 said:


> NYC Composer @ Sun Aug 18 said:
> 
> 
> > Ah yes, I agree that the healthcare bill is at least a partial bj to the healthcare insurers... I seem to remember the libs pushing hard for single payer, which would have been more accountable and better. Now why didn't that come about? :::scratching head:::
> ...



"Children and other naive practitioners of wrongthink,, let's do a thought experiment!" (laughing). I love it. THANK you, Mister Rogers!

Fine. And if Bo does eventually take good medical advice, he lives 'til 80 or later-which, as time goes by and symptoms add up, he is as likely to do as not, human nature being what it is. That assumes, of course, that he has some sort of insurance and goes to the doctor at all. Screw Bo-he is impractical in his lifestyle choices and deserves to die!


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 18, 2013)

NYC Composer @ Sun Aug 18 said:


> Ah yes, I agree that the healthcare bill is at least a partial bj to the healthcare insurers... I seem to remember the libs pushing hard for single payer, which would have been more accountable and better. Now why didn't that come about? :::scratching head:::



That's funny, I seem to remember the Liberals "pretending" they wanted a single payer while blaming a totally powerless handful of GOP reps for magically stopping this back door bribery scheme.
At our Union meetings we were basically warned about how our Union Treasury and Group Plan were at risk, so we purchased the exemptions, just like the wealthy redistributors who jammed this through did for themselves recently.
It's another example of how these 2 parties are the same away from the Cameras.
Notice how within hours a bill was drafted, brought to the floor and passed before they left town on a Friday Document Dump day. Try that with any real legislation that wasn't purchased by lobbyists.
Personally, I see the exemptions expiring for us in 2018, but the danger to Unions is they will have to give their members 6-10 dollars an hour raise, to justify the deductions since they will see their members flocking to the "free health care" plan. 
Even retirees that pay 400-600 USD per month will jump ship and that's the real story.
Don't expect Liberal media outlets or even Fox/CNN to report this, it's not part of their talking points.
But I will sign up Oct '13 and gain hundreds a month since we own the wealthy Liberals, just like Soros and the Gulf State Arabs.
Actually don't like being on the same side as Gulf State Arabs, but sure seems better for me, as the GOP is not an option when it comes to free stuff these days.

Ooops....I quoted your original reply.
If you want I can remove my reply........I sure wouldn't blame you.. 0oD


----------



## Darthmorphling (Aug 18, 2013)

In the meantime I have a college degree and, what used to be considered a good job. My health insurance is currently $1,300 a month and might be going up to 1,600 in the next two months. My house is worth $100,000 less then I owe on it. I currently feed my five kids on less than $700 a month.

Meanwhile a member of my family gets assistance every month, Section 8 housing for $125, free health care, and gets $1,100 a month to feed her family. Did I mention that neither her, or her husband have jobs?

Both parties have screwed the pooch on many things and are both to blame. Obamacare is a joke, seriously. Conservatives are to blame as well for not helping to come up with a better solution. Liberals allow people to leech off of the system and provide no real checks for abuse.

Then you have people on both sides having a pissing contest, because their views are the only ones that can possibly be right. Arrogance, and ignorance, on both sides of the political spectrum is what is truly messing this country up.

Both Fox and CNN just cater to that.


----------



## jaeroe (Aug 18, 2013)

And here's some pretty good FOX awesomeness some here might appreciate -
(I actually don't have much time or patience to check out the headlines much these days - busy composing....but, here's one i remember seeing) One day that I did happen to check out FOXNEWS.COM they had an awesome headline about 'celebrities and their loser siblings'. It was quite hilarious, as many of the 'losers' weren't remotely losers. The best two examples were

Angus Young and loser brother Malcolm Young
And
Eddie van haven and loser brother Alex Van Halen

That's right, Malcom Young, writer of the vast majority of AC/DC's songs (and riffs) and their producer and 2nd guitarist is clearly a loser. Even by Fox standards he's surely made enough money to get some respect from them.... But no... Because it's all about getting people to tune in, even if by controversy or just plain being wrong, misinformed, or making idiotic statements.

And

Alex Van Halen - drummer of one of the biggest American rock bands is clearly a loser. "Hot For Teacher" is clearly the drumming of a loser. No level of accomplishment whatsoever. If you're a rock drummer, multiple covers of Modern Drummer is definitely the ultimate sign of being a loser.

Both are clearly losers, never accomplished or achieved anything, never even made it with a lady, for crying out loud, and neither of them have a penny to their names.

Ah..... FOX rules. Think they had a little trouble getting the paper bag off their heads on that one?


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 18, 2013)

:mrgreen: Screwed the Pooch ......that's great.
But in all reality they screwed the Pooch then sold the Puppies.
Never pass up an oppurtunity to take advantage of a crisis.....

A Quote from Rahm Emmanual Mayor of a gun free City with the highest murder rate next to Tijuana and Syria, former "advisor" to the Prez in his quest to protect all the people on Earth as well as the Solar System, since life forms other than his kind, are basically incapable of such a feat.


----------



## Darthmorphling (Aug 18, 2013)

I should point out that I do believe there are good people on both sides of the spectrum. I even believe that there are some good people in politics. It just seems that nothing can get accomplished anymore, because if you are a politician, and look like you are going to extend your arm across the aisle, the masses do not make it easy for you to to compromise.

Even at my school, and teaching is stereotypically a liberal profession, we have numerous people blaming Obama for this healthcare mess. I pointed out that the Republicans didn't do anything to make it better. No one wants to hear that because the Republicans will turn it around next election. 

It's funny because it was only a few years ago that these same people were complaining about the Republicans destroying education with No Child Left Behind.


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 19, 2013)

chimuelo @ Mon Aug 19 said:


> NYC Composer @ Sun Aug 18 said:
> 
> 
> > Ah yes, I agree that the healthcare bill is at least a partial bj to the healthcare insurers... I seem to remember the libs pushing hard for single payer, which would have been more accountable and better. Now why didn't that come about? :::scratching head:::
> ...



Why? Always a pleasure to debate you, Chim


----------



## Guy Rowland (Aug 19, 2013)

Richard - take a look at this table - http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS and then tell me if current US policiy on healthcare is either reasonable or rational. Obama's Healthcare plan - I've little doubt - has been so watered down by the realities of the dysfunctional US polictical system that it will be far less than perfect, but IMO it's a product of right wing logic and misinformation to suggest any change to the system to be more equitable will make things worse. That world bank table says it all - you guys spend way more than anyone else on earth on health care.


----------



## gsilbers (Aug 19, 2013)

Darthmorphling @ Fri Aug 16 said:


> Unfortunately news is no longer about news, but instead about ratings. Foxnews knows how to cater to their target audience. Plain and simple. CNN is just as bad.
> 
> Honestly, I peruse both sites to see what is going on, then I google the terms to see what other outlets are saying. One can get a much better perspective on world events that way.
> 
> .



i agree. 

all news is now is eye catching, nerve touching , sensensionalism yellow news. 


plus, there is nothing on the tv news i cant just open up a news website and see the same in 2 mins. most yahoo, msn and the like mimic the same news as tv but also there is tech news, science news, social news, news from other countries which might affect friends and family etc. 
plus do research on how to do something about something you see inthe news. any donations yuo can make, companies that are helping out people in need, and research to know how to vote in the next elections for whatever issue and not only presidential.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 19, 2013)

> Both parties have screwed the pooch on many things and are both to blame. Obamacare is a joke, seriously. Conservatives are to blame as well for not helping to come up with a better solution. Liberals allow people to leech off of the system and provide no real checks for abuse.
> 
> Then you have people on both sides having a pissing contest, because their views are the only ones that can possibly be right. Arrogance, and ignorance, on both sides of the political spectrum is what is truly messing this country up.
> 
> Both Fox and CNN just cater to that.



No!

That's what I keep saying: both parties are NOT to blame. One is not a mirror image of the other.

The Republicans are to blame. They want you to think it's a pissing contest and that both sides are to blame, because their goal is to dismantle everything that makes us a civilized society. It would give them a permanent erection if they could get rid of the entire social safety net, from Social Security to unemployment insurance to Medicare - all of it.

So they do their best to disable the government. Then people who don't follow this closely enough naturally assume that government doesn't work and that both parties are to blame.

And if you look just a little closer, you'll see that what my side says is absolute is NOT that there aren't people like you who are stuck in the middle. Nobody has said that there wouldn't be bumps in the road; how could there no be when you're reforming how 16% of the economy is financed? What's absolute is exactly what I said: you need the three components of ANY healthcare system and there are no alternatives.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 19, 2013)

> I should point out that I do believe there are good people on both sides of the spectrum. I even believe that there are some good people in politics.



The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I don't care if Republicans are nice guys. Their agenda over the past 30+ years has already screwed up the country, and they want to make it worse.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 19, 2013)

Richard, two things. First, when I said you were wrong about global warming, I meant you were wrong to use that issue as an example of an issue that made whatever case you were making (I've forgotten right now).

As to the obesity problem and universal healthcare, you are using the Gish Gallop method to convince yourself that you are making an intelligent argument. (The Gish Gallop is what Mitt Romney used in the first presidential debate: spew a whole bunch of bullshit in series so that it looks like a coherent argument.)

Inside Richard's brain:

Obesity is an epidemic, responsible for a high percentage of our healthcare costs. Ergo providing healthcare to everyone will not make anyone healthier, mandatory insurance will just redistribute money to insurance companies, and...actually I don't know what else; it's too twisted for me to make any sense of.

Reality:

- Obesity is an epidemic, and we need to deal with it.

The major cause of it is that 85% of the 650K products on our supermarket shelves are processed crap. Actually, that crappy food is responsible for a whole bunch of health issues, and obesity is just one; the list goes on and on (heart disease, diabetes, possibly cancer...etc. etc. etc.).

The reasons for the crappy processed food - acknowledging that there's processing and there's processing - are that it lasts on the shelf longer, sweet food tastes better (when you become used to it), and corn syrup is cheap. Processing generally means grinding it up and sweetening it, but there's more to it than that.

- Providing universal healthcare is basic human decency. Anyone opposed to it sucks, well-intentioned or not. And if you don't want the three components I've listed several times in this thread alone, you are not living in reality; they are the laws of physics or something.

That doesn't mean there aren't lots of things we could do to make ourselves healthier, to cut healthcare costs, to make healthcare financing more efficient, to improve the situation of people whose premiums are too high, and so on.


----------



## Darthmorphling (Aug 19, 2013)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Aug 19 said:


> > Both parties have screwed the pooch on many things and are both to blame. Obamacare is a joke, seriously. Conservatives are to blame as well for not helping to come up with a better solution. Liberals allow people to leech off of the system and provide no real checks for abuse.
> >
> > Then you have people on both sides having a pissing contest, because their views are the only ones that can possibly be right. Arrogance, and ignorance, on both sides of the political spectrum is what is truly messing this country up.
> >
> ...



I'm actually a registered Democrat so I am mostly on your side. My point is that the political atmosphere in this country is so damaged that nothing effective can get done anymore. This is the fault of both parties. I also blame the "news" outlets who give people what they want to hear. I blame the sheep in this country who never seek out alternative views on policy and who still think that only their views are correct.

Yes conservatives do not want to pay for entitlement programs. I have nothing against the concept of government assistance, I have everything wrong with the way it is implemented. Abuse, after abuse.

Earlier I pointed out that I have five kids. My wife manages to get us fed on average with around $700-800 a month. I would love to be able to say it is all completely healthy, but most of it is. A close family member, on my wife's side, has 5 kids as well. She gets close to a $1,000 a month to feed her family. Her kids also qualify for free lunch at school. What's wrong with this picture? I mean seriously tell me how your side thinks this is right?

Talk about government waste. We'll give you money to feed your kids, and we'll also give your kids free breakfast and lunch at school too. I mean kids need to be fed to learn right? Of course they do and that's why I feed my kids with the $700-800 I spend on food.

Before you start in with how this must be an isolated case, it is not. I see it all the time in my classroom. I once asked a student what they were going to do if they coudn't improve their grades and didn't pass highschool. He seriously said this, "I'll just go on welfare like my parents." This was a kid who was incredibly smart and could easily do anything he wanted to do, but his mindset is already on how to not work.

Universal health care is a must for this country. It needs to happen. However, until there is reform in the industry itself, and both sides of the political debate work together, it will never happen in any meaningful way. In the meantime, my healthcare premiums are approaching the amount I pay for my mortgage.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Aug 19, 2013)

_"The reason why we find ourselves in a position of impotency is not because our only powerful potential enemy has sent men to invade our shores . . . but rather because of the traitorous actions of those who have been treated so well by this Nation. It has not been the less fortunate, or members of minority groups who have been traitorous to this Nation, but rather those who have had all the benefits that the wealthiest Nation on earth has had to offer . . . the finest homes, the finest college education and the finest jobs in government we can give."

...

"I have here in my hand a list of 279 . . . a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Republican Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the US Congress. . . ."_


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 19, 2013)

> This is the fault of both parties



And that is simply not true. I'm sorry, but this is false equivalence.



> Universal health care is a must for this country. It needs to happen. However, until there is reform in the industry itself, and both sides of the political debate work together, it will never happen in any meaningful way.



Two separate issues: universal healthcare and bringing down the costs. There are some cost-cutting measures in Obamacare, but it's mainly just universal coverage.

As I said - branching off from Richard's argument that fat people don't need healthcare - the biggest driver of our healthcare costs is crappy food.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 19, 2013)

The Democrats aren't holding up every nomination, holding the country hostage to get cuts in social services, forcing the sequester, and on and on and on. It's the Republican party that's made our country ungovernable.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 19, 2013)

Or as Robert Reich puts it:


Permit me an impertinent question (or three).

Suppose a small group of extremely wealthy people sought to systematically destroy the U.S. government by (1) finding and bankrolling new candidates pledged to shrinking and dismembering it; (2) intimidating or bribing many current senators and representatives to block all proposed legislation, prevent the appointment of presidential nominees, eliminate funds to implement and enforce laws, and threaten to default on the nation's debt; (3) taking over state governments in order to redistrict, gerrymander, require voter IDs, purge voter rolls, and otherwise suppress the votes of the majority in federal elections; (4) running a vast PR campaign designed to convince the American public of certain big lies, such as climate change is a hoax, and (5) buying up the media so the public cannot know the truth.

Would you call this treason?

If not, what would you call it?

And what would you do about it?


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 19, 2013)

I liked it better when the Liberal Super Majority had no GOP opposition.
Absolutely nothing was passed.
Much better to wait for GOP leaders to regain seats, then talk about what you want to pass, but can't since there's those darn GOP guys are stopping Progress......

Speaking of Sheep.
Montana has seen a large gathering of wealthy Liberals from Hollywood claiming residence to avoid the "Fair Share" taxes, so they also have successfully lobbied the State for a new State Song.

Appropriately named "There'll Never Be Another Ewe." .... o 

Ankyu


----------



## SamGarnerStudios (Aug 19, 2013)

Even though I lean far right, I always hesitate to associate myself with a party because I hate things about both political parties (most days I lean libertarian if anything). Regardless of what party is more at fault than the other, both parties are at fault to some degree. People can agree to disagree on who is more at fault, but to say that one party is completely at fault and the other is completely innocent seems like a brainwashed thing to say (I'm not sure if you're saying you think the Republicans are entirely to blame and the Democrats are entirely innocent, I hope not). 

The beautiful thing about brainwashing is the victim doesn't know they're brainwashed until after the fact. We could all be brainwashed, who knows.


----------



## Darthmorphling (Aug 19, 2013)

@Nick

Just because you keep saying things doesn't make them true. I agree with you that the Republicans have done a lot to mess this country up, but to say that the Democrats are innocent of it is just wishful, blind, ignorance.

What's really sad is that we as people are continuing to allow it to happen.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 19, 2013)

And just because I keep saying things doesn't make it false either, and it isn't. As a matter of fact, I think you'd find by most standards that I'm not particularly ignorant, wishful, or blind. Reality is reality.

Of I'm not saying Democrats are perfect. Far from it. But they're not the ones paralyzing our government. It's not like there are two equal parties that are both to blame. This is the Republicans' doing.

And whether or not I've said it again has nothing to do with it. It's not just opinion.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 19, 2013)

> but to say that one party is completely at fault and the other is completely innocent seems like a brainwashed thing to say



Maybe it seems like it, but then anyone who leans right is totally brainwashed anyway, so what different does it make?


----------



## SamGarnerStudios (Aug 19, 2013)

I guess we're both brainwashed.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 19, 2013)

That's a brainwashed thing to say.


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 19, 2013)

Being one of the entitled class, I have my brain dry cleaned.


----------



## Andrew Aversa (Aug 19, 2013)

> Before you start in with how this must be an isolated case, it is not. I see it all the time in my classroom. I once asked a student what they were going to do if they coudn't improve their grades and didn't pass highschool. He seriously said this, "I'll just go on welfare like my parents." This was a kid who was incredibly smart and could easily do anything he wanted to do, but his mindset is already on how to not work.



True, some people abuse the system. However the scale of welfare abuse is still minimal in the grand scheme of things. Inevitably, if we provide a social safety net, some people - who don't mind getting by with the bare minimums - will not mind living with the bare minimums. But it's fair to say that a great many people prefer to strive harder so we can afford the latest gadgets, entertainment, vacations, cars, houses, etc. 

If the concern is that such abuse is an actual drain on our resources, I would posit that we lose far more from tax loopholes taken advantage of by the very very wealthy and extremely large businesses in our country, along with extreme overspending on military operations and inefficiencies in the medical system caused by a largely for-profit scheme (as you noted)


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 20, 2013)

The poor will always be with us. The best way to break the cycle of poverty is by early and consistently excellent education. Conservatives won't fund that. The teachers' union certainly makes it problematic, I admit.

The poor will always be among us. Every major religion tells their members and everyone with any moral center knows they should have compassion towards the poor. In this case, compassion might be to stop complaining about pennies, especially when you're doing ok.

I am all for cleaning up the incredible amount of fraud and waste but I'm sorry, school breakfast programs and lunch programs and feeding programs in general don't cost squat in the general scheme of things. 

This constant far right rumbling about revolution against tyranny in America is laughable. First, because the military will eat the 50 man militias for a snack. Second, because the government ends up helping everyone. I actually have listened to people on disability complaining that OTHER people are on disability. I have heard grumbling about government from people receiving unemployment benefits. Everyone receives protection from the military, uses roads and bridges, collects Social Security, gets Medicare. It's anti-logical, all this carping.


----------



## Darthmorphling (Aug 20, 2013)

NYC Composer @ Tue Aug 20 said:


> The poor will always be with us. The best way to break the cycle of poverty is by early and consistently excellent education. Conservatives won't fund that. The teachers' union certainly makes it problematic, I admit.



I feel that the best way is to teach a man to fish.

At what point does the teacher's union make it problematic? In California we had a PreK program get approved that would allow those kids that just missed the age cutoff for kindergarten get shelved due to budget constraints. It wasn't the union's doing in anyway whatsoever. 

If you are saying that we as teachers need to stop complaining about fair pay and benefits, then I would say that all you composers need to stop complaining about the decrease in royalties, rates, and back end payments. Puts things in perspective eh?



> The poor will always be among us. Every major religion tells their members and everyone with any moral center knows they should have compassion towards the poor. In this case, compassion might be to stop complaining about pennies, especially when you're doing ok.



I bring in snacks for my kids, I buy school supplies for my students who can't afford it. I do so because I choose to do so. I resent the government telling my that they are a better judge of how my money is spent than I am

As for complaining about pennies, please see my earlier post where I point out how much my insurance premiums are. They have gone from $600 only 5 years ago to a potential $1,600 depending on how tomorrow's vote turns out.

My wife and I calculated that we would actually make more money if she quit her job, because then my kids would qualify for healthy families.



> I am all for cleaning up the incredible amount of fraud and waste but I'm sorry, school breakfast programs and lunch programs and feeding programs in general don't cost squat in the general scheme of things.



Low cost/free lunch programs are based on income. If you qualify for free lunch, your family qualifies for EBT. Why the double dipping?

If you saw the amount of food that gets thrown away on a daily basis you would change your opinion about waste. Even if the food is still in its prepackaged wrapper it needs to get thrown away. It's little things like this in all areas of government that add up to huge waste. The best thing to cut out when you are tightening your own budget is your daily Starbuck's habit. Five dollars is not much in the grand scheme, but multiply that by 365 and you get a lot of cash.

Google the MAA program in California. It's part of MediCal. Essentially it allows schools to bill MediCal for things we already do as part of our job anyway. During our MAA week, I can pass out a flier for a dental program and bill MediCal for 15 minutes. If I talk to our speech therapist during that week about a student I can bill that time. You know what I did before this program was around? I still talked to the speech therapist. If I talk to a parent about their child having difficulty seeing the board, I can bill as long as I hand them a flier. Complete and utter waste.

I believe last year was the last year for it, but I'm sure someone will claim its too valuable to let go.



> This constant far right rumbling about revolution against tyranny in America is laughable. First, because the military will eat the 50 man militias for a snack. Second, because the government ends up helping everyone. I actually have listened to people on disability complaining that OTHER people are on disability. I have heard grumbling about government from people receiving unemployment benefits. Everyone receives protection from the military, uses roads and bridges, collects Social Security, gets Medicare. It's anti-logical, all this carping.



Here I completely agree with you!


----------



## Darthmorphling (Aug 20, 2013)

zircon_st @ Mon Aug 19 said:


> If the concern is that such abuse is an actual drain on our resources, I would posit that we lose far more from tax loopholes taken advantage of by the very very wealthy and extremely large businesses in our country, along with extreme overspending on military operations and inefficiencies in the medical system caused by a largely for-profit scheme (as you noted)



I agree with this.

Please do not take what I am saying as I don't think people shouldn't get help when needed. My mother-in-law went many years without health insurance. She cleans houses for a living. Going to the doctor cost her a lot of money until she finally qualified for Medicare. There is a teacher in our district who worked construction. He went on disability and put himself through college. Actually disability helped pay for that. This is using the system the way it was intended.

I just see a lot of abuse on a daily basis. My wife works in a physical therapy office and sees a huge number of workman's comp patients that always seem to improve, until it gets closer to their time off coming to an end.

Meanwhile our politician's get the sweetest retirement and benefits for the remainder of their lives.


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 20, 2013)

Darthmorphling @ Tue Aug 20 said:


> Meanwhile our politician's get the sweetest retirement and benefits for the remainder of their lives.



Just another example of how there's no difference between these 2 false dietys' other than the shit they rattle from their mouths.

But they have a quest where all Americans play by the same fair share, socially engineered rules they create, but themselves would never dream of adhering to.

The Royal Family made sure that thier American anti-Oil/Green Energy mogul Al Gore got his 500,000,000 USD days before the Bush tax cuts that Gore "despised," expired.
The hypocracy was comical during economic certainty, but now it's incredibly insulting IMHO.

When we see such self serving bastards brainwashing Sheep, I don't know if I am more angered at them, or the sheer stupidity of their followers.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 20, 2013)

The stupidity is that you keep posting that, chim. Even if our politicians do take care of themselves first, that doesn't mean that the legislation they advance for the rest of the country makes no difference. Why don't you advance your repeated post to the next step - what to do about it?

To me the first step is to take the money out of our campaigns to remove the corrupting influence. What to do about over half of them becoming highly paid lobbyists when they leave office (literally over half, by the way) is another question.

But at least you might move forward rather than saying over and over how everyone who believes in one party over the other is a sheep. It's not like you see something that everyone else is too stupid to realize.

**

I agree with Mr. Aversa. There will always be lazy people, but millions of people didn't suddenly become lazy when they lost their jobs in the crash.

Note that we have this thing called the Earned Income Tax Credit - a wage subsidy that encourages people to work rather than go on welfare.

We also have a focused agenda by the Koch suckers of the world to convince people that their taxes go to help lazy people (when their real agenda is to make themselves richer).


----------



## TheUnfinished (Aug 21, 2013)

Returning to Fox for a moment... Bill O'Reilly. Quite the most appalling broadcaster alive today. 

I find him even more disturbing than Glenn Beck, because Beck was/is obviously a clown. Whereas O'Reilly kinda manages to stay just the right side of the nutjob fence, despite being a relentlessly ignorant, lying, bully.

Genuinely disturbing.


----------



## woodsdenis (Aug 21, 2013)

TheUnfinished @ Wed Aug 21 said:


> Returning to Fox for a moment... Bill O'Reilly. Quite the most appalling broadcaster alive today.
> 
> I find him even more disturbing than Glenn Beck, because Beck was/is obviously a clown. Whereas O'Reilly kinda manages to stay just the right side of the nutjob fence, despite being a relentlessly ignorant, lying, bully.
> 
> Genuinely disturbing.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1M6EYA14eU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUK8yaxHbj4

He certainly is.


----------



## Darthmorphling (Aug 21, 2013)

TheUnfinished @ Wed Aug 21 said:


> Returning to Fox for a moment... Bill O'Reilly. Quite the most appalling broadcaster alive today.
> 
> I find him even more disturbing than Glenn Beck, because Beck was/is obviously a clown. Whereas O'Reilly kinda manages to stay just the right side of the nutjob fence, despite being a relentlessly ignorant, lying, bully.
> 
> Genuinely disturbing.



These types of personalities are the reason why I will probably never support a republican candidate. Even if there are more centrist conservatives, that are willing to reach out for the greater good, they have to pander to the nutjobs that believe everything these people say. And there are a lot of nutjobs out there that truly do believe the crap they are shoveling.


----------



## Udo (Aug 21, 2013)

There's objective news reporting available in the US now; Al-Jazeera America just launched.  Facts ..., no opinions masquerading as facts ..., no propaganda ... (but the scope will probably be limited initially).


----------



## FredrikJonasson (Aug 22, 2013)

Probably it's only natural to blame it on the one that's officially in charge. Those who's _really_ setting the schedule in the US (who own much of the media) can of course blame it on Obama, leaving their own backs free and the public with a belief that something actually will change with a new president. 

And yes, I think the Zeitgeist movement is great


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 22, 2013)

Yes but Al Gorezeerah is pushing the Green agenda which is what wealthy Suadi Royals need to maintain power.
Al Gore and his various Sheep make him rich as he praises our dependance on Saudi Oil while low level drug offenders build Soros, Gore, Kerry and other wealthy Liberal redistributors Solar Panels from the worlds largest incarcertaion Plantations, no not Guantanamo that the administration closed back in 2009, the other 18,000 Work Camps, not the ones in NKorea, but here at home.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Aug 22, 2013)

Al Jazeera is all I feel like watching now. First, there's all kinds of shades of reporters, all the time! Second, everyone has a sexy british accent. Third, there's actually more going on in Africa than starvation and war. Fourth, Asia is not just about business opportunities and floods. Fifth, no stupid Big Pharma and 'clean' oil ads.

Only 2 things bug me: always, always the same musical theme, a gazillion times per hour; cricket games' analysis. 230 - 3? Games that last days? I don't get it. :lol:


----------



## TheUnfinished (Aug 22, 2013)

Oh do give it a rest Chimuelo, you're beginning to sound like a manic depressive Alex Jones.


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 22, 2013)

I'll never rest as long as the worlds largest Oil producers and Exporters continue paying American spokepersons to represent them.
I guess Big Al figured after the IPCC debacle, and the failure of Carbon tax incentive at Chicagos Trade Center, he should let the Gulf State Royals promote their own agenda abroad and get out with 500,000,000 USD while the getting was good, especially before the fair tax laws would have taken several million more, he seemed to think would serve him better than the Sheep who he led to the Theaters.

I mean with all of this talk of the largest oil junkie in the world trying to cure itself and become at least independant, it's like a Herion Dealer or pimp losing their highest earners and largest addicts.

Watch Hillarys campaign that recently started for 2016. U can name the financail backers already, Soros, the DNC Party, the Gulf State Emirates. Bill tried to slip Hillary 20,000,000 USD of Saudi money back in 2008 while running against Obama.
Rules say that his Presidential "library" was illegal to transfer cash secretly from Arabs.

Also expect to see her with a backdrop of Mariachi Bands playing as pretends to tolerate being near low life Mexican immigrants.... o-[][]-o 

Alex Jones is a whack job, but attempting to insult someone with a personal fling like that, I simply interpret that as a badge of honor, as obviously there's no way to stick up for the wealthy elites you worship, so destroying the message or messenger is the last alternative.


Ankyu.... o=?


----------



## snowleopard (Aug 22, 2013)

Here's what really needs to be done. Feel free to add, or even refute if you can, but I'd challenge anyone to not say this is a priority above all the partisan nonsense and thus toss it all out and go back to debating pointless nonsense topics our society, media, and politicians do every day. 

• Criminalize lobbying.
• Completely overhaul campaign financing.
• Eliminate political party benefits, including all tax exemptions.
• Make all elections open (non-partisan, non-party).

You can add talk about equitable taxation, trade agreements, livable wages, health care overhaul, education overhaul, energy investment too if you wish. They are important. But the real problem is money in politics. Money leading to political manipulation and power. It's cronyism, bribery and corruption, pure and simple. And it's completely legal. 

We live in a plutocracy people. The sooner you come to grips with that, and realize there will be very little change in our lifetimes, the sooner you can focus on the circle in which you live. It may seem like a prison sentence you don't deserve, and in many ways it is, but it also may free you up some. Sorry if this sounds too Zen, or too blasé sarcastic, but that's how I see it. 

You can now go back to debating Fox vs. CNN, Trayvon Martin, if Snowden is a hero or traitor, Mayor Filner's infidelity, US payments to the UN, Voter ID lawsuits, etc. if you really think I'm wrong and that's what matters.


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 22, 2013)

Just taking the money out would remove the Kennedy,Gore, Reid, Pelosi, Edwards, Shumer, Issa, Rockefeller, Bush types.
Maybe then someone who actually understands what a job really is could get in there and actually help people instead of themselves.
Being a Union man I usually vote for the DNC since they help with our wage increases, but never really do. But in all reality without the wealthy developers from the GOP side of the fence, we have no jobs.
That's why we are seeing Carters second term now as businesses are crushed and investment is in Macau, Brazil and Costa Rica.
Once the wealhty Liberals leave the wealthy GOP guys come back and at least then our Union wages will be paid for working instead of marching for jobs that no longer exist.

I vote for Snow Leopard..... o-[][]-o


----------



## Darthmorphling (Aug 22, 2013)

snowleopard @ Thu Aug 22 said:


> • Criminalize lobbying.
> • Completely overhaul campaign financing.
> • Eliminate political party benefits, including all tax exemptions.
> • Make all elections open (non-partisan, non-party).



Agree!

I would also add limits of two terms for all offices.


----------



## TheUnfinished (Aug 22, 2013)

Yeah, that wasn't any less mad really, was it?

And as for suggesting I worship somebody... that's the sort of silliness I'm talking about.


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 22, 2013)

It's all good Brotha' Man unfinished.
Passion is a virtue, even if it's misplaced.
Better than being complacent.

Cheerz to you....


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 22, 2013)

snowleopard @ Thu Aug 22 said:


> Here's what really needs to be done. Feel free to add, or even refute if you can, but I'd challenge anyone to not say this is a priority above all the partisan nonsense and thus toss it all out and go back to debating pointless nonsense topics our society, media, and politicians do every day.
> 
> • Criminalize lobbying.
> • Completely overhaul campaign financing.
> ...



I agree. I'd also like to get rid of tax exempt status for all religious institutions and make them spin off their charitable divisions into regulated and audited entities. 

Slightly OT- I stopped giving money to the United Way and Red Cross when I saw how little of my money actually went to help people and how much was eaten up in salaries and general administrative expenses. On the religious institution level, i like the idea that my tax money goes to funding soup kitchens, but abstinence promotion and lobbying for teaching religion as science in public schools ("Intelligent Design"), not so much. If the divisions were cleanly split, I'd be more likely to donate.


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 22, 2013)

@Darth-first, good teachers are worth their weight in gold. I have complete respect and love for them. That said-

The tenure system in NYC allows for the well known "No Teacher Fired Unless Convicted of Murder" program. I sent my kid to public school. We ran into egregiously underperforming and fairly psychotic teachers who, instead of being fired or taken to task for non performance metrics, were unfireable due to seniority. I passed one of my kid's classrooms once and heard a MUSIC teacher screaming and berating children with obscenities. 3rd graders. When I took it to the principal, she sighed and explained the two year process it would take just to get a review. The union representative would be there. It would be my word against the teachers. Other parents knew about this teacher, had known for years but was afraid the teacher would take it out on their kid. I wish I could say she was the only one, but sadly, there were about ten tgat I personally knew of. The underperforming ones were shutled around to places that it was felt they would do the least damage. They often taught-botany!

I understand the inherent problems with metrics in teaching, but the unions have resisted EVERY attempt to establish ANY here. Ditto with performance incentives. This does not enhance "teaching people to fish" in a quantifiable way.

I am pro-union. I belonged to three. They did good things for me- but unions, like any other organization, can get ahead of themselves and while advocating for their members, lose sight of the bigger picture of keeping jobs and, in this case, the very important task of educating the next generation.

The "pennies" I was referring to are what feeding programs cost as opposed to, say, the military budget. That there is fraud and waste, no doubt at all. Still. Btw- i make my own coffee and take it to the studio every nght :wink: Cheers.


----------



## Darthmorphling (Aug 22, 2013)

NYC Composer @ Thu Aug 22 said:


> @Darth-first, good teachers are worth their weight in gold. I have complete respect and love for them. That said-
> 
> The tenure system in NYC allows for the well known "No Teacher Fired Unless Convicted of Murder" program. I sent my kid to public school. We ran into egregiously underperforming and fairly psychotic teachers who, instead of being fired or taken to task for non performance metrics, were unfireable due to seniority. I passed one of my kid's classrooms once and heard a MUSIC teacher screaming and berating children with obscenities. 3rd graders. When I took it to the principal, she sighed and explained the two year process it would take just to get a review. The union representative would be there. It would be my word against the teachers. Other parents knew about this teacher, had known for years but was afraid the teacher would take it out on their kid. I wish I could say she was the only one, but sadly, there were about ten tgat I personally knew of. The underperforming ones were shutled around to places that it was felt they would do the least damage. They often taught-botany!
> 
> ...



I am well aware of how, like political parties, and programs go, that unions have their bad side as well.

The fact of the matter is the principal was to blame there. It is not that difficult to get a teacher fired. Yes it does take a while, but if the principal really thought there was something wrong and it sounds like there was, they could get it done.

I have a similar story with my daughter, and her teacher. I eventually had to put her in a Charter school, and my sons ended up coming to my school. The principal chose to ignore the teacher in question. 

It took a lot for me to put her in the charter school. It seems like charter schools are a great thing and the answer to education, but they are a mixed blessing. My daughter is thriving there, so I am glad I finally relented. Where the problem lies is that, unlike public schools, they can be selective about who gets in, and who gets to stay. If you are a behavior problem you will be removed from the school. Most of you will say, "That's great! My kid's teacher will get to focus on teaching and not discipline." Where does the "troubled" kid go? Public schools, that's where. So as you can see I am conflicted.

As far as standardized testing I have mixed feelings about them. On one hand, the idea of testing what a student knows seems like a good thing, but it is not as clearcut as that. What the current CSTs did, in CA at least, was to put so much focus on memorizing algorithms, that problem solving took a huge back seat. We are trasitioning to Common Core, which New York has already adopted, starting next year. The emphasis is being put heavily on problem solving, application, and real world uses. I think it will be terrific.

Basing teacher performance on how kids do on a test they take in one day, is to say the least ridiculous. For example, I just saw my Language Arts scores for last year, and I was not happy with them at all. I was quite disappointed with my self actually. But then I looked at the kid's levels before they came to me and I actually made them improve. If merit pay was in effect though, my salary could be jeopardized due to where the scores are currently, despite the class improving overall. That is completely wrong. I have no control over what my students do in their free time, and I cannot really make them do anything beyond my classroom door.

In the business world, music as well, if your employee is not doing their job, they can be let go. I have a group of kids that I have for the whole year. I cannot just get rid of the underacheivers, I wouldn't anyway as I do enjoy teaching, like a corporation can do.

Can we blame the cardiologist, whose patient has ignored all advice about changing their lifestyle when they die. Not really.

These are kids, and my job is to do the best I can with them. I like to think I am a good teacher, but there is only so much I can realistically do with them on my own. There needs to be parental support, and buyin from both the stuent and the parents. For most of the kids this is not an issue, but a larger proportion than you might think it is an issue.

Now I need to figure out how I'm going to eat lunch as I haven't, and the bell just rang >8o


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 22, 2013)

@ Darth-We are going wildly OT, so I'll respond privately. 

Apologies to all.


----------



## TheUnfinished (Aug 22, 2013)

chimuelo @ Thu Aug 22 said:


> It's all good Brotha' Man unfinished.
> Passion is a virtue, even if it's misplaced.
> Better than being complacent.
> 
> Cheerz to you....


No problemo matey. I'm aware this isn't the Royal Society!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 22, 2013)

Snowleopard's ideas all make good sense to me. 

Outlawing lobbyists is a thorny one, though, because you're allowed to petition Congress.


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 22, 2013)

Anyone who has served in government should be barred from being hired for any lobbying position. This should go double for members of Congress.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Aug 22, 2013)

NYC Composer @ Fri Aug 23 said:


> Anyone who has served in government should be barred from being hired for any lobbying position. This should go double for members of Congress.



What an excellent idea.

Meanwhile, here's some recent science / Fox News fun: 

http://mediamatters.org/mobile/blog/2013/08/22/fox-under-three-feet-of-denial/195541 (http://mediamatters.org/mobile/blog/201 ... ial/195541)


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 22, 2013)

Got any pictures of Al Gores Beach house which was also underwater in his movie...?
Why on Earth would a Saudi puppet invest 9 miilion on beach house property if he actually believed the shit he rattled from his mouth...?

Ice melting and re freezing at the other end of the Atlantic Conveyor Belt will tell us how soon Sea Level will rise, not some silly Soros puppets or Government "Climatologists" whose income relies on "results."

We have decades before this scarry movie stuff might even show signs.
Do you really think the Chinese Government or the Indian Government with all the Billions we give them everyday wouldn't be investing or toting the Green Gore Agenda if they had evidence....?

Their Government is full of Engineers and Scientitsts.
The UK and USA Governments are Royal Family members, wealthy Liberals and Conservatives, Used car salesmen and a bunch of Lawyers who can't even cite Case Law without a staffer to write their scripts.

I'll watch the Chinese before I fall for another Al Gore cash machine scam.
When their better educated leaders stop burning Coal instead of building a new Plant every month, I'll start paying attention.
But since the 70s I have heard the same sad Maurice Strong con jobs, yet my old house in Coral Gables Fla. has remained exactly the same as when our clan lived there in '76.

But underwater cities like New Orleans and Manhattan should have been devastated by now if we were to believe the Government Revenue seekers.

But I agree, higher taxes might change the weather. Afterall we have Gods in the House Of Lords and Washington DC that will do anything for money, no reason Nature can't accept cash for certain weather.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Aug 22, 2013)

How about one free Chimuelo post about climate science that doesn't mention Al Gore? Go on, try it, it's perfectly possible. (well, unless you've watched too much Fox News, in which case perhaps not?)


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 22, 2013)

chimuelo @ Thu Aug 22 said:


> Got any pictures of Al Gores Beach house which was also underwater in his movie...?
> Why on Earth would a Saudi puppet invest 9 miilion on beach house property if he actually believed the [email protected]#t he rattled from his mouth...?
> 
> Ice melting and re freezing at the other end of the Atlantic Conveyor Belt will tell us how soon Sea Level will rise, not some silly Soros puppets or Government "Climatologists" whose income relies on "results."
> ...



According to industry figures, 5% of the casings for the pipes protecting the aquifer from harmful chemicals during fracking will fail immediately. Eventually, they will all fail unless mushc more stringent standards are imposed and followed up constantly. yet, the natural gas boom is on, come hell or high water.

Jobs or drinking water without benzene, jobs or water, hmmm. Decisions, decisions. Ah hell. It's probably Al Gore behind the whole Cornell/Stanford/every other research facility thingie. Matter of fact, I think I saw Al in the garden the other day, lurking. He does that, you know. Lurk, I mean. That's what evil wealthy redistributors do. Lurk.


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 23, 2013)

Yeah, I am a simple man. Once I am lied to by the same people again and again, I start asking where does the money come from and what are the results of this cash.

Start with the "war on poverty" and see that trillions of dollars later poor communites are in worse shape than ever before.
But notice that was 18-20 million people, and it has expanded now to 40 million people.
Yet China has no war on poverty, yet they somehow managed to raise 550,000,000 people up from poverty to the largest middle class in the world in just 15 years.
Yet we spent trillions over 45 years and the results speak for themselves.

So do I now believe that the wealthy multi millionaires flying around in multi million dollar Jets polluting the air more than anyone really care or have the answers to this "problem." I don't think so.

I bet I use less energy here than most folks. I have a Solar trailer which due to Nevada having 330+ Sunny days a year is wise, even though we rarely have outtages.

For me it's a 3500 USD investment we used when camping, and now for laundry the pool area parties, and anything to keep my energy costs and footprint down.
So the message I get from these Planet savers is we are going to charge you more money to save the Earth. 

Fine by me, I listened and my bills are 1200-1500 less a year. But to actually believe those we catch in lies over and over, that's a game for the believers to play.
As I said when the Beaches rise, or rich Arab Gulf Kingdoms stop giving their mouthpieces cash, I got my own ideas.

Being a conservationalist, I also use nature as comparisons of the Animal Kindgom to our very own ruling class and thier pecking schemes.

I see how a couple of chimp tribes that each live with a baboon tribe act. 
It seems that the chimps have grown fond of baboon meat, but they don't want to tip off the less intelligent baboons that they are hunting them. 
If the baboon being killed panics and makes a ruckus, the peaceful coexistance will end. 
What the chimps do is pretty devious. They quietly surround the target baboon, who is slightly seperated from his tribe. 
One chimp in front of the victim baboon starts acting silly, rolling around and goofing off. Then, one of his buddies sneaks up behind the victim and WHAM!, smashes the poor baboon's skull into the ground killing him instantly with no fuss.

Everyone can then eat baboon meat to their heart's content. the baboons know that something must have happened, they just don't know what it is...

Seems that the Chimps in DC can print and pay others to do anything they are told and steal the famous old statistical approach that DC never even thought to try until Ross Perot showed them how advanced modern baboons in the USA had become.
Now they can compare and argue on whose charts and percentages are correct, and whose side is right.

I learned something years ago that has always helped me out. When people lie, they never stop. It's their entire agenda to continue lying in hopes that others will listen.
I find one lie, I know there are nothing else but webs of lies to unravel.

Why on Earth after the IPCC emails were hacked, and it was found who was paying these "Scientists" would I ever dream of listening closely to anything they or their minions who believe higher taxes will save the Earth got to say.

When the law says I pay more for stopping the Earths natural Climate Change cycles, I will disagee, but being a patriot, I will pay.
But until then, Maurice Strong (under the guard of Chinas' military) can kiss my ass, Al Gore and his wealthy Saudi Kingdomites can also kiss my ass.

I must say though after our elites sent thousands of young Americans to their graves protecting the various campaign contributors, I am relieved to see they are finally spending their billions instead of ours in Egypt and Syria.

Maybe OPEC is leaving DC soon, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
And please, take Al Gore back to Qatar and big Oil where his money comes from.

0oD

BTW, I don't see Policemen in my soup, and I was told I was a whacko from hearing and seeing wierd objects in the sky everytime I drove through Tonapah and Hawthorne, Nevada, as I gigged in Tahoe/Reno, then back to Vegas.
Years later they finally stopped lying and said yes, we have these new planes and there is an Area 51.

Just another example of the ruling class telling us the truth after decades of hiding it, while allowing workers there to die from toxic waste and disease, all while denying the coverage for them and the existance of said facilities.

But somehow I should now suddenly believe taxes will save the Planet....?
NOT


----------



## snowleopard (Aug 23, 2013)

This is a rather sloppily written article by the usually reliable Greg Palast, but if you can read between the muck, his work to dig this up is to be commended, and just adds to the truth about the plutocracy I mention.

http://m.vice.com/en_uk/read/larry-summ ... -game-memo


----------



## JonFairhurst (Aug 23, 2013)

Lobbying isn't the problem. Campaign donations are the problem.

First, people should understand what lobbyists do. They have contacts. They get paid by companies and organizations to set up meetings and make introductions. When done well, they shut up and the experts in the meeting talk with the official and/or their staff. Afterwards, the lobbyist finds out the political response to the meeting and monitors the progress of the topic at hand.

This isn't all bad. Somebody might propose a simple-minded bill. Experts can then make their case about the unintended consequences. Sometimes the politicians are swayed by reason. Often, they are handcuffed by party politics and various loyalties. Maybe they don't want to anger somebody who can offer them a chairmanship, or who might support their upcoming bill.

Of course, we have to hope that the politician can smell BS when the "expert" is making stuff up. Access is good - we don't want politicians living in a bubble - but there will be BS.

The problem isn't access. Sometimes it can be gullibility or flat out stupidity. But the real issues are that big money is required to win elections and that loyalty to donors, those with power, and those who are being woo'd for support often trumps reason and doing the right thing for constituents.


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 25, 2013)

JonFairhurst @ Fri Aug 23 said:


> Lobbying isn't the problem. Campaign donations are the problem.
> 
> First, people should understand what lobbyists do. They have contacts. They get paid by companies and organizations to set up meetings and make introductions. When done well, they shut up and the experts in the meeting talk with the official and/or their staff. Afterwards, the lobbyist finds out the political response to the meeting and monitors the progress of the topic at hand.
> 
> ...



Oh, I heartily disagree about access not being the problem. I'd agree that it's not the ONLY problem and that campaign contributions are also a huge problem, but talk about the fox guarding the hehhouse! The same people who wield power for years and collect favors for years are the ones later collecting on those favors and getting access?? I think it's naive to think the game isn't rigged that way, and I stick to my statement that members of Congress should not be allowed to hold lobbying jobs after they leave office.


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 26, 2013)

Maybe if you read how they are purchasing politicians right now with other peoples money, to try and get tax payers to pay their pensions while the wealthy redistribuotrs are still holding the Senate, Executive and all Federal Agenices.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/keyw ... hers-union

They're counting on voters to be stupid again. They're probably right. All I need is a free iPad, iPhone and cable service from the GOP to sway me away from the free stuff of the DNC, and they can rape the taxpayers, it's all good.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Aug 26, 2013)

NYC Composer @ Sun Aug 25 said:


> Oh, I heartily disagree about access not being the problem. I'd agree that it's not the ONLY problem and that campaign contributions are also a huge problem, but talk about the fox guarding the hehhouse! The same people who wield power for years and collect favors for years are the ones later collecting on those favors and getting access?? I think it's naive to think the game isn't rigged that way, and I stick to my statement that members of Congress should not be allowed to hold lobbying jobs after they leave office.



I think there should be a probation period where former congressional members can't formally lobby until some number of years have passed since they leave office.

But let's say the Corporations for Evil Media try to pass an onerous law. The Citizens for Awesome Composers sees a money grab. You want to talk to key people in Congress. A letter writing campaign isn't enough. You want to state your case. How do you do this? You hire somebody with connections.

The thing is, with lobbyists having to register, you can find them. And with a nominal amount of cash, you can contract with them for a limited time. If you have no organization, no mass of followers, and no cash, you won't have access. (But then again, why should you if you're just another person in 300 million? You need to represent a group, not just your lonesome.)

You could outlaw lobbyists, but what would that accomplish? People still have connections. If the connections are in the shadows, only the insiders get in. You can't make it illegal for former members of congress to know one another or contact one another. But now you no longer have registries and reporting. 

In other words, it you eliminate lobbyists, you are left with a shadow group of good-old-boys. That's no improvement.

I'm not a lobbyist, but I've worked with some. The groups I work with don't bribe people with contributions and don't ask for funding, tax breaks, or special favors. The focus is mainly to prevent bone-headed (but often well intended) regulations from becoming law. Often, the language just needs some small adjustments in order to avoid unintended consequences. And often, the poor initial language exists because it was written by people without the expertise to know any better.

So in my experience, the groups have been able to hire low-level lobbyists (not previous congress members) for a nominal fee and were able to make their cases without meeting in shadows or paying for funny business. The money pays the salary of the lobbyist for doing the groundwork - it doesn't pay the politician. And in the end, the results are generally positive.

I think there's a natural inclination for people to fear the unknown and feel powerless. Government is huge. As private citizens, we don't often interact with the system. So it's easy to demonize politicians, administrators, and lobbyists as a whole.

If you think about it, this isn't unlike racism. We see some bad behavior from a group and tar the whole group with a bad reputation, creating a stereotype.

Yes, let's regulate lobbying to keep things out of the shadows and above board. Let's take money out of politics to keep a small number of wealthy people from whacking the masses (who have more money in total but who can't amass and target it.) And we should urge politicians to make smart rules that don't allow an abuse of power when doling out chairmanships and party funds.

But let's not ban lobbyists as if this would clean up access. Let's keep the connections in the light rather than forcing access into the shadows.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 26, 2013)

Banning lobbyists would just mean that politicians are bribed with different high-paying jobs once they leave office.

Taking the money out of campaigns would get rid of the biggest corrupting influence, but the other problem is hard to deal with. As with non-competition clauses, how do you forbid someone from making a living?


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 26, 2013)

You miss my point. It would bar the access givers from gaining access right after they were granting it.. It's all far too cozy and insular. 

It also might improve the quality of elected officials as they wouldnt automatically be rapacious carpetbaggers.

Jeez, yuo guys . How about we ban Republican Congresspeople from becoming lobbyists- wl you be ok with that?


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 26, 2013)

Nick I will buy you as many Blue Moons w/ slices or Orange for finally saying something I would support with my own time and money.
If you ever come to the facist State of Nevada, and go through Vegas, your Drinks are on me.
Please spread that message so the people someday might come first instead of Soros, Kochs' the Chinese, Israelis, and Saudi Royal Phuckin' family.

Nobody in America really cared who won the race years back, as the winner was "OUR' President, not somebody elses.
But we have seen since the Clinton/Gore days just how slimy these campaign managers have become. 
Citizens United, like the Great Society, and Affordable Health Care Act, have the exact opposite effect of the title.

There are no Citizens donating to politicians as we donate via our taxes.
Hence this title is a contradiction in terms like everything else we see from these dirtbags in the last 2 decades.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 26, 2013)

Chim, drinks sound good as long as I don't have to agree with everything you say. 

And as long as I don't have to go to Las Vegas. It's not my favorite place. 

Larry, I don't miss your point. Banning lobbyists would be fine with me, never mind that it's not going to happen. Actually, banning the whole Republican party would be fine too. 

But I still say what I say: the problem is the money in elections. Remove that and politicians wouldn't have to spend all their time soliciting bribes.


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 26, 2013)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Aug 26 said:


> Chim, drinks sound good as long as I don't have to agree with everything you say.
> 
> And as long as I don't have to go to Las Vegas. It's not my favorite place.
> 
> ...



...and I totally agree with public campaign financing with a pretty minimal budget.


----------



## MA-Simon (Aug 26, 2013)

Since I am from germany, I don't pick up much news from Fox etc.
But this just popped up on my game-news-feed. Ridiculous:

http://kotaku.com/grand-theft-auto-blam ... 1201375715


----------



## JonFairhurst (Aug 26, 2013)

NYC Composer @ Mon Aug 26 said:


> You miss my point. It would bar the access givers from gaining access right after they were granting it.. It's all far too cozy and insular.



But would it work? Can you really ban former members from contacting current members? Can you make friendship illegal?



> It also might improve the quality of elected officials as they wouldnt automatically be rapacious carpetbaggers.



There's some truth to that. If they can't profit from the office immediately after they leave, then the job is less appealing to the super-greedy.

But it's more complex than that. A guy who chaired the Whatsit Committee leaves and becomes CEO of the Whatsit Trade Association. It looks bad. The guy gets a big paycheck from the Whatsit industry. But the lobbyists in the trenches are the same people that worked there before Senator Greedhammer became CEO. As much as anything, Senator Greedhammer will be sweet talking the CEOs in the Whatsit industry to continue their membership with the Whatsit Trade Association after they raise their rates. The guy is more likely to be a trophy CEO than a guy who is actually proposing new legislative language.



> Jeez, yuo guys . How about we ban Republican Congresspeople from becoming lobbyists- wl you be ok with that?



Definitely not! The more in the open, the better. You can ban the title. You can ban the recordkeeping. You can't ban the relationships.

Now, if you could zap them with a Men In Black memory gizmo, that might work!


----------



## jleckie (Aug 26, 2013)

I've seen those FOX news folks with the aid of these glasses. They aint pretty.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVgl1HOxpj8


----------



## jleckie (Aug 26, 2013)

Actually - the CNN folks are uglier:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nx1i4HZ5Sv8


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 27, 2013)

After a 15 minute viewing of Fox this morning I couldn't help but to come here and see what happened after my last reading of this thread.
I wanted to see something as my paper never comes until 0430 hours.
I get in around 330-400 on this peaceful shift.
What a new approach they have.

Always thought the girl from the View was a fresh voice in a crowd of overweight cacklers and former comedians, but I found myself staring at her not really listening to anything and she actually sits there, stares right at the camera and is really tring to seduce the viewers.
It worked, but then after a minute or so a man with experience from being a performer in public snaps out of it, but they seem to have more than their spin to sell these days.

Then came the new NASA report of how the Ice formations are at record highs in Antarctica, yadda, yadda, so I switched to CNN and Lo and Behold an IPCC scientist was fervently trying to convince viewers that the recent discovery of this doesn't mean their theory or trapped radiation from evil C02 gases that created the world in the first place is flawed.

Then came the paper which as always reports the news without picking sides.

A well rounded day in the world of propoganda by Federal media.

But I can see why American Sheep enjoy eating the free Grass they are told to eat.

I too am a Sheep, but instead of being content and staring down at the free grass, I eat while looking around wondering why I am being fattened up for the kill.... /\~O


----------



## AC986 (Sep 28, 2013)

:lol: :lol: :lol: 

Al Gore is almost as big an asshole as John Kerry.


----------

