The Science of Fox News: Why Its Viewers are the Most Misinformed
- Thread starter Free Thinker
- Start date
Why don't you take a deep breath and a step back? Does it really matter whether or not a dictator (a dictator!) considers himself to be extremist?
And if you don't know where the middle is, chances are you're standing somewhere else. And we've already established by historical timeline and precedent that the Right is presently not standing there even if it had been at the time of Reagan. Unless, of course, Reagan really had been a Left Winger in his day and his party has since moved to the center. (Yeah, I didn't think so either.) So, really, is is all that hard to figure out?
Actually, Iâm quite relaxed, but thanks for your concern.
It absolutely matters regarding a dictator (or politicians in general, for that matter). He might use the argument that he is in the middle to paint his opponents as the extremists.
As far as knowing where the middle is: If you and I sat down, you would find that we agree on some issues. Let's say I agree with a third of your views and vice versa. I still disagree with 2/3rd's of your views as you do mine. Since we both believe all of our views are the correct views, each of us believes we are closer to the middle, and in each case we would be correct from our own perspective. You know all this, though.
I'm still seeking your opinion on my prior question.
Judging by your response to what I wrote, you are essentially asking a rhetorical question.
In any event, the Right doesn't even want a middle ground because several of its important members have already condemned the notion of compromise. The middle ground is by its very definition a compromise from extremes.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44311.html
http://www.redstate.com/adamis/2011/10/02/compromise-is-for-losers-republican-leadership-must-go/
And so on.
Racism is legal.. if you don't like an individual or a group, for whatever reason, you don't have to interact with or treat them fairly. in fact if you want to go about bashing said group and preaching hate, it is your right to do so. This statement only applies to private citizens and industry. What is it about Liberty that you guys don't understand. You think that you can ban what people think? Really
the federal govt does necessarily need to be fair to all LEGAL citizens of this country, this means everyone has equal treatment by law. AA is a shining example of RACIST govt policy, but it seems that you don't have a problem with that. this is an easy enough example, white males are seemingly being discriminated against MORE than any other group. Quotas for a certain % of female and minority employees are costing white males jobs. Arguments that females need to be paid as much as their white male equivalents, are attempting to FORCE private companies to spend more money. Do you have a problem with this form of racism?
Oh and states rights are Constitutional law, so however you are equating that to klanspeak is way overboard and a bogus claim.
I agree with your definition of the middle, but I stand by my previous posts that the claim of the middle is used as a weapon to diminish or even ridicule political opponents. Many on the right believe that their side gives up more than they gain routinely in the compromise game. I expect many on the left feel the same way.
I am primarily libertarian on most issues. You would consider me conservative on some, liberal on others. I havenât changed my views in 22 years, yet I have gone from being considered a libertarian to an extremist simply for the few views I hold that you would consider the conservative view.
Ponder this: Letâs say that a third of our views are basically the same (Iâm sure we have at least that many in common). Even so, I wouldnât consider you a conservative libertarian for that 3rd of a view, nor would you consider me a modern liberal for the 3rd of my views that mirror yours.
Keeping that in mind, a few weeks ago someone Iâve known for ten years, a person who knows my views, abruptly accused me of being a racist, nazi, and extremist. This person, a self-proclaimed proud liberal, holds the same beliefs as I regarding guns. Weâre close on abortion, and have many other things in common. We mostly disagree on the level of regulation the government should impose. Thatâs it. But because I said I agree with a few of the viewpoints of some who may be among the tea party group, I was suddenly labeled all those hate terms constantly being utilized by the left. I found it somewhat ironic that the views I hold in common with the so called tea party are some of the same views he holds, yet he couldnât see that because his hate gained control over his rationality.
I challenged him on every one at which time he, for no reason, began to attack the education of conservatives. My wife and two of my brothers have much greater educations (two of them in science fields) than his 4 year law degree, and all are conservative libertarians, as well. My wife has the same degree as you, if I read one of your previous posts correctly (MBA?). I was educated in a few fields of meteorology in Navy schools (spelling was not a pre-requisite for me
).Perhaps you would have reacted the way he did, perhaps not. I see this happening all the time. This was in my face, unexpected, and totally unjustified.
Although I have nothing in common with racists, extremists, Nazis, or any other group for that matter, it is no problem for those on the left to quickly place me in that category. Do you now see why I pose such a rhetorical question? What makes his considered viewpoint so correct that he can immediately label me as an extremist?
I don't know what views you share with Tea Partiers, but please be aware that I strongly believe they were largely born of racial discrimination towards the president. Where were they, and why were they not nearly as vociferous during Bush's administration? They pretty much exploded on the scene as soon as Obama won the election. And it was a while before the more overtly discriminatory members were reined in by the leadership. The Tea Party has since tried to whitewash those beginnings.
Also remember that the Right is about hierarchy, whereas the Left is about egalitarianism:
"In politics, the Right, right-wing and rightist has been defined as the support or acceptance of social hierarchy.[1][2][3] Inequality is viewed by the Right as inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics
"In politics, the Left, left-wing and leftists are people or views which support social change to create a more egalitarian society.[1][2][3][4] They usually involve a concern for those in society who are disadvantaged relative to others and an assumption that there are unjustified inequalities (which right-wing politics view as natural or traditional) that should be reduced or abolished..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics
Against this background, you may wish to ask yourself what, specifically, you told your friend, and why your friend said what he did.
first rule is if you have friends you want to keep dont debate religion, politics or money.Quote from wjk:
I agree with your definition of the middle, but I stand by my previous posts that the claim of the middle is used as a weapon to diminish or even ridicule political opponents. Many on the right believe that their side gives up more than they gain routinely in the compromise game. I expect many on the left feel the same way.
I am primarily libertarian on most issues. You would consider me conservative on some, liberal on others. I havenât changed my views in 22 years, yet I have gone from being considered a libertarian to an extremist simply for the few views I hold that you would consider the conservative view.
Ponder this: Letâs say that a third of our views are basically the same (Iâm sure we have at least that many in common). Even so, I wouldnât consider you a conservative libertarian for that 3rd of a view, nor would you consider me a modern liberal for the 3rd of my views that mirror yours.
Keeping that in mind, a few weeks ago someone Iâve known for ten years, a person who knows my views, abruptly accused me of being a racist, nazi, and extremist. This person, a self-proclaimed proud liberal, holds the same beliefs as I regarding guns. Weâre close on abortion, and have many other things in common. We mostly disagree on the level of regulation the government should impose. Thatâs it. But because I said I agree with a few of the viewpoints of some who may be among the tea party group, I was suddenly labeled all those hate terms constantly being utilized by the left. I found it somewhat ironic that the views I hold in common with the so called tea party are some of the same views he holds, yet he couldnât see that because his hate gained control over his rationality.
I challenged him on every one at which time he, for no reason, began to attack the education of conservatives. My wife and two of my brothers have much greater educations (two of them in science fields) than his 4 year law degree, and all are conservative libertarians, as well. My wife has the same degree as you, if I read one of your previous posts correctly (MBA?). I was educated in a few fields of meteorology in Navy schools (spelling was not a pre-requisite for me
Perhaps you would have reacted the way he did, perhaps not. I see this happening all the time. This was in my face, unexpected, and totally unjustified.
Although I have nothing in common with racists, extremists, Nazis, or any other group for that matter, it is no problem for those on the left to quickly place me in that category. Do you now see why I pose such a rhetorical question? What makes his considered viewpoint so correct that he can immediately label me as an extremist?
second if he called you a nazi i suspect there is more to the story but if you are a fox news or rush devote and you sprout off with those views dont be surprised if you piss a few people off.
guns are polarizing right now because of the florida killing. that was a prime example of the right mindset. an innocent kid gets killed and right away the right led by fox news went on the attack trying to justify the killing.