|
Post by Russell Letson on Aug 12, 2019 12:05:06 GMT -5
The truth is biased. I'm pretty sure the way past this information impasse is not by discounting sources. Especially since the right reads the left but the left has no freaking idea what the right is even talking about. Part of reporting or any other research-like activity is precisely vetting sources--which means cross-checking accounts/evidence from a range of sources and ranking trustworthiness/accuracy/dependability over time and also noting possible (but not necessarily inevitable) sources of bias or other dependability-limiting factors. A version of this was central to the academic-research course every English grad student once took, and I suspect that there's an equivalent in J-school. As for "the left" having no idea of what "the right" is talking about--well, no. Some parts of both sides are clueless or tin-eared, and some of us (again, on both sides) understand the other side pretty well and plain old disagree. Sometimes it's a matter of value systems, sometimes it's epistemology, sometimes it's interest-group stuff, sometimes it's just tribalism. I have understood this at least since I realized that Bill Buckley's conservatism had roots in his particular flavor of Catholicism, which was very different from, say, Dan Berrigan's--and I got to see both flavors close-up at LeMoyne in the 1960s.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 12, 2019 12:23:26 GMT -5
Vetting is not dismissing. And it means something yet again to Breeze.
|
|
|
Post by casualplayerpaul on Aug 12, 2019 12:33:43 GMT -5
The truth is biased. I'm pretty sure the way past this information impasse is not by discounting sources. Especially since the right reads the left but the left has no freaking idea what the right is even talking about. The right reads the left? Curious on what basis you assert this.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Aug 12, 2019 14:23:36 GMT -5
Well, in an interview with Charlie Sykes, a Wisconsin conservative radio talk show guy (who wrote a book) he talked about Rush Limburger and how he has no believes of his own. All he does is attack and berate the Democrats. My point being, the far right pays a lot of attention to the left of center. In fact, in Rush's case (and Trump's the author says) they don't promote anything themselves. They just tear down others they don't agree with.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Aug 12, 2019 14:37:09 GMT -5
"Part of reporting or any other research-like activity is precisely vetting sources--which means cross-checking accounts/evidence from a range of sources and ranking trustworthiness/accuracy/dependability over time and also noting possible (but not necessarily inevitable) sources of bias or other dependability-limiting factors. A version of this was central to the academic-research course every English grad student once took, and I suspect that there's an equivalent in J-school."
That's so 19th century, Russell.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Aug 12, 2019 15:03:25 GMT -5
Well, what do you expect of a guy born in the middle of the 20th century with all four grandparents born in the 19th?
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 12, 2019 15:05:05 GMT -5
Well, what do you expect of a guy born in the middle of the 20th century with all four grandparents born in the 19th? A less than hip fashion sense?
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Aug 12, 2019 15:16:02 GMT -5
I am the very heppest cat of all the cats and kittens. I know all the latest jive, drop in at my dive and I'll slip you five. (And I don't mean half a sawbuck.)
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 12, 2019 15:34:53 GMT -5
I bet you even call your girlfriend "man"
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 12, 2019 15:39:09 GMT -5
Well, in an interview with Charlie Sykes, a Wisconsin conservative radio talk show guy (who wrote a book) he talked about Rush Limburger and how he has no believes of his own. All he does is attack and berate the Democrats. My point being, the far right pays a lot of attention to the left of center. In fact, in Rush's case (and Trump's the author says) they don't promote anything themselves. They just tear down others they don't agree with. So,if Sykes is unreliable because he is biased conservative,then you're saying you suddenly believe him anyway because he's now telling you what you're comfortable believing about Limbaugh? Or did you then listen to Limbaugh to verify Sykes? And if they are both conservative,do you know what distinguishes them?
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Aug 12, 2019 15:50:13 GMT -5
|
|
Dub
Administrator
I'm gettin' so the past is the only thing I can remember.
Posts: 20,295
Member is Online
|
Post by Dub on Aug 12, 2019 16:43:24 GMT -5
Nothing wrong with conservatives. The people I object to are racists, bigots, xenophobes, homophobes, liars, and cheats of whatever stripe. Those aren’t conservative attributes, it’s just that people with those attributes get called conservatives in an attempt to insult them.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Aug 12, 2019 17:34:13 GMT -5
Well, in an interview with Charlie Sykes, a Wisconsin conservative radio talk show guy (who wrote a book) he talked about Rush Limburger and how he has no believes of his own. All he does is attack and berate the Democrats. My point being, the far right pays a lot of attention to the left of center. In fact, in Rush's case (and Trump's the author says) they don't promote anything themselves. They just tear down others they don't agree with. So,if Sykes is unreliable because he is biased conservative,then you're saying you suddenly believe him anyway because he's now telling you what you're comfortable believing about Limbaugh? Or did you then listen to Limbaugh to verify Sykes? And if they are both conservative,do you know what distinguishes them? Just reporting what I heard today on the Fake News Network. I figure you'd come around to set me straight. I do think there's something to this. I might want to read his book. . . . , but probably I'll go find a nice novel instead. I have heard elsewhere that the new wave right has abandoned a lot of classic conservative principals; like fiscal responsibility. I remember I used to hear all sorts of conservative complaints about the deficit. How we should reel it in; less spending?; more income? Sounds reasonable. But the new wave right seems to all of a sudden think adding to the deficit is a good thing now that they have control of the purse strings. In the interview Sykes complained about the media's liberal bias. (you'll be happy to know). So, he's not totally a Communist.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 12, 2019 17:36:58 GMT -5
I'm familiar with Sykes. I'm pretty sure I understand the divide too.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Aug 12, 2019 17:50:58 GMT -5
So,if Sykes is unreliable because he is biased conservative,then you're saying you suddenly believe him anyway because he's now telling you what you're comfortable believing about Limbaugh? Or did you then listen to Limbaugh to verify Sykes? And if they are both conservative,do you know what distinguishes them? Just reporting what I heard today on the Fake News Network. I figure you'd come around to set me straight. I do think there's something to this. I might want to read his book. . . . , but probably I'll go find a nice novel instead. I have heard elsewhere that the new wave right has abandoned a lot of classic conservative principals; like fiscal responsibility. I remember I used to hear all sorts of conservative complaints about the deficit. How we should real it in; less spending?; more income? Sounds reasonable. But the new wave right seems to all of a sudden think adding to the deficit is a good thing now that they have control of the purse strings. In the interview Sykes complained about the media's liberal bias. (you'll be happy to know). So, he's not totally a Communist. When did the right get control of the purse strings? Did half the Democrats in the House resign suddenly?
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hanesworth on Aug 12, 2019 18:19:50 GMT -5
Just reporting what I heard today on the Fake News Network. I figure you'd come around to set me straight. I do think there's something to this. I might want to read his book. . . . , but probably I'll go find a nice novel instead. I have heard elsewhere that the new wave right has abandoned a lot of classic conservative principals; like fiscal responsibility. I remember I used to hear all sorts of conservative complaints about the deficit. How we should real it in; less spending?; more income? Sounds reasonable. But the new wave right seems to all of a sudden think adding to the deficit is a good thing now that they have control of the purse strings. In the interview Sykes complained about the media's liberal bias. (you'll be happy to know). So, he's not totally a Communist. When did the right get control of the purse strings? Did half the Democrats in the House resign suddenly? 2016-2018 the right had control of the purse strings and thought a trillion dollars deficit increase would be a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Aug 12, 2019 18:37:24 GMT -5
When did the right get control of the purse strings? Did half the Democrats in the House resign suddenly? 2016-2018 the right had control of the purse strings and thought a trillion dollars deficit increase would be a good idea. What did they increase spending on by that much?
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Aug 12, 2019 18:37:31 GMT -5
The right never had control of the Senate so that's all that mattered. The right lost control in the 2006 elections and never got it back.
As to the deficit, and I'm still basically a hawk on that, It has taken years to grow the government as far above its means as it is and the only way to ever get it back under control is through economic growth. Trump has made a start toward that end but getting the government under control requires getting congress to do their jobs as their jobs are designed and get enough more money flowing through the economy to increase the governments income without killing the economy and keep it growing long enough for the deficit to be able to decline while still providing the promised government benefits. We need defense and its the governments job to provide it. We need secure borders and its the governments job to provide them. We need to make welfare an exception rather than the rule by having more people working and less on the dole. As long as the houses of congress don't go along with that program the deficit will continue to grow until we're forced to default. 2 1/2 years isn't enough to straighten out the mess of the past couple of decades so we'll have to either turn both houses conservative or at least re-elect Trump and then elect Pence to keep going in the right direction. Yes, I know most of you think it's the wrong direction but that's because you're Democrat Socialists whether you believe it or not and that's not going to keep this country running. Of course you don't want to keep it running, you want to fundamentally change it into a Socialist dictatorship.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Aug 12, 2019 21:00:19 GMT -5
2016-2018 the right had control of the purse strings and thought a trillion dollars deficit increase would be a good idea. What did they increase spending on by that much? Mostly they reduced income (tax cuts) without reducing spending.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Aug 12, 2019 21:20:38 GMT -5
What did they increase spending on by that much? Mostly they reduced income (tax cuts) without reducing spending. So let me get this straight. Just because Congress has seen fit for decades to spend senselessly on anything they want, I'm obligated to continue to pony up increasing amounts of my money. And if the Republicans decide to let me keep more of my money, somehow they're responsible for the whole mess. Is that about right? And I'm supposed to care?
|
|