Rick;Comment Posted By c3 On 15.02.2010 @ 16:34
Now what were you saying about Paul Ryan?
It occurred to me today that when the economy tanked and people lost their jobs the government stepped in and bailed out......the government.Comment Posted By c3 On 25.01.2010 @ 21:27
Hot Air, of course, is about as conservative as mainstream blogs get. So like I said, no surprise. But I urge you to read the comments because they are truly a window into the soullessness of many conservatives — and by extension the Republican Party — in America today.
Now there's the "leap". Would never suggest that a blog, regardless of size of followers is a "window" into a movement, let alone a party. And I would say that for Hot Air and for Daily Kos.
Clearly a distinct minority of the public visits, let alone comments on the blogs. Additionally, the tenor of "discussion" on blogs is exaggerated to the extreme. I visit several conservative blogs and I have friends who regularly visit liberal blogs. I could never imagine us having such a loud, obscenity-laced "discussion" that is so common on so many blogs.
People are different on the blogs.
And Shaun if you met me and discussed a hot topic (i.e. healthcare reform) I bet you wouldn't call me "soulless".Comment Posted By c3 On 15.01.2010 @ 15:21
I'm no Limbaugh fan but in this case: ER visit for chest pain by "high risk" male, he's probably correct; the system worked fine and he got the same care as anyone would have, insured or otherwise.
Now, unfortunately not all medical problems are such. If he were a diabetic with a slightly infected foot, a blood sugar of 340 and evidence of mildly failing kidneys I would wager he would have received decidedly different care based on his insurance status (and many other factors)
And finally, who cares what Limbaugh says about the American Health Care system. How did he get elevated to such status?Comment Posted By c3 On 4.01.2010 @ 17:25
Is that an oxymoron?Comment Posted By c3 On 3.12.2009 @ 16:20
President Obama has embraced the War in Afghanistan
embraced seems a little strong.
The 10+ months of deciding on a new (same) direction suggests a distinct ambivalence on our President's part.Comment Posted By c3 On 3.12.2009 @ 16:32
I hate to partially agree with Michael Reynolds but did it ever occur to you that a "blog" audience will not
value intellectual honesty, thoughtfulness, independence, and rigorous self examination
To paraphrase McLuhan maybe this Medium kills the message
I value those things - and that's what counts.
ed.Comment Posted By c3 On 22.10.2009 @ 14:53
Rick;Comment Posted By c3 On 15.10.2009 @ 12:56
With this post you appear to have hit the "Snowe Balancing Point", a place near that middle that is upsetting to both extremes. Is that worth 50 points or something?
Growing up in the 60's and 70's in upstate New York (and being a naive youth) I wasn't sure of the difference between a Republican and a conservative. I knew that most officials in upstate were Republican but I could only assume that was because we "weren't like NYC" which was Democratic. Our governor was Republican (Rocky) but I couldn't clearly state how his politics were dramatically different from many Democrats. (Same for our long-term Senator, Jacob Javits).
At the same time I was aware of Bill Buckley's TV show "Firing line" (hard to find and odd hours) It was hard to watch and he talked funny but I could tell it was "thoughtful stuff". At about the same time his brother Jim Buckley ran and won a Senate seat as a "Conservative", and not a Republican. That was my first inkling that there was a difference.
Later in the 70's I became aware of Reagan, as someone clearly different than Nixon and "conservative" (whatever that was). Unfortunately he was mainly that actor who narrated "Death Valley Days". There was little TV punditry (does Eric Severied count?) and no 24 hour news etc. My first votes in presidential campaigns were for Carter and Anderson (couldn't vote for the Death Valley Days narrator; "Boraxo!")
Through the 80's I grew a family and inevitably became more conservative but still an independent. At that same time I witnessed the growth of TV and radio punditry. I saw those who wanted influence (i.e. Falwell) and those who wanted listenership (i.e. Limbaugh). I generally felt you didn't watch TV opinion shows for "intellectual stimulation" but more for the "boxing match aspects" of it all (i.e. "Point/Counterpoint"; "Jane you ignorant slut!")
And now we have the explosion of blogs and websites. Some thoughtful; some thoughtful AND loud; some just loud!
Though not a "died in the wool" conservative, I have a conservative-bent (i.e. skeptical of governmental solutions if only for the unintended consequences.) Because the idea of government "doing things" is so pervasive, it is hard to "sell" conservative ideas. It's much easier to sell "they're idiots", "Our side is better!", etc.
Intellectuals shouldn't be judged on the volume of their words or their voices, the number of adjectives and 3+ syllable words they use and certainly not on the number of readers, viewers or listeners they have. Good arguments backed by facts and ideally research data makes for good "intellectuals". I assume pundits and speechwriters ARE NOT intellectuals; they're paid for word-smithing. I certainly assume that TV and radio political personalities ARE NOT intellectuals. They're paid (and paid attention to) based on ratings. I'm pretty sure Bill Buckley's show always had lousy ratings. A pundit/intellectual who reminds me a bit of Buckley today is Krauthammer. Maybe its the prickly personality. I don't always agree with him (and at times he seems to speak with the knowledge that he's on TV and has to "say it quickly and with a few 'choice' words") but I believe he puts "thought" into his opinions. I note that he doesn't have his own show; who would watch?
Oh yeah, and I would NEVER ASSUME THAT POLITICIANS ARE INTELLECTUALS. I would hope they have an intellectual foundation to their beliefs but then again I'm not as naive as I was in the 70's (I mean c'mon, I voted for Jimmy Carter and John Anderson)
So Peggy Noonan (who I like)yes, its a brave new world out there so DEAL WITH IT!Comment Posted By c3 On 8.10.2009 @ 11:48
It was a mistake, more atmospheric than substantative. I don't see it helping the GOP other than maybe lessening the stature of a strong political foe.
I don't think this is the signal for Iran to complete the nukes or for Putin to get adventuresome or ...Comment Posted By c3 On 2.10.2009 @ 16:26