America was built on liberal Western democratic values. If you want to live in a conservative society: move to Iran.
I'm sick of the formula that goes like this:
"Some say the earth is flat. Some say the earth is round. You decide which is right, because we wouldn't want to offend anyone, because then they who might not buy the shit our advertisers pay us to shill!"
I would much prefer to read a more liberal style of journalism that goes like this:
"Some say the earth is flat. Those people are wrong."
@gawkimo: You see, you're confusing 'fact' and 'philosophy'. You're also confusing 'classical liberalism' with 'political liberalism'. You're actually just confused all the way around, it seems.
Fact: The earth is round.
Philosophy: Government which governs least, governs best.
Fact: Humans need oxygen to survive.
Philosophy: Providing cradle-to-grave social welfare is good for a society overall.
Do you see the difference? Do you see how its actually possible to reasonably disagree on philosophy without necessarily impinging upon facts?
Because if what you're proposing is that your personal philosophy is as correct as saying that the earth is round and that no other options or debate should exist, then that is actually referred to as 'a dictatorship'. Which is about as far from classical liberalism as one can get.
@gawkimo: You're mixing up liberal and conservative with what Americans thing of as liberal and conservative, but you're smoking some good shit if you think the union was founded on democratic values. Not only is the president not directly elected, senators weren't prior to 1913. That sounds far more republican than democratic (small r, small d).
No, actually my point is that, for example, when Glenn Beck goes on Fox News (as he did on Jan. 30) and falsely claims that Obama's people were so stupid that they created an organization with the acronym "BARF" nobody was there to fact-check Beck and point out that what he just said was false.
(Beck was either purposefully lying or, more likely, confused and stupid because he works for a very confused and stupid news organization. Forbes magazine had JOKED that Obama's entity for buying bad assets should be called the "Bad Asset Repository Fund." Beck then claimed it was a real name on live national news, and nobody pointed out to him that he was making a false statement.)
As far as classical liberalism and political liberalism, I am not really confused. You might be though, because there are different political liberalisms. There is Neo-liberalism which is an economic/political theory heralded by both Republicans and Democrats. There is social liberalism, heralded by liberals and not conservatives. And there is classical liberalism, which is basically the dictionary definition of liberal.
When I say that if you don't like Western liberalism, then move to Iran, I am saying that people who oppose social liberalism would perhaps be happier in a place where there is no social liberalism, like Iran.
@sample032: You have a point there on the foundations of the union thing. However, only in terms of democracy vs republic. The liberal part is pretty clear. Taken in their proper historical context (because, of course, owning slaves would hardly qualify as a "liberal" stance) the people that wrote our Declaration of Independence and Constitution were far more liberal than those whom they declared independence from, to say the least. They created a liberal foundation for us to progress upon. Thomas Jefferson even said in his autobiography that the country was for the Christian, Jew, "Hindoo," "Mohammedan," and infidel of every type. That was radical stuff for its time, and even radical for some social conservatives today who want to wrap themselves up in the flag and Jesus, give everyone guns, ban abortions, and build a wall around our country.
Without this liberalism, women would not be voting today.
@sample032: I agree with that. I think entitlements are still an issue with which we're grappling. One end is Social Darwinian and the other end is Authoritarian Communism. Any mid-way point is going to involve entitlements. It's funny that as soon as Americans turn 65 they become a whole lot friendlier to government support. Interesting how as soon as you get hit by an uninsured driver you appreciate a little aid from the big, evil guv-mint. NY has a great Crime Victim's fund -- you whine until you get a tooth knocked out by a low-life shit bag near Washington Square Park trying (trying) to steal your bike, as happened to me in 2003. And I love how business owners might kvetch about taxes but are more than happy to take state aid to insure its employees (a lot of states do this) or any other support offered by business development incentives. All of these things are fueled by the income-redistribution system of entitlements.
the notion that most journalists are liberals is pretty much nonsense; most people in the media area wealthy people who care about keeping their money; they may not be conservatives in the socially conservative, cluster of cells obsessed wingnut way, but liberals they are not.
there have always been journalists who go and work in politics in both parties, and there probably always will be, nor has there been some great increase this time around as the naval gazing talking heads love to imply. these incessant cries of liberal media bias and favoritism are typically based on a rather selective reading of the evidence. they also tend to magically to ignore a lot of the ways in which conservative thinking is taken as the base point from which to frame issues and ask questions in the press, simply because conservatives yell their version of the facts louder and the people that pass for journalists these days can't be bothered to do any research or fact checking of their own.
@sarcasticusername: Have you heard of a certain river in Egypt? It's pretty clear that the media is biased in favor of the left.
For instance, take a serious look at the coverage of Obama. If you don't detect the faintest scent of cultish, fawning praise, I would immediately check your own pulse.
@Beausoleil: Well, to be fair, we're in the early stages of his administration; it's not like Clinton was treated especially well by the media.
I think successful journalists tend to be noncommittally liberal. But I don't think their personal beliefs are necessarily reflected in their coverage. If anything, the product that mainstream news outlets produce is heavily in bias of the status quo -- which I think is difficult to describe as "liberal."
They need a partisan staff member whose job it is to come to someone's house and punch them in the face when they make the endlessly overused "Oh Rahm you can RAHM me anytime" joke.
03/12/09
03/12/09
03/12/09
03/12/09
03/12/09
03/12/09
02/03/09
I'm sick of the formula that goes like this:
"Some say the earth is flat. Some say the earth is round. You decide which is right, because we wouldn't want to offend anyone, because then they who might not buy the shit our advertisers pay us to shill!"
I would much prefer to read a more liberal style of journalism that goes like this:
"Some say the earth is flat. Those people are wrong."
02/03/09
Fact: The earth is round.
Philosophy: Government which governs least, governs best.
Fact: Humans need oxygen to survive.
Philosophy: Providing cradle-to-grave social welfare is good for a society overall.
Do you see the difference? Do you see how its actually possible to reasonably disagree on philosophy without necessarily impinging upon facts?
Because if what you're proposing is that your personal philosophy is as correct as saying that the earth is round and that no other options or debate should exist, then that is actually referred to as 'a dictatorship'. Which is about as far from classical liberalism as one can get.
02/03/09
02/03/09
No, actually my point is that, for example, when Glenn Beck goes on Fox News (as he did on Jan. 30) and falsely claims that Obama's people were so stupid that they created an organization with the acronym "BARF" nobody was there to fact-check Beck and point out that what he just said was false.
(Beck was either purposefully lying or, more likely, confused and stupid because he works for a very confused and stupid news organization. Forbes magazine had JOKED that Obama's entity for buying bad assets should be called the "Bad Asset Repository Fund." Beck then claimed it was a real name on live national news, and nobody pointed out to him that he was making a false statement.)
As far as classical liberalism and political liberalism, I am not really confused. You might be though, because there are different political liberalisms. There is Neo-liberalism which is an economic/political theory heralded by both Republicans and Democrats. There is social liberalism, heralded by liberals and not conservatives. And there is classical liberalism, which is basically the dictionary definition of liberal.
When I say that if you don't like Western liberalism, then move to Iran, I am saying that people who oppose social liberalism would perhaps be happier in a place where there is no social liberalism, like Iran.
Hope that clears up "my" confusion.
02/03/09
Without this liberalism, women would not be voting today.
02/03/09
02/03/09
02/03/09
02/03/09
02/03/09
02/03/09
there have always been journalists who go and work in politics in both parties, and there probably always will be, nor has there been some great increase this time around as the naval gazing talking heads love to imply. these incessant cries of liberal media bias and favoritism are typically based on a rather selective reading of the evidence. they also tend to magically to ignore a lot of the ways in which conservative thinking is taken as the base point from which to frame issues and ask questions in the press, simply because conservatives yell their version of the facts louder and the people that pass for journalists these days can't be bothered to do any research or fact checking of their own.
02/03/09
No.
02/03/09
02/03/09
For instance, take a serious look at the coverage of Obama. If you don't detect the faintest scent of cultish, fawning praise, I would immediately check your own pulse.
02/03/09
I think successful journalists tend to be noncommittally liberal. But I don't think their personal beliefs are necessarily reflected in their coverage. If anything, the product that mainstream news outlets produce is heavily in bias of the status quo -- which I think is difficult to describe as "liberal."
02/03/09
02/03/09
12/16/08
12/16/08