AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2008-08-26, 01:04   Link #1861
Kyuusai
9wiki
*Scanlator
 
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: State of Denial
Send a message via AIM to Kyuusai Send a message via MSN to Kyuusai Send a message via Yahoo to Kyuusai
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
So couple that lack of empathy with the vast middle of America (McCain's economics advisor Phil Gramm called Americans a "bunch of whiners") with McCain's repeated demonstration of just how clueless he is about the geopolitics of the Middle East, the real reasons for the improvements in Iraq (hint: the surge was only a small part) and his total misreading of the Russian/Georgian situation..... why is anyone even considering McCain?
I'll stand with Phil Gramm on that one. Things are harder than they were a couple of years ago, but how easily people forget how much easier it is now than it was just a very short while ago. People have a right to be upset about everything going on in government that got us here (I sincerely believe the people should have taken up arms decades ago), but I don't hear much of that. I mostly just hear whining. That statement was a real blow to the McCain campaign (McCain himself was quick to express Gramm didn't speak for him on that matter), but I can't say I disagree.

Of course, if I were running for President, I doubt my ticket slogan of "Stop crying like sissies and man up, morons" would get me very far in the polls.

I expect foreign policy to, in the long term, nosedive no matter which candidate makes it into office (If it weren't for that pesky Iraq thing, Bush would have been celebrated in the history books for relations around most of the globe). If McCain is elected, well... he's McCain. If Obama is elected, there will be a lot of praise and hand raising initially on account of him being the anti-Bush, but despite his better education on foreign issues, I haven't heard him say anything profound--often just the opposite. He's spent a lot of time talking out of both sides of his mouth to pander, and while he can say he got Iraq right from the beginning, he certainly proved he had no idea what the heck to do with it now (before he changed his tune to be more marketable, I mean). And now to give him more credibility in foreign policy, he's chosen Biden... the experienced Senator who actually had almost the exact same thing to say about the Russia/Georgia situation as McCain.

And after all Obama's had to say about Africa, what he's done (or, more to the point, NOT done) in the places he's been there to visit, have photo opportunities at, and make promises to... I'm not even underwhelmed. I'm disgusted. For all the knowledge and passion, it's still apparently possible to be clueless and callous. (The Africa thing is especially ironic considering Bush's track record there.)

For me, Obama and foreign policy has been just like everything else he's involved in:
- Grudging hopefulness that some one with completely opposing policy viewpoints might at least do well for having intelligence, values, and priorities.
- Realization, after investigating previous talks and voting records, that the values and priorities are all talk, and intelligence often can't buy a clue.
- Further realization that every thing else that seemed positive was political posturing.

I really did have hope for Obama. It has been slowly chipped away over the campaign.
__________________

I await patiently
the gift promised to me.
Kyuusai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 01:14   Link #1862
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by solomon View Post
Vexx, could you explain how McCain hasn't demonstrated knowledge of Middle East Geo Politics, or point me to some evidence.
...
Both candidates have lost points from me cause they are playing the mean spirited game of US politics, out of short term political necessity and not out of reason or morals.
Agreed, both campaigns have been less than adult at many moments. And, oddly enough, I agree with Kyuusai on many of his points .... to some degree its a matter of worse or worst. I may disagree with him about the whining though.... the middle class has taken a major economic beating since 1996 that I don't believe has been matched since the Depression. A very few people have made out like bandits to the point it recalls the robber baron antics of the 1890s and the unregulated disaster of the late 1920s.

But to answer solomon:
McCain has repeatedly gotten basic facts wrong about Iraq - even repeating them after having been corrected by his own staff. Basic things like getting the various factions wrong or not even recognizing that there were factions. The thing that really gets me is his attempt to build the meme that "The Surge Worked"..... at best, that is highly over-simplified and misdirecting. It is about like giving full credit for the victory in WW2 to the only one of the many countries involved. What really made a shift (and it was already happening before the Surge started) was the US military buying off the local tribal insurgents to turn them against the foreign militia.
Even today, he's going on about having troops there for decades (like in Korea) while at the same time the Iraqi government is quite clearly saying, leave and set a time to leave. No, we didn't mean leave the cities (for those bases in the countryside being built) - we mean leave Iraq completely. Also listen to how the military hedges when it says the "surge worked". They also always credit the deals struck with the tribes. They can't bluntly say the surge was only a small part of the package (unless they're retired and then they say that quite loudly). I spent enough time working with the military (DoD contracts, etc) to understand the nuances of their language so I always smile when I watch military dance through interviews.

Also consider the fact that Afghanistan is starting to blow up again because we have chronically understaffed it because of Iraq. Remember Taliban and the original Al Qaeda?

Basically... just because he was in the military and just because he was a POW -- doesn't give him some automatic expertise in geopolitics. My teenage son can run circles around him on geopolitics (that's his specialty in debate). I guess the real problem is that McCain's staff doesn't measure up and that they're just giving out more of the same delusionary neocon nonsense that got us into the mess we're in. Every one of our government agencies has been systematically corroded by the Republican political appointees -- made almost totally ineffective to the point they *can't* function. I could probably write for several pages documenting agency failures and looted funds directly as a result of Bush appointees.

I can rip on the Democrats just as nastily on other issues .... sometimes it feels like a question of voting for what kind of uber-government I can tolerate better.

But the Bush Administration needs to go (which it won't - McCain's promise) and the Republicans need a long timeout to do some pruning and casting out.

Last edited by Vexx; 2008-08-26 at 01:26.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 02:10   Link #1863
solomon
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Suburban DC
Hmm interesting points;

In relation to Kyuusai; it interesting on his Obama/Africa charges. Frankly, in the presidential election I haven't heard any one say anything about Africa. And I haven't heard anyone really holler that much about Sudan specifically either.

What my elders have told me (and what I see to be true through observation) is that the Middle East is always gonna trump Africa in terms of geopolitcs cause of strategy. There's teh Isreal/Palestine issue, there is Iran and there is the oil. All of which not only affect US in varying degrees but also have been endlessly recycled and repeated in terms of political discourse, campaigning and the media.

Africa has not, even though I bet that Africa DOES factor in US geopolitics and economy in some way (it's prolly just more subtle or not easily turned into soundbite "debate"). As long as American joe schmoes don't care about it or are MADE to care about, the gov't won't intervene.

Then we get into the Iraq issue, the WMD thing failed so what do certain neo-cons say? Saddamn Huseein was an evil man and had to be taken out. What about Robert Mugabe? Don't we need to march in and overthrow his outfit in the name of human decency?

And China. I have no reason to believe anything the Chinese feed us against the Muslim Uyghurs being an acute terror threat, when they misconstrue the "threat" and
situations regarding Tibetans. They may as well be just as maligned as the Tibetans but what do we do? Wave our finger and say, "Now China, be a good boy". We dare not consider any sanctions (or any overt action) against China in the name of "protecting human rights" or what have you cause you can imagine what will happen.

Just another example of double standards, I don't say thats Uniqely american though. All civilizations have done it. And it's still wrong.

So I'm not surprised that Barack Obama at least seem clueless and callous (only proof I have is what you say you see). For better or for worse it's not America's practice to look to someone who will Look at geopolitcs from a world perspective or even one that doesn't align with what we voters want and believe. Thusly we won't always vote for them. (Americans on the whole aren't stupid in any way, but many around the world have pointed out instances where too many of us can be woefully uninformed or ignorant of perspectives that aren't American or Christian or our version of "democratic").
solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 02:14   Link #1864
Kyuusai
9wiki
*Scanlator
 
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: State of Denial
Send a message via AIM to Kyuusai Send a message via MSN to Kyuusai Send a message via Yahoo to Kyuusai
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
And, oddly enough, I agree with Kyuusai on many of his points .... to some degree its a matter of worse or worst. I may disagree with him about the whining though.... the middle class has taken a major economic beating since 1996 that I don't believe has been matched since the Depression. A very few people have made out like bandits to the point it recalls the robber baron antics of the 1890s and the unregulated disaster of the late 1920s.
On this one we'll have to (respectfully) disagree.

My personal stance on this one:
While the middle class and poor have been bludgeoned repeatedly as of late, I would say that the only times that compare favorably have been very, very recent incredible economic surges, much of which was the result of incredible overvaluation. Even so, any major consequences in all of this have been, by and large, avoidable by the Average Joe, assuming the Average Joe the Fifth lives like the Average Joes before him. Even now compared to ten years ago, the average quality of living is... well, very favorable. There have just been ups and downs. The Great Depression, on the other hand, was an almost complete breakdown of the economy with devastating consequences for a tremendous part of the country.

The present hiccups, though, are an indication of the downward spiral of the plane society rides in. The final glorious crash I believe we're heading for, though, I predict will be from the same issues that caused the Great Depression: Absolute fiscal irresponsibility, utterly tragic Federal Reserve policies and predatory banking at high levels... and the rest is will just be water under the bridge.

The Republicans have done, and have no plans to do anything about it... but the same could be said of the Democrats.

Ultimately, though, we'll survive, and live to fight another day. I just hope that when that day comes, society at large has learned to take responsibility for themselves, not live beyond their means, and dedicated themselves to real change instead of just complaining.

I do eventually want to run for office. I take that back... I don't want to, but I think I ought to. Have you considered it, yourself, Vexx?

Quote:
Originally Posted by solomon View Post
In relation to Kyuusai; it interesting on his Obama/Africa charges. Frankly, in the presidential election I haven't heard any one say anything about Africa. And I haven't heard anyone really holler that much about Sudan specifically either.
Speaking on global politics, Africa really doesn't matter as much as the Middle East right now. I don't expect it to be a talking point at all.

Africa is, though, and ever-present issue. Examining Obama's track record on his personal actions in Africa (versus what he's said) is beyond disheartening. Even though it's been at a relatively small and personal scale, I think it's quite revealing in terms of personal character and foreign policy mindset. I especially doubt that Africa will be an issue in the campaign, though, because Obama won't want his track record on Africa to be compared Bush's track record on Africa. (I do recommend the story at that link. It's a bittersweet and occasionally hilarious read, no matter what one thinks of the current administration.)
__________________

I await patiently
the gift promised to me.

Last edited by Kyuusai; 2008-08-26 at 02:39.
Kyuusai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 02:25   Link #1865
solomon
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Suburban DC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyuusai View Post
O

I do eventually want to run for office. I take that back... I don't want to, but I think I ought to. Have you considered it, yourself, Vexx?
Wow good luck. I don't want to seem judgemental or anything but I hope you keep in mind that some one who can engage in reasoned politcal debate like many of us including Vexx do can't necessarily be good at serving in office. (If that's how you feel, and if it seems at all that I'm trying to put words in your mouth, I humbly apologize.)

To me that is like the differene between being an exceptionally knowledgable art critic and being a competent artist with the knowledge of an art critic.
solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 02:31   Link #1866
Kyuusai
9wiki
*Scanlator
 
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: State of Denial
Send a message via AIM to Kyuusai Send a message via MSN to Kyuusai Send a message via Yahoo to Kyuusai
Quote:
Originally Posted by solomon View Post
Wow good luck. I don't want to seem judgemental or anything but I hope you keep in mind that some one who can engage in reasoned politcal debate like many of us including Vexx do can't necessarily be good at serving in office. (If that's how you feel, and if it seems at all that I'm trying to put words in your mouth, I humbly apologize.)

To me that is like the differene between being an exceptionally knowledgable art critic and being a competent artist with the knowledge of an art critic.
I wouldn't say that some one who can engage in reasoned political debate can't do well in office... I'd just say they have trouble GETTING in office.

But if the good and able never try...
__________________

I await patiently
the gift promised to me.
Kyuusai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 02:37   Link #1867
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
I wouldn't put up with the hyper-scrutiny of my life and all the mistakes I've ever made. So no, I've not seriously considered running for anything.

The biggest difference today is how much of the middle class is one paycheck away from utter disaster, and how often that happens with the unstable corporate whims (ooh, need to hit our projection for the quarter - fire all those guys who form our core expertise), off-shoring (most of the technicals I've ever worked with are unable to find work outside of temp or have done what I'm doing - shifting to a lesser paying career we hope can't be off-shored)., or the big one - a medical crisis. Even those with "health insurance" can discover that they're totally financially f*cked with a single accident or organ malfunction no matter how good their numbers are.

yeah, some of this is due to not saving properly or running up debt (or being morbidly obese for that medical crisis) --- but in many cases having savings or no debt didn't help at all. And with the changes to bankruptcy law and financial goons playing fast and loose with the rules and no oversight.... well it just seems a bit iffy when someone like Gramm who had his hands a bit deep in the pockets and engineered some of the processes that got us into this mess tells the very people he may have helped rip off to "suck it up".

Caveat: I spent the first half of my life in Texas and grew up watching the antics of Gramm, the Bushes, DeLay, and the rest of them .... they are very much "royalists" (one set of rules for us, to hell with the peasants).
edit: and just for completeness - the Kennedys are royalists as well though its "one set of rules for us, be sure and keep the peasants happy so they don't hang us".

Last edited by Vexx; 2008-08-26 at 02:51.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 13:17   Link #1868
Fipskuul
τηε πιγητ ωατςη
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: τη λαnδ of веагз αnδ дг
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
What really made a shift (and it was already happening before the Surge started) was the US military buying off the local tribal insurgents to turn them against the foreign militia.
That is the reality of the region. You cannot fight against those people using regular means. Even if you give all the good things they need, these people will still have a tendency to continue the attacks. As been mentioned recently in my country, those people are the kind (the Saudi versions who sold out the other Muslims for money) that would not even hesitate to destroy Prophet Mohammad's grave, if it would mean getting something in return.
Quote:
Even today, he's going on about having troops there for decades (like in Korea) while at the same time the Iraqi government is quite clearly saying, leave and set a time to leave. No, we didn't mean leave the cities (for those bases in the countryside being built) - we mean leave Iraq completely.
Iraq government is a puppet one, nothing more nothing less. It represents the tribes. The people with no power do not get represented there. Hence, what they say will not represent the public's views, cause there is still no unity among the different groups in the region. America knows that. Depending on what US promises, those people will jump on the wagon immediately, without showing any kind of hesitation. They also know that.

Anyways, I don't think there is any single answer to the problems in Middle East, and forget about Republicans even Democrats will be clueless in finding any kind of easy solution. And, no, they cannot use the cheapest solution to color the eyes of the public and decide to get out the mess they have made before cleaning it.
__________________
Fipskuul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 13:44   Link #1869
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fipskuul View Post
The people with no power do not get represented there. Hence, what they say will not represent the public's views, cause there is still no unity among the different groups in the region. America knows that. Depending on what US promises, those people will jump on the wagon immediately, without showing any kind of hesitation. They also know that.

Anyways, I don't think there is any single answer to the problems in Middle East, and forget about Republicans even Democrats will be clueless in finding any kind of easy solution. And, no, they cannot use the cheapest solution to color the eyes of the public and decide to get out the mess they have made before cleaning it.
Hmmm, the "people" *are* the tribes ... though I get that you're saying the tribal leaders stand between the people and the elected government. Rather like the US seems to have the corporations and the wealthy standing between "the people" and their elected government.

And you're right also in that neither party is going to have it easy finding a solution .... but I have zero confidence in the party that got us into this situation

Back on the domestic economic side,
people may find this Standard & Poor 26Aug08 article on housing prices interesting. Its a website PDF file format: http://www2.standardandpoors.com/spf...ase_082653.pdf . The chart that covers housing prices from the 80s to the present is of interest.

Keep in mind that much of the middle class put a lot of their asset portfolio into their homes since traditionally home prices are more stable than stocks and equity loans can be used to access the value. Stocks became much less attractive to the middle class after the stock crash of the late 1980s. When housing prices plummet like this, that equity vanishes - very problematic if say, you've got an equity loan to finance a child's college education.

In my own case, between my wife and I - our stock/mutual portfolio has lost almost 40% of its value in the last 8 years and our house has lost value to its original purchase purchase when adjusted for inflation (even though the dollar value looks higher). When the big boys are able to play their shenanigans without personal consequence - everyone from upper middle class on down takes it in the nether regions.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 16:46   Link #1870
bayoab
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyuusai View Post
Speaking on global politics, Africa really doesn't matter as much as the Middle East right now. I don't expect it to be a talking point at all.

Africa is, though, and ever-present issue. Examining Obama's track record on his personal actions in Africa (versus what he's said) is beyond disheartening. Even though it's been at a relatively small and personal scale, I think it's quite revealing in terms of personal character and foreign policy mindset. I especially doubt that Africa will be an issue in the campaign, though, because Obama won't want his track record on Africa to be compared Bush's track record on Africa.
(Re: Time article)
I don't see why the president would get credit for throwing money at a problem that all it really needed was someone to throw money at it. Yes, it is humanitarian aid, but anyone could have done it. (Question that shouldn't be asked: Where is this money coming from?)

The real problem with Africa is that when you point to a map, the difficult question is to name a country that is NOT having problems. Okay, it's not that hard, but you actually have to do some digging to find some of these problems. Ex: There was a little reported war between 1998 and 2000 between Eritrea and Ethiopia (which according to wikipedia started up again 4 months ago). You have either border wars, governmental corruption, famine, AIDS and other disease, uprisings, instability, terrorism, racial warfare, or something else in pretty much the entire continent. Some of these are easier to actually do something about than others.

In other words: There are always problems in Africa. We just choose to ignore them unless they actually pose a threat to us.

The other issue with Africa is it has been inaction and failure for years now. A certain failure for the world (Somalia) is still somewhat in the news cycle every 3-6 months or so when the pirates grab another important boat. Darfur, which was just a cheap rallying cry for people who could claim to have a cause and do nothing, is basically out of the news again as if it is over.
bayoab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 18:18   Link #1871
solomon
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Suburban DC
Thusly, the neo-conservative mantra, of "we invaded Iraq cause it was the right thing to do" is bullshit
solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 18:38   Link #1872
solomon
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Suburban DC
Ok, I watched the DNC coverage, (I may just listen to it on NPR for the rest of the nights until Barack Obama speaks officially.) via PBS. I can see how some would call it an infomercial, but it was a much better infomercial than those attack ads. It did help give you a feeling of who is for who, and how they feel, even if there was a bunch of general rhetoric. In otherwords, not all of it may have a lot of meaning. But people need to judge for themselves.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080826/...vn_tv_s_filter

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=93967150

Looking at these two articles only reflect how sucky tv is at covering news items for the sake of publicity and ratings. PBS was the only one who showed large chunks of the convention, with reasoned anaylisis that wasn't awash in hyperbole or posturing. (Both O'Rieily and Olbermann SUCK ASS) After all these are people who endlessly mulled over the Paris Hilton jail fiasco and did we a have serious look at celebreites serving jail time, No. Just another media frenzy to get ad dollars.

Sigh.
solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 18:47   Link #1873
ApostleOfGod
^.^
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto
Quote:
Originally Posted by solomon View Post
Ok, I watched the DNC coverage, (I may just listen to it on NPR for the rest of the nights until Barack Obama speaks officially.) via PBS. I can see how some would call it an infomercial, but it was a much better infomercial than those attack ads. It did help give you a feeling of who is for who, and how they feel, even if there was a bunch of general rhetoric. In otherwords, not all of it may have a lot of meaning. But people need to judge for themselves.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080826/...vn_tv_s_filter

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=93967150

Looking at these two articles only reflect how sucky tv is at covering news items for the sake of publicity and ratings. PBS was the only one who showed large chunks of the convention, with reasoned anaylisis that wasn't awash in hyperbole or posturing. (Both O'Rieily and Olbermann SUCK ASS) After all these are people who endlessly mulled over the Paris Hilton jail fiasco and did we a have serious look at celebreites serving jail time, No. Just another media frenzy to get ad dollars.

Sigh.
Hooray for Youtube.

Just watching Michelle Obama's speech motivating the supporters like her husband.

I'm looking at this nice little comment by someone regarding the video.
"one of the kennedies said a speech like this"

Take it however you like.
__________________
There are two ways to live life.

One is to live life as if nothing is a miracle.

The other way is to live life as though everything is a miracle.
ApostleOfGod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 18:53   Link #1874
Ledgem
Love Yourself
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 28
I'm not really so sure how you can use Africa as a leveraging point, either. In my mind, the region is currently a black hole for aid. If you think that sounds heartless, then please pay careful attention to the rest of what I say. There's a terrible load of instability. Whether it's genocide, government corruption, or famine (among many others), these problems have seemingly existed since I was born and they've existed long before then as well. While I'm sure that progress has been made, it hasn't been anything notable with regard to Africa no longer needing aid.

Is providing aid the right thing to do? Some people would claim that we need to do it because of our involvement with the slave trade, which potentially deprived Africa of some of its best and brightest, thereby reducing the continent to what it is today. Others would argue that we should go where there is human suffering and make things right. To the first, I would have to ask whether we can truly do anything about the current state of the African societies. To the latter, can we really do anything effective?

Perhaps up until recently, the most popular aid form to Africa was food. People are now beginning to understand that simply throwing food at the African nations is harmful. People are fed in the short term, but in the long term the local farm industries collapse. They can't compete in a market flooded with cheap/free food and go out of business. This results in a worsened hunger situation. I was pleased to read that some foreign aid is designated for enhancement of local agricultural efforts, but that still does not seem to be the major focus.

The next concept that people have stems from good will, but is ultimately flawed: that we can bring these people to a better form of society. The reason this is flawed is because it is self-centered. What's the best form of society? Why, ours, of course. Who would want to live any other way? I think most Americans/westerners are beginning to realize that our lifestyle is not as highly coveted by the rest of the world as we'd thought at first, given how much resistance we're encountering in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Even if one could establish that our form of society is the best for people overall, do you really believe that you can just walk in and establish it? American society as it is already is experiencing an undermining of the freedoms that defined our society and made it so wonderful. I feel that the reason for this is that the people at large do not understand the value of those freedoms, and their increased apathy for the government and society in general is bringing us along this trend. Freedoms aren't just established, they must be appreciated and guarded. Having a foreign nation instill their version of freedoms in your land - somehow that doesn't seem like a cause that the local people could cherish and celebrate.

What's to be done? I think that the best solution in the long term is to let it play out and settle on its own. In a democracy the people are in charge, not the government. How can you have a system like that when you start by changing the government and letting the government change the society, rather than starting with the people's perception of the government? Is a democracy even the form of government that the people desire? As for what we should do, I'd like to think that we should sit back until a local group who wants to set things right appears, and then provide them with support (similar to what France did when the American colonies were warring with Britain for independence). However, things are rarely black and white, and there are no true "good guys" no matter how you look at it. Determining what group should receive aid is difficult, and providing aid without getting too involved would also be difficult. Even that partially goes against the tone of what I said earlier: it isn't our responsibility to get involved, and arguably by choosing one group over another we're altering the development of the nation as skewed to our views.
__________________
Ledgem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 20:36   Link #1875
bayoab
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
I keep flipping on the DNC coverage over the MSNBC stream for about 5 minutes and turning it off. It essentially is a really really boring infomertial repeating everything we know already. "Obama this while McCain that. Obama change, McCain McSame." etc etc. Why are the dems spending so much time preaching to the choir? It really isn't much of a surprise that the networks are throwing their pundits over this. Regular America isn't going to want to listen or watch this.

Last edited by bayoab; 2008-08-26 at 20:54. Reason: Closed quote
bayoab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 20:53   Link #1876
solomon
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Suburban DC
Fair point. I still maintain however that just because people don't want to look at the primary source. They shouldn't expect that the secondary sources will capture the feeling of the convention itself.

Then again it is my first convention/election.
solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 21:06   Link #1877
ApostleOfGod
^.^
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto
The primaries debates are the best to watch. That's when they spill dirt on each other to see who's the cleanest. And yes, I agree, it gets tiring to hear hope speeches paraphrased all the time; that's just a general way of saying, it's not always the same, other than the fact that it's motivational and good-willed.

However, it is important to understand, that sometimes, "Words are more important than Actions." Besides, what can they do along the course of actions right now, other than rallying support? They can't do the job until they get it, and it is the biggest one out there. It's tough. But once again, I got all love for Obama.

DNC... Where the Republicans at?
__________________
There are two ways to live life.

One is to live life as if nothing is a miracle.

The other way is to live life as though everything is a miracle.
ApostleOfGod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 21:44   Link #1878
james0246
Senior Member
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: East Cupcake
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayoab View Post
I keep flipping on the DNC coverage over the MSNBC stream for about 5 minutes and turning it off. It essentially is a really really boring infomertial repeating everything we know already. "Obama this while McCain that. Obama change, McCain McSame." etc etc. Why are the dems spending so much time preaching to the choir? It really isn't much of a surprise that the networks are throwing their pundits over this. Regular America isn't going to want to listen or watch this.
LOL, you just described every political convention for the past 20 years (which is about as long as I have been paying attention to these conventions). These shows always have about 90% of the speeches preaching excessively to the choir (made up of "ordinary" citizens (that all have diseases that can't be paid for or are related to someone with a disease that can't be paid for) and politicians) and then the remaining 10% of the speeches still retain the same information, but are written better (the main speeches and of course the 'Presidential' Speech from the candidate). What is really funny about these conventions is the fact that seemingly no one except the pundits are listening to the regular speeches. Instead everyone at the convention just kind of walk around talking to each other, milling about like chickens in a hen house.

And then, next week, the Republicans will do the same exact thing.
james0246 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 22:08   Link #1879
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
yeah... conventions became ritualistic artifacts about 25 years ago. I remember listening to the radio as a young teen when there was actual doubt about who would be nominated at a convention.

However.... a lot of people who haven't been paying attention do tune in to watch the convention -- for them this isn't a repeat, its first time evaluation. I've seen a number of studies that the vast unwashed mass of Americans pretty much ignore the issues and the candidates til the conventions. It is just the political wonks like me and the posters here who wallow in all the build-up.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-08-26, 22:13   Link #1880
solomon
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Suburban DC
Quote:
Originally Posted by james0246 View Post
LOL, you just described every political convention for the past 20 years (which is about as long as I have been paying attention to these conventions). These shows always have about 90% of the speeches preaching excessively to the choir (made up of "ordinary" citizens (that all have diseases that can't be paid for or are related to someone with a disease that can't be paid for) and politicians) and then the remaining 10% of the speeches still retain the same information, but are written better (the main speeches and of course the 'Presidential' Speech from the candidate). What is really funny about these conventions is the fact that seemingly no one except the pundits are listening to the regular speeches. Instead everyone at the convention just kind of walk around talking to each other, milling about like chickens in a hen house.

And then, next week, the Republicans will do the same exact thing.
Hmm well I did come to that overall conclusion. I just hate how some commentators masqerading as journalists will take tiny fascets of the conventions to frame psuedo debates of why this person sucks and why this person rocks. Especially when they know that BY AND LARGE, people aren't watching the conventions with high frequency or long periods of time

Actually the same is for cable news. Prime time ratings for headliner shows on fox, cnn, msnbc combined are dwarfed by the big 3's suppertime news combined. about 2 million vs. 20-25 million respectively. And they median age is at least 45-55 dependent on the channel. So it's really a lot of moderatley heavy to heavily interested people. The rest, the majority I believe are tuning them out.

Then again the reason ratings are so low, is cause nielsen only cares about people 18-45, and while tv is isn't washed up, naturally the age is tipped on the higher end of the scale for tv preference.
solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
debate, elections, news, politics, united_states

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 13:32.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.