Split from: Did my mother-in-law get scammed? -- Left Wing Advocacy

[volatile]

...regardless of what you read in the left-advocacy, alarmist media...


Is there a single thread on this entire forum that you can't make an ill-informed, conspiracist rant in?

[BPSCG]

Is there a single thread on this entire forum that you can't make an ill-informed, conspiracist rant in?:)


Sometimes I think TC likes to poke at the libs through the bars of their cages, just to watch them snarl.

[Tokenconservative]

Is there a single thread on this entire forum that you can't make an ill-informed, conspiracist rant in?

Hmm....cooking.

But tell me this, if the left-advocacy media is not attempting (largely successfully) to infiltrate every aspect of our lives in order to get us to think, act and especially VOTE leftist, what would it LOOK like if they were?

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

:)


Sometimes I think TC likes to poke at the libs through the bars of their cages, just to watch them snarl.

I put it differently: I like to wonder by and give the chicken coop a good shake ever onct in a while, jest fer the fun of it!

Tokie

[fls]

Hmm....cooking.

But tell me this, if the left-advocacy media is not attempting (largely successfully) to infiltrate every aspect of our lives in order to get us to think, act and especially VOTE leftist, what would it LOOK like if they were?

Tokie

I don't have a very good handle on this, but I'll give it a try...

Communist Russia?

Am I close?

Linda

[volatile]

Exactly where in the world is "voting leftist"? Just off the top of my head, there are openly right-ist governments in the USA, Japan, France, Germany, Canada, Russia and most of Central and Eastern Europe, and centrist governments in the UK and Australia. The only bastions of real Left-wing government are Scandinavia and South America, really, plus the quasi-"left" authoritarianism / capitalism of China.

Exactly how worried can you really be about a "leftist media" that is manifestly so terrible at "making us VOTE left"?

[volatile]

To add - now this is in its proper place, in Conspiracies, isn't it weird that the left-wing conspiracsists think that the media is uniformly run by evil right-wingers, and those on the other side of the fence see the same body as uniformly run by evil left-wingers!

[fls]

Lisa put this under Conspiracy Theories. ;)

As amusing as that is, and even though it's not like anyone is interested in a real discussion on the topic, surely this should have been Politics?

The idea of framing the debate as though the reality-based community is the product of a left-wing media conspiracy seems to be more of a political decision than the result of Conservatives actually believing it to be the case.

Linda

[fls]

To add - now this is in its proper place, in Conspiracies, isn't it weird that the left-wing conspiracsists think that the media is uniformly run by evil right-wingers, and those on the other side of the fence see the same body as uniformly run by evil left-wingers!

You snuck your post in before mine. :)

I'm new to the US, but I sorta assumed all this involves a great deal of posturing, rather than a true representation of what people really think. I mean, I'm always hearing about how smart Ann Coulter is, so it would be pretty much impossible for her to believe most of what she writes. And Michael Moore must be aware of his own fudging.

Yes? No?

Linda

[uk_dave]

Please do not sully our pristine Conspiracy Theories sub-forum with this dirty thread.






:D

[FactCheck]

Please do not sully our pristine Conspiracy Theories sub-forum with this dirty thread.

:DI think lisa put it here because anyone who thinks the left contols the media is about as mindless a twoofer. Just a guess concidering the right hasn't done a damn thing right and they still survive. Bush's track record is about as good as the average right winger. Both have the positive polling numbers somewhere between the underarm sweat of a 450 pound jogger and something you avoid stepping on.

If the left were in control of the media,the country wouldn't have a 9 trillion deficit. The tax rate during the Clinton years would still be in place and paying the bills. Our children wouldn't be the primary debtors of OUR 9 trillion dollar debt.

They would be pointing out that Bush said the tax cut would pay for itself by 2005 Heh! It was laughable then as it is now.

They would be pointing out that getting rid of regulations in industries such as the banking, energy and telecom industries has only hurt the country.

If the left were in control of the media we would be pointing out the corporate welfare rolls have gone up with the right in charge. Many corporations pay little or no tax at all which helps raise the deficit.

If the left were in charge we would be pointing out how poor the southen, more conservative states do in just about every catagory than the liberal northeast

If the left were in control of the media we would be pointing out how much crime and murder there is in southern, more conservative states.

If the left were in control of the media we would be pointing out that guns used in crimes and traced to their place of origin prove that southern states with lax gun laws are helping rase murder rates in the country as a whole.

If the left were in control of the media we would be pointing out that it wasn't until southen states spent more money on education that education in the right wing south began to show improvement. Proving that sometimes throwning money at a problem works when the money is desperately needed.

If the left controlled the media people would know global warming is a problem, not because of the warming but the SPEED of the warming which the various systems on earth can not adapt quickly enough to. Instead, the mindless right points to a few scientists paid by special interests and deny. Twoofers?

We would join the rest of the free word with universal healthcare.

The right wouldn't believe there is enough money to cut spending while our infrastructure falls down around us.

The right wouldn't think tax cuts will cure everything from Britteny's parental skills to AIDS.

There is much more proof the right controls the media but I made my point.

I'll be waiting for the cute, twoofer like replay. :D

[Darth Rotor]

anyone who thinks the left contols the media is about as mindless a twoofer.
Wear blinders much?

Anyone who thinks the right controls the media is as mindless as a troofer.

The media is a bit big for "control" and your arbitrary usage of "right" and "left" makes me ask you

What part of the right?

Paleoconservatives?

Industrialists?

Bankers?

Religious Right?

Who are you tarring with this brush, troofer imitator?

DR

[Praktik]

The problem with all you Americans is that your entire political debate occupies a narrow sliver of Liberalism (classical Liberalism, in the Lockeian sense).

You guys have been purifying your Liberal philosophy since your founding (the act of which expelled Tory loyalists, and their aristocratic ideas to Canada), through the end of the Whigs, and ending with the death of the feudal remnant of the South after the Civil War.

After the Civil War, all you guys had left was the classical liberal values of property rights and the American dream (the Horatio Alger, "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" myth). These are really the founding political ideals of your country, and as such, you didn't have the Tory outlook that allowed for a little government intervention in the name of "social order", you didn't have the feudal arrangements that spawned socialism as it did in Europe and in Canada. In fact, socialism has never really had a shot in America because the political opposite of it didn't exist either!

This is why things like "Conservative Toryism" (ie, you can be conservative and still meddle in the economy) and Socialism just DONT EXIST for you guys.

This is how a new medical insurance bill - lobbied for by the pharmaceutical industry and the health care industry generally - can actually be called a "socialist plan" by a Republican senator on the floor of the senate with a straight face (to hearty applause and "amens"from the Santorum/Delay demographic). To the rest of the world, calling a bill that partners heavily with private industry and maintains most of the private structure of health care socialist must seem crazy.

Actually I can answer that, it DOES seem crazy.

So what does this have to do with the media? Well "America's Left" is really "right" to the rest of the world, and to those poor woebegotten Americans who still persist in trying to enact "real left" policy in America. This is why a thread on "right and left" in the media can spark such controversy here - in fact, both sides are right.

The "American left" does dominate the media in some respects, if we're talking about social attitudes on say, homosexuality or other issues that the rest of the Western World have moved past years ago. But when it comes down to economics, to say, questioning some of the fundamental economic structure of America, well the media is pretty far to the right.

To those on the "American right", things like CNN or the NYT may very well appear to be "left", and in the American context they are!

But to those who take political science seriously, and look at the political spectrum from a wider historical and worldly perspective, than the media in America is most certainly pretty far to the right, because the country as a whole is pretty far to the right - permamently "locked into" a classical, propertied Liberal viewpoint, devoid even of the minimal political diversity that allows even a rather classically liberal country like canada to have a party with socialist roots actually do well in elections! Why is there no socialist party in America?

Because socialism is "Anti-American", historically and politically. So because of this truncated political world, you can have righties like Darth Rotor calling the NYT part of the "left".

What he really means is the "left hand side of the Business Party".

[Brainster]

Using American definitions and discussing only the American media, I tend to think that the national media (CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN and the NY Times) tend to be liberal. There are good reasons for this that don't involve a conspiracy. First, the media tend to look for stories where they can show their support for the "little guy". Which party claims to support the little guy? Second, writers and other artists tend to be liberal. Not all of them, certainly, but clearly a majority.

And there certainly is plenty of conservative media out there as well, although in my mind it's of more recent vintage, and its success proves that the conservative market was not being served as well. Fox News has been a startling success. Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity have become very wealthy men.

Note that when I say "liberal" I don't mean "leftist". I have a continuum in my mind that runs as follows:

Left: The Nation
Left-Liberal: The American Prospect
Liberal: The New York Times (Editorial Board)
Moderate Liberal: The New Republic
Moderate Conservative: The Weekly Standard
Conservative: The National Review
Right: The American Conservative

I don't know what slots between the National Review and The American Conservative, maybe the American Spectator?

Unfortunately, very few reporters will admit their personal biases, so confirming that the national media or a large part of it is liberal is difficult. The one media outlet that actually requires their staff to announce their candidates is Slate; in 2004 they voted (http://slate.com/id/2108714/) as follows:

Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Bush (intern!), Kerry, Kerry, Bush (economic writer), Kerry, Not Voting (Canadian), Bush, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, David Cobb (?), Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Badnarik (Libertarian), Kerry, Bush, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry.

Yeah, what liberal media?

[volatile]

Yeah, what liberal media?

Hmmm... well, you might have a point in general (but, well, Slate is hardly required reading in most American households now, is it?), but when it comes to the conspiratorial claims of our token friend in the corner, exactly how successful *is* this leftist conspiracy, if one exists?

There are right or centrist governments in most of the developed world at the moment. Increasing authoritarianism is rife, the free-market infiltrates ever-more recesses of all our lives and unions are fairly weak (at least compared to the 70s and 80s, even in France!). Immigration control is a hot-button issue in most of the developed world. Not to comment on these issues either way; I just wanted to point out that the West is hardly overcome with liberal (or even Liberal) social democracy right about now...

How someone can claim that there is some conspiracy making the West think, act and move to the political Left is beyond me frankly. I only wish there were, really... ;)

[pomeroo]

Exactly where in the world is "voting leftist"? Just off the top of my head, there are openly right-ist governments in the USA, Japan, France, Germany, Canada, Russia and most of Central and Eastern Europe, and centrist governments in the UK and Australia. The only bastions of real Left-wing government are Scandinavia and South America, really, plus the quasi-"left" authoritarianism / capitalism of China.

Exactly how worried can you really be about a "leftist media" that is manifestly so terrible at "making us VOTE left"?


Yes, conservatives are delighted with that enlightened disciple of John Locke, Edmund Burke, and John Stuart Mill--Vladimir Putin!
Good grief.

[pomeroo]

Using American definitions and discussing only the American media, I tend to think that the national media (CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN and the NY Times) tend to be liberal. There are good reasons for this that don't involve a conspiracy. First, the media tend to look for stories where they can show their support for the "little guy". Which party claims to support the little guy? Second, writers and other artists tend to be liberal. Not all of them, certainly, but clearly a majority.

And there certainly is plenty of conservative media out there as well, although in my mind it's of more recent vintage, and its success proves that the conservative market was not being served as well. Fox News has been a startling success. Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity have become very wealthy men.

Note that when I say "liberal" I don't mean "leftist". I have a continuum in my mind that runs as follows:

Left: The Nation
Left-Liberal: The American Prospect
Liberal: The New York Times (Editorial Board)
Moderate Liberal: The New Republic
Moderate Conservative: The Weekly Standard
Conservative: The National Review
Right: The American Conservative

I don't know what slots between the National Review and The American Conservative, maybe the American Spectator?

Unfortunately, very few reporters will admit their personal biases, so confirming that the national media or a large part of it is liberal is difficult. The one media outlet that actually requires their staff to announce their candidates is Slate; in 2004 they voted (http://slate.com/id/2108714/) as follows:

Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Bush (intern!), Kerry, Kerry, Bush (economic writer), Kerry, Not Voting (Canadian), Bush, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, David Cobb (?), Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Badnarik (Libertarian), Kerry, Bush, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry, Kerry.

Yeah, what liberal media?


Bush got THREE votes at Slate??? I'm sure the intern is gone, but does the economic writer have a job anywhere?

[volatile]

Yes, conservatives are delighted with that enlightened disciple of John Locke, Edmund Burke, and John Stuart Mill--Vladimir Putin!
Good grief.

Well, maybe not. But he's hardly "leftist" now, is he? That was the point in hand.

If there is a left-wing media cabal forcing us all to vote and think left, it's manifestly not doing a very good job.