American Healthcare Protests

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reactions
743 117 11
#37
also, i was referring to how msnbc and fox are both partisan hacks, but from my limited experience mnsbc never made me go "are they nuts"?!
 

Espy

Staff member
Reactions
56 0 0
#38
@Li3n said:
smoking baby needs more colbert report...
Let me know when he does something outside of his one note schtick. I'm a daily show man.
I do enjoy Colbert every now and then, but it's just not as funny as TDS to me, plus I HATE O'Reilly and since he's mimicking him it just annoys me.
Regarding Fox and MSNBC, yeah, they both just scream and yell their respective talking points, but in fairness to both of them, all cable news sucks donkey butt. :slywink:
 
Reactions
743 117 11
#39
But he's mocking O'Reilly... you're required to like it if you hate him... :aaahhh:
 

Espy

Staff member
Reactions
56 0 0
#40
@Li3n said:
But he's mocking O'Reilly... you're required to like it if you hate him... :aaahhh:
I know he is, but he does such a good job that it annoys the hell out of me. There are few people as annoying as Bill O'Reilly. Keith Olberman is one of them, it's hard to know which one is worse.
 
#41
Implying you have to watch Comedy Central in order to be up to date on important political issues reflects how terrible the state of politics/news media/etc is in this country :(
 
Reactions
142 22 1
#42
If you're not jaded about our political process after this, I don't know what else could do it. Lobbyists are in every damn piece of the process. They send letters to politicians disguised as letters from constituents, pay for their campaigns, put out canned news stories, take them on vacations, and now pay people to break up town halls.

I'm sure a good chunk of these people are ordinary people trying to be heard, screaming and yelling isn't gonna do it though.
 
Reactions
430 55 1
#43
@Li3n said:
also, i was referring to how msnbc and fox are both partisan hacks, but from my limited experience mnsbc never made me go "are they nuts"?!
Weeelllll, I wish I could say that. There are certain things I can watch, but Keith O and Chris Mathews drive me nuts.

-- Tue Aug 11, 2009 2:25 pm --

Charlie Dont Surf said:
Implying you have to watch Comedy Central in order to be up to date on important political issues reflects how terrible the state of politics/news media/etc is in this country :(
I tend toward public television for news or BBC America if I can find it.
 

Espy

Staff member
Reactions
56 0 0
#44
Shakey said:
If you're not jaded about our political process after this, I don't know what else could do it. Lobbyists are in every damn piece of the process. They send letters to politicians disguised as letters from constituents, pay for their campaigns, put out canned news stories, take them on vacations, and now pay people to break up town halls.

I'm sure a good chunk of these people are ordinary people trying to be heard, screaming and yelling isn't gonna do it though.
See, what's funny about this to me is that people are acting like it's the first time it's ever happened and are freaking out. None of this is new. Both sides have been doing this so it's funny to hear people (thats a generic people, not anyone in particular) pretending like their parties shit don't stink.


@ Krisken: But C. Matthews is just a good old fashioned reporter who get "thrills up his leg" when Obama speaks! That's good straight to the point journalism saving the country!
 
Reactions
743 117 11
#45
Charlie Dont Surf said:
Implying you have to watch Comedy Central in order to be up to date on important political issues reflects how terrible the state of politics/news media/etc is in this country :(
No, i'm implying that a comedy show is a more impartial source then your regular news... it does reflect the same thing though.

@Krisken

I never said i could watch them (my brother does), but that they never cross over into "Obama had [strike:1dfuy6se]imported[/strike:1dfuy6se] owned by foreign companies beer, he's anti-America" territory... not from what i saw at least...
 
Reactions
430 55 1
#46
@Li3n- I always thought Keiths "Worst Person In The World" shtick was a little grating and way over the top.

Espy- I'd call him the dumbest man in political commentary, but Tucker Carlson is still doing commentary.
 
Reactions
332 104 0
#47
Espy said:
Shakey said:
If you're not jaded about our political process after this, I don't know what else could do it. Lobbyists are in every damn piece of the process. They send letters to politicians disguised as letters from constituents, pay for their campaigns, put out canned news stories, take them on vacations, and now pay people to break up town halls.

I'm sure a good chunk of these people are ordinary people trying to be heard, screaming and yelling isn't gonna do it though.
See, what's funny about this to me is that people are acting like it's the first time it's ever happened and are freaking out. None of this is new. Both sides have been doing this so it's funny to hear people (thats a generic people, not anyone in particular) pretending like their parties poop don't stink.
As someone who has for years been shunned from society because his own fecal matter in fact smells like roses, I take offense to that expression.

More to the point, is it that for whatever reason, the GOP seems to be able to rile up some, shall we say, really outgoing personalities that makes this more newsworthy? I mean, people protested the war, and Dubya with it, all the time, but I don't recall town hall meetings being shouted into uselessness. I recall similar situations during the election where people were shouting things like "kill him" during rallies, and that making the news more often that similar crowds from the other side.
 
Reactions
743 117 11
#48
Krisken said:
@Li3n- I always thought Keiths "Worst Person In The World" shtick was a little grating and way over the top.
I found his voice to be grating and way over the top...
 
Reactions
1,322 432 11
#49
Espy said:
@Li3n said:
But he's mocking O'Reilly... you're required to like it if you hate him... :aaahhh:
I know he is, but he does such a good job that it annoys the hell out of me. There are few people as annoying as Bill O'Reilly. Keith Olberman is one of them, it's hard to know which one is worse.
It's easy. Billo is the one who said ON AIR that a girl who was raped and murdered had it coming because she was dressed like a tramp. Billo was the one who said that the boy who was held hostage for *years* in Missouri liked that situation better than being at home with his parents. Billo is the one who kept railing against the abortion doctor, until said doctor was finally assassinated.
 
Reactions
142 22 1
#50
Espy said:
Shakey said:
If you're not jaded about our political process after this, I don't know what else could do it. Lobbyists are in every damn piece of the process. They send letters to politicians disguised as letters from constituents, pay for their campaigns, put out canned news stories, take them on vacations, and now pay people to break up town halls.

I'm sure a good chunk of these people are ordinary people trying to be heard, screaming and yelling isn't gonna do it though.
See, what's funny about this to me is that people are acting like it's the first time it's ever happened and are freaking out. None of this is new. Both sides have been doing this so it's funny to hear people (thats a generic people, not anyone in particular) pretending like their parties shit don't stink.
We have rules that all advertisements during an election have to have a message stating who they are paid for by. I don't see why this shouldn't apply through the whole political process. If a lobbyist is behind anything they should have to identify themselves. Too much crap on both sides gets pushed through as "news" or "the feelings of the American public" when it's just lobbyist propaganda.
 
Reactions
484 252 1
#51
Charlie Dont Surf said:
Implying you have to watch Comedy Central in order to be up to date on important political issues reflects how terrible the state of politics/news media/etc is in this country :(
Colbert and Stewart seem to do more research into the news for their 30 minutes than Fox does for its 24 hour cycle.

The best comedians tell the truth.
 
Reactions
142 22 1
#52
sixpackshaker said:
Charlie Dont Surf said:
Implying you have to watch Comedy Central in order to be up to date on important political issues reflects how terrible the state of politics/news media/etc is in this country :(
Colbert and Stewart seem to do more research into the news for their 30 minutes than Fox does for its 24 hour cycle.

The best comedians tell the truth.
But they just glaze over everything. There is no real depth in anything they "report". They also add just as much, if not more, bias as everyone else.
 
B

BoringMetaphor

#53
Espy said:
See, what's funny about this to me is that people are acting like it's the first time it's ever happened and are freaking out. None of this is new. Both sides have been doing this so it's funny to hear people (thats a generic people, not anyone in particular) pretending like their parties shit don't stink.
So this has happened before? Obviously, protesting has occurred before, but with this level of vitriol? In my mind it only reaches these levels with something more important. Like race issues.
 
Reactions
142 22 1
#54
BoringMetaphor said:
Espy said:
See, what's funny about this to me is that people are acting like it's the first time it's ever happened and are freaking out. None of this is new. Both sides have been doing this so it's funny to hear people (thats a generic people, not anyone in particular) pretending like their parties shit don't stink.
So this has happened before? Obviously, protesting has occurred before, but with this level of vitriol? In my mind it only reaches these levels with something more important. Like race issues.
A lot of people are seeing this as Obama's slow push towards socialism, so it's got a lot of people scared. That combined with a whole lot of misinformation makes for angry people.
 
Reactions
743 117 11
#55
Shakey said:
sixpackshaker said:
Charlie Dont Surf said:
Implying you have to watch Comedy Central in order to be up to date on important political issues reflects how terrible the state of politics/news media/etc is in this country :(
Colbert and Stewart seem to do more research into the news for their 30 minutes than Fox does for its 24 hour cycle.

The best comedians tell the truth.
But they just glaze over everything. There is no real depth in anything they "report". They also add just as much, if not more, bias as everyone else.
But it's bias toward teh funny... so we're more forgiving.
 
Reactions
1,463 540 7
#56
@Li3n said:
Shakey said:
sixpackshaker said:
\"Charlie Dont Surf\":1fmzyhhq said:
Implying you have to watch Comedy Central in order to be up to date on important political issues reflects how terrible the state of politics/news media/etc is in this country :(
Colbert and Stewart seem to do more research into the news for their 30 minutes than Fox does for its 24 hour cycle.

The best comedians tell the truth.
But they just glaze over everything. There is no real depth in anything they "report". They also add just as much, if not more, bias as everyone else.
But it's bias toward teh funny... so we're more forgiving.[/quote:1fmzyhhq]

Yeah, honestly if Glenn Beck was actually funny funny and not terrifying psycho funny, I'd probably watch the fucking shit out of his show too.

Also, when he tries to be funny, he's about as funny as a burn ward.

http://www.cracked.com/video_17292_prev ... -tour.html
 
Reactions
229 10 0
#57
BoringMetaphor said:
Espy said:
See, what's funny about this to me is that people are acting like it's the first time it's ever happened and are freaking out. None of this is new. Both sides have been doing this so it's funny to hear people (thats a generic people, not anyone in particular) pretending like their parties poop don't stink.
So this has happened before? Obviously, protesting has occurred before, but with this level of vitriol? In my mind it only reaches these levels with something more important. Like race issues.
american protesting has reached this level since 1773. We are not a peaceful people.

also you don't consider the state of our entire medical industry to be important?
 
Reactions
969 73 2
#58
Whenever Americans protest (and aren't being lead by Dr. King) there is almost always violence and/or intimidation. We are very, VERY passionate about the things we believe in... which is probably why we take so much flack for our foreign policy.
 
B

BoringMetaphor

#61
Im not american so Im really okay with not discussing the minutae of it in this thread. Just stickin to what I want to know here.

I guess vietnam protests were pretty violent.. But anything in recent memory? Say post 1980?

Im really curious about the state of the American political system, which has one side dissolve into these somewhat incredulous attacks (seeminglyone side? not sure if this statement is true..). Coming from a foreigner's perspective, I just dont understand why it is happening with such vehemence. How does it help anything or anyone except those committing the acts?
 
L

Le Quack

#62
Republican's are angry with themselves that they were acting stupid and fucked up the United States for 8 years.

edit:

If the Republican Party had more people like Peter Schiff, and Ron Paul, I wouldn't mind elections so bad. I wouldn't matter what the outcome was, because I would know that the USA was safe from moral extremism. Schiff and Paul definitely got their shit down when it comes to economics.
 
Reactions
142 22 1
#63
BoringMetaphor said:
Im not american so Im really okay with not discussing the minutae of it in this thread. Just stickin to what I want to know here.

I guess vietnam protests were pretty violent.. But anything in recent memory? Say post 1980?

Im really curious about the state of the American political system, which has one side dissolve into these somewhat incredulous attacks (seeminglyone side? not sure if this statement is true..). Coming from a foreigner's perspective, I just dont understand why it is happening with such vehemence. How does it help anything or anyone except those committing the acts?
I don't think it's as bad as you think. There aren't large amounts of violence. A lot of the frustration people are showing now come from the fact that they have no real say any more. Republicans are the minority in the House and Senate, and they don't have the White House anymore. They see the new health care program as a step towards socialism and their party has no say in it at all. This is one of the biggest shifts in government policy we have had in a long time. So while the issue right now is health care, underneath it's "where does it stop?"

Add to this we have lobbyists who are stirring up as much shit as they can. They have clients who have a lot to lose if this goes through, so they will do what they can to water it down as much as they can. They are trying to make it look like there is a huge grassroots campaign against it, when it's really just them starting it all.
 
C

Chibibar

#64
the bill is so confusing....... I try to read it.. honest, but I can't get past first 10 pages :(
 
B

BoringMetaphor

#66
Shakey said:
BoringMetaphor said:
Im not american so Im really okay with not discussing the minutae of it in this thread. Just stickin to what I want to know here.

I guess vietnam protests were pretty violent.. But anything in recent memory? Say post 1980?

Im really curious about the state of the American political system, which has one side dissolve into these somewhat incredulous attacks (seeminglyone side? not sure if this statement is true..). Coming from a foreigner's perspective, I just dont understand why it is happening with such vehemence. How does it help anything or anyone except those committing the acts?
I don't think it's as bad as you think. There aren't large amounts of violence. A lot of the frustration people are showing now come from the fact that they have no real say any more. Republicans are the minority in the House and Senate, and they don't have the White House anymore. They see the new health care program as a step towards socialism and their party has no say in it at all. This is one of the biggest shifts in government policy we have had in a long time. So while the issue right now is health care, underneath it's "where does it stop?"

Add to this we have lobbyists who are stirring up as much shit as they can. They have clients who have a lot to lose if this goes through, so they will do what they can to water it down as much as they can. They are trying to make it look like there is a huge grassroots campaign against it, when it's really just them starting it all.
That makes sense. I guess my next question would be what do Americans think about this tyranny of the majority which their political system seems to move towards? The republicans lost the elections this round.. So as you point out, they dont have say in it, but isnt that because the majority of Americans decided they shouldn't?

I suppose I am asking all these questions because as of late when I have been watching the news I have a hard time combining two of the most treasured American values: democracy and individualism. It seems like on the one hand, they want to uphold the spectre of the best, first and strongest democracy, yet at the same time decry the loss of their voice - their individualism - when they lose an election, a loss which is mandated by the very democratic system which they uphold. The majority rules. In fairness, the Republicans do have a voice, and they can express it in November. Why get all riled up now?

I think this could easily be turned around against Democrats in another election as well. I'm just at a loss to explain this apparent contradiction in values. Again - I am not American. So, any help here?
 
Reactions
1,322 432 11
#67
They're overly bitter that Rove's "permanent Republican majority" failed so miserably. And a good portion are just plain racist.
 
Reactions
142 22 1
#68
BoringMetaphor said:
That makes sense. I guess my next question would be what do Americans think about this tyranny of the majority which their political system seems to move towards? The republicans lost the elections this round.. So as you point out, they dont have say in it, but isnt that because the majority of Americans decided they shouldn't?
Yeah, but the majority may only be 51%, that leaves 49% of the population unhappy. Those aren't exact number though, and it could be closer to 60/40. People have a right to show they are unhappy, and make it be known. That's what they are doing. Personally I think it can be a problem when one side controls the House, Senate, and the Pres. The other side tends to feel ignored and marginalized, and to a point they are.

BoringMetaphor said:
I suppose I am asking all these questions because as of late when I have been watching the news I have a hard time combining two of the most treasured American values: democracy and individualism. It seems like on the one hand, they want to uphold the spectre of the best, first and strongest democracy, yet at the same time decry the loss of their voice - their individualism - when they lose an election, a loss which is mandated by the very democratic system which they uphold. The majority rules. In fairness, the Republicans do have a voice, and they can express it in November. Why get all riled up now?

I think this could easily be turned around against Democrats in another election as well. I'm just at a loss to explain this apparent contradiction in values. Again - I am not American. So, any help here?
Why not get riled up? Something is happening that they do not agree with. What's the point in having free speech if you sit there and say "well, we lost the election so they can do what they want for 4 years."
 
Reactions
969 73 2
#69
It's actually usually closer to 1-2 years, as I'm pretty sure Senators and Representatives have elections on different schedules and they usually have more effect on the actual legislative process than the President. The President may be the face of the nation, but Congress is where everything gets done.
 
Reactions
142 22 1
#70
AshburnerX said:
It's actually usually closer to 1-2 years, as I'm pretty sure Senators and Representatives have elections on different schedules and they usually have more effect on the actual legislative process than the President. The President may be the face of the nation, but Congress is where everything gets done.
Yeah, they are staggered every 2 years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top