Liberals or Conservatives: Who is the bigger threat?

[James]

[color=#808080]Fox is a [i]moderate[/i] channel? lol.

Fox News is about as right-wing as you can possibly get, unless you tune in to Rush Limbaugh.

In Australia, we do get some American CNN programs...but we mostly get "CNN International". I've never noticed a problem with it; it's pretty objective. The problem is that a lot of conservatives see a sign of tolerance or something on CNN (or credible journalistic practices) and instantly label it as being "leftist". And no, I'm not talking about you gokents.

The thing is, Fox News tends to practice very poor journalism in some cases. One of their anchors in particular...I forget his name, but he is the [i]worst[/i] journalist I've ever seen. He has no idea how to conduct an interview.

I remember that he briefly interviewed Brigette Boisillei (I hope that's the right spelling); the woman who runs CloneAid. She was trying to answer his questions, but he [i]continually[/i] interjected by calling her crazy and such.

Now, I [i]do[/i] think that Ms. Boilsillei is pretty nuts. But come on...the woman didn't get a word in. The news anchor continually called her names and didn't practice one iota of fair journalism.

I've noticed similar tactics on other Fox programs. And whilst I do enjoy some Fox shows, most of the ones that I enjoy are [i]editorial[/i] based. In other words, they're opinion based. When you have an opinion show, you can spout off whatever you want basically.

But when you are covering [i]news[/i], you are supposed to be unemotional and objective. Fox News continually practices poor quality journalism in this regard.

CNN International, on the other hand, tends to remain very objective and doesn't make "judgement calls" within news stories. This is the correct way to approach news. More boring, yes. But it's the right way to present factual news. The opinion shows...I don't care much for them generally. CNN's opinion shows don't always interest me.

But generally, as I've said...if a media network tries to deal with news in an unemotional way, the right-wingers tend to accuse the network of being leftist. No, that's not the case. The difference is that such networks aren't interested in throwing ideology at you; they're interested in presenting news and news only.

I'm saying this in general terms, of course. CNN International is probably different from the "domestic" CNN that the United States receives. But still, the whole idea of the entire media being liberal is pretty alarmist and ignorant. Most of the people who make such accusations rarely [i]watch[/i] such news outlets on a regular basis; they take a soundbite and run with it. If I did that with Fox News, most people would be horrified by what could be uncovered.

As long as you view news with some intelligence (and view multiple sources), you'll be fine.[/color]

[Lady Macaiodh]

[color=darkblue]This is a question I've actually stuggled with from time to time.

My family has very strong Republican ties. Needless to say, I was raised hearing Rush Limbaugh, blocking abortion clinics, going to rallies, hearing all about how horrible liberals are, etc.

It's funny how even to this day, my mom can make the most absurd conservative policy seem justifiable, & vice versa about liberals.

I don't really see much difference in either party, concerning corruption & want for power (& not just political). I don't have time right now to explain myself b/c my ride just got here. I don't vote often, but when I do, it's Libertarian. I'll come back tonight & explain what I mean.[/color]

[Justin]

I think it's best to decide what views and values you have before you go aligning yourself with political parties.

If this country had been intelligent back in the 1790s and listened to the original GW as he was leaving office, we of course wouldn't have the political party problem. But that's the way things have fallen into place, I guess.

-Justin

[Kent]

Well although I tend to agree with James on the fact that there are times when fox does interupt during interviews...

I also still see the channel as a balanced news service consisting of many liberals who have left their previous networks for the creative freedom of fox. (mort kondrake with a slew of others)

But most of all, when I see CNN I see the channel that refused to call the nine eleven hijackers and the suicide bombers in palestine terrorist. And thats the truth... they wouldn't reffer to those people as terrorist...?! Thats not moderate or balanced. That is straight up wrong and extremly leftist.

I know that fox has conservatives like cal thomas and shawn hannity, but it also has independents like Bill Orielly and Neil Cavuto, as well as liberals like Alan colmes and Mara Liasson. (Mara is from NPR and on special report.)

Fair and balanced means that for every conservative, there is a liberal.

Fox does a better job with that than any of the network news companies.

And calling someone ignorant because they see a bias to the media in a country you dont even live in, is, well...

[Change]

I would say that the threat should be determined by your personal philosophy. If you belive is conservatism, you are afraid of change, you wish to hold back society from the brink of rapid progress and slow things down. If you are a liberal, you look ahead and take the plunge, you go for the gold.

[BabyGirl]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by gokents [/i]
[B]Not that your opinion doesnt matter, but I dont know about your experience with censorship as a foriegn war correspondent.[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=deeppink]I'm going into photojournalism, this is the type of stuff that we learn about. More than one guest speaker (people like Carolyn Cole and Mr. Steve McCurry) has told us about their limitations as media in war time situations. I wasn't just making it up for arguments sake :)[/color]


[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by {SITH} Change [/i]
[B]If you belive is conservatism, you are afraid of change, you wish to hold back society from the brink of rapid progress and slow things down. If you are a liberal, you look ahead and take the plunge, you go for the gold. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=deeppink]Ahh, now that makes sense :D I tend to agree with you.[/color]

[Kent]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by {SITH} Change [/i]
[B]I would say that the threat should be determined by your personal philosophy. If you belive is conservatism, you are afraid of change, you wish to hold back society from the brink of rapid progress and slow things down. If you are a liberal, you look ahead and take the plunge, you go for the gold. [/B][/QUOTE]

I am truely dissapointed with this sort of thought. (I guess I shouldn't have expected much in the first place... right?) And this goes for both of you.

I think this sort of post is exactly what I needed earlier on when I was trying to show how pointless a thread like this is.

This sort of stereotyping is what makes liberals look bad.

I mean, conservatives trying to hold back society from progress...!?

And liberals pushing the limits, going for the gold, trying to make the world a better place...!?

I think that is about all you need to say to show exactly who is the closed minded type.

If you think that conservatives don't want cures for disease or advances in technology your a fool.

What you said about conservatives and liberals has no base and is purely your own subjective opinion.

Im just taking a guess here, but would it be a stretch to say your a liberal?

Or would it be safe to say that your one of the evil ones who want to hold society back from making progress.

I would say your taking the plunge. You know, "going for the gold."

If this sort of thinking was widely accepted as true, then it would be just as acceptable to say that liberals have no moral restraints... i.e. cloning of humans, killing babies. (aka abortion)

I know that liberals are not immoral, but atleast I have the common sense to recognize the fact that not all liberals are ok with partial birth abortion or full on cloning of human beings.

I have the sense to know that there are different degrees to every political group, including liberals.

Seeing that liberals are not all extremist is just as important as seeing that all conservatives are not evangelical christians.

Unfortunatly, as a moderate conservative, I often find myself being stereotyped and insulted by people making comments like yours.

This is just rediculus and the thought of liberals being the only ones wishing for the betterment and furthering of human progress is only a testiment towards your own ignorance.

[Harry]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by {SITH} Change [/i]
[B] If you belive is conservatism, you are afraid of change, you wish to hold back society from the brink of rapid progress and slow things down. If you are a liberal, you look ahead and take the plunge, you go for the gold. [/B][/QUOTE] If you're a conservative you don't hold back society, you just don't want it to change rapidly. Liberals want things to change radically and instantly which just never happens.

[BabyGirl]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by gokents [/i]
[B]I am truely dissapointed with this sort of thought. (I guess I shouldn't have expected much in the first place... right?) And this goes for both of you.

This is just ridiculus and the thought of liberals being the only ones wishing for the betterment and furthering of human progress is only a testiment towards your own ignorance. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=deeppink]Heh, good to know someone is always disappointed in me :p

I don't think SITH meant that in a condescending way...during my photo project for class, everyone who was assigned the left wing found it far easier to find pictures. Why? As we discussed in class, liberals are often out there vying for change, giving voice to their opinions. And yes, sometimes those opinions are bad ideas.

When I agreed with SITH, I agreed with the philosophy that liberals are often out in the world trying to make a change (peace rallies, anyone?), while conservatives are often less likely to demonstrate their need for change. Most of them ARE pretty happy with their 2.5 children, SUV, and east coast mansions. [don't take that in the wrong way, I know it's a stereotype >_<]

However, I know that both parties want to make things better for themselves, and in doing that, they want to make the world better with the belief that their way is the right way. Neither party really wants [i]bad[/i] things to happen, liberals are just a little more voisterous when it comes to wanting change.

When my boyfriend was taking pictures at the anti-war rally in Los Angeles, he said that among the crowd of thousands of people, he saw only two people protesting FOR the war. I didn't mean to agree with SITH in a way that "dissed" either party...I just agreed with his ideals about getting out in the community and letting their voice be known type thing. Of course, I could be very wrong about all of this to you, gokents, but I just wanted to explain myself better :whoops:

[size=1]P.S. The next time you don't expect much from me and my posts, let me know personally ;)[/size][/color]

[Orien_Xel]

[color=blue]I'm a liberal, and I have been at several peace rallys. The only problem I have with conservatives is that if we don't support our government we aren't "patriotic" :(. I'm patriotic. I beleive in the ideals of the U.S. I just don't believe in our current admin. If a conservative wishes to sit down and talk to me about his ideas, that is fine with me.[/color]

[Kent]

Sure, I will be happy to let you know personally when I am let down by your post.

About protest and change...

Speaking loudly and protesting doesnt mean you want the "betterment" of mankind any more than the other party, it merely means that you are willing to march in the streets while the other party considers it wasted energy.

I believe I made myself clear, but I think its funny...

2.5 kids, suv's and mansions. What a joke.

Do you think all the soccer moms I've rode with, who had gore stickers were just putting those bumper stickers on to even out the stereotypes?

I garuntee that for every suv driving conservative, there is another suv driver who is liberal.

I guess those liberal suv drivers aren't comfortable though.

Are there not mansions on the west coast?

I could be wrong, but isn't there a cliche term that says something like "limousine liberals."

Enough about stereotypes though.

Oddly, look at protestors who oppose abortion, they seem pretty damn vocal to me and they are protesting for the change of a supreme court decision that makes it ok to kill babies.

What I am trying to get at is that protesting doesn't indincate that you desire change more than any other person.
(although anti-war protesting infact is trying to stop the change in the middle east and protect saddam.)

Conservatives know that it is smarter to make your voice count by doing two things...
1. put your money where your mouth is. (and dont tell me liberals dont have money... Can you say "martin sheen"?)

2. conservatives know it is a whole lot easier to show up and vote or express yourself with a congress person, than it is to protest and hope people notice.

I am saying that the "condensending" comments made about conservatives were stupid and wrong.

Spin control is what I see here. (although I still consider your views to be valid, as well as apologetic at times like this... looking at bg as I say this.)

If you dont like stereotypes, then dont perpetuate their use.

This gives me insight into just how independent the thoughts of the people here are.

And that makes me wonder about the opinions I have come to form over the time I have been here.

[Subversive]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B][color=#808080]
If it were up to certain members of society (who share your beliefs, but are more extreme), we'd all be living under a Christian theocracy. So, as I've said...extremism is dangerous in general, whether it's liberal or conservative.[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

Maybe but I don't think so. Typically Christianity is taught about freewill when it comes to decisions (God made it where we are not all robots)--Theocracy is not what would most likely be backed, but what do I know, I'm not the extreme. Possibly a theocracy would be supported, but I wouldn't. I agree with our founding fathers, we should support our diverse religious beliefs, but definetly keep them seperate from being the government. Theocracy would be making the religion secular--look what happened to the pope throughout history when this happened. Its not a good thing.

And Gokents: thats exactly what I was saying. But..wow..you said it great. ^^

[BabyGirl]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by gokents [/i]
[B]2.5 kids, suv's and mansions. What a joke.

And that makes me wonder about the opinions I have come to form over the time I have been here. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=deeppink]::sigh:: gokents, I'm not directing any of the comments toward you with the intent to be condescending. I'm just letting my views be known, and I find it frustrating that I can't do so without people feeling offended and jumping on my back. I find it difficult to get involved in topics like this, because I didn't even start out supporting a certain political group, and in this topic I wanted to stay neutral. Don't assume that I agree with everything the liberals have to say, even if I consider myself to have more liberal tendencies.

I'm willing to be open minded to the opinions from people who believe differently than I, but I start to close myself off and get defensive when people attack my beliefs without considering what I have to say [that's in general, I'm not talking to anyone specific].

About the 2.5 kids blah blah blah thing: I agree that it's a phoney stereotype, but I was using it as an example. There's plenty of stupid stereotypes that I could use against the liberals, I just didn't need one in the context of that post.

Feel free to be angered or let down by my post...I suppose it's not my place to make everyone happy with what I have to say. I just encourage everyone to try and accept the views of others and not get [i]so[/i] worked up about comments that offend your personal affiliation. I really did mean to stay neutral in this topic, I'm sorry that people had to see it otherwise and turn my words into the bad guys =\[/color]

[Lady Macaiodh]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by {SITH} Change [/i]
[B]I would say that the threat should be determined by your personal philosophy. If you belive is conservatism, you are afraid of change, you wish to hold back society from the brink of rapid progress and slow things down. If you are a liberal, you look ahead and take the plunge, you go for the gold. [/B][/QUOTE]

[COLOR=darkblue]Now [i]that[/i] is just straight-up [i]ridiculous.[/i] Another word for Conserve is Preserve, which means to keep safe from harm. You make it sound like conservatives still want to keep blacks & women from voting or something. If what you're saying is true, then a liberal must have been the one to initiate any positive change whatsoever in America.

You actually think that conservatives want to and try to prevent progress? That has got to be one of the most ignorant things I've ever read on these boards!

& you have to admit, liberals sometimes have really dumb ideas! It's a necessary balance, & without it the liberals would be running wild & possibly jeopardizing things for us right now.

For example: The liberals are very apprehensive & hesitant about taking any sort of stand in the world-wide arena concerning national defense. If it wasn't for the conservatives of the past, we'd be sitting ducks. Yeah, liberals want us to downsize the military & have peace & all, which is ideally a pretty picture, but not at all realistic or forseeable. Luckily Reagan bulked all that stuff up, or we wouldn't be in as nearly as good of a position for all that's going on right now.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not a conservative. But for an outrageous statement like that, I had to say something. I still can't even believe I read that. I'll have to keep going back to this page to make sure I wasn't going crazy.[/COLOR]

[Kent]

I've already made my opinion clear...

But I wanted to say.

See Lady Macaiodh, we can agree on some things.:D

[Orien_Xel]

[color=blue]I'd just like to clarify that I do not support Saddam. I just want peace. You people want a war that will kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. I do not. That is all.[/color]

[Harry]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Orien_Xel [/i]
[B][color=blue]I'd just like to clarify that I do not support Saddam. I just want peace. You people want a war that will kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. I do not. That is all.[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]
So you'd rather have his oppressive regime to stay in power striking fear into all his people and neighboring countries?

[BabyGirl]

[color=deeppink]I don't know if this is off-topic or not, but today I took some photographs of people rallying [i]for[/i] the war. It was the first organized group of people supporting our troops that I have seen thus far. There were only about 6 of them, but they were standing on a corner of a busy, busy intersection, and the entire time that I was taking pictures, the horns of drivers-by never stopped going.

I think more people support the war than we know, there are just some people who are afraid of the criticism that they will recieve if they speak out about it. I chatted with the lady in charge of the group and told her that I appreciated what they were all doing. I'm still on the fence about whether or not the war is a "good" thing, but I loved seeing people doing something other than creating a second Veitnam-esque peace protest. I don't know if some people who protest the war really don't want one to happen, or if they just do it because it's the popular thing to do.

I guess it was just a refreshing thing to see friendly, patriotic people out in the community letting their out numbered opinions be heard. So yes, I don't know if that was off topic, but it made my day.[/color]

[Harry]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by BabyGirl [/i]
[B][color=deeppink]I don't know if this is off-topic or not, but today I took some photographs of people rallying [i]for[/i] the war. It was the first organized group of people supporting our troops that I have seen thus far. There were only about 6 of them, but they were standing on a corner of a busy, busy intersection, and the entire time that I was taking pictures, the horns of drivers-by never stopped going.

I think more people support the war than we know, there are just some people who are afraid of the criticism that they will recieve if they speak out about it. I chatted with the lady in charge of the group and told her that I appreciated what they were all doing. I'm still on the fence about whether or not the war is a "good" thing, but I loved seeing people doing something other than creating a second Veitnam-esque peace protest. I don't know if some people who protest the war really don't want one to happen, or if they just do it because it's the popular thing to do.

I guess it was just a refreshing thing to see friendly, patriotic people out in the community letting their out numbered opinions be heard. So yes, I don't know if that was off topic, but it made my day.[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]
There was a big rally supporting the war in Houston just yesterday. People that are for the war don't need to speak about it because the government supports their ideas, the hippies that don't like the war don't have the support so they have to make their position known.

[Kent]

Actually, as odd and off topic this may be... I just have to mention it.

In france (thats right france, for gods sake, FRANCE!) there was a pro american rally.

Can you believe that.

I guess blanket statments and stereotypes need to be banned for ever now, because hell has just frozen over.

[Lady Macaiodh]

[color=darkblue]The reason there aren't nearly as many pro-war rallies as anti-war is because they don't need to do that. What's there to protest? The government is doing exactly what they want. Anti-war ralliers (or whatever they're called) are the only ones who need to protest. So I really don't think it's a good example.

And about killing tons of Iraqis... Saddam does a good job of killing & torturing them on his own. Either we can sit back & let it go on forever, or we can try to make a difference. War is never an easy or clean solution.[/color]

[Kent]

Well Lady Macaiodh, although I know you are more of a liberal than anything else...

I gotta say, you made a point that is worth more than any anti-war protestor could ever say.

No one wants war, and to qoute a brilliant man, "no one loaths war more than the soldier."

The truth is, although we all hate war, there are times that we must do things we hate.

Empty the trash, cut the grass or wash the car... I hate doing them all, but they must be done.

The removal of saddam is another task that must be addressed.

If we allow him to carry on his stalinistic dictatorship, we will see more innocents die by his own hands or the hands of his secret service than america COULD possibly kill in a war with Iraq.

[Lady Macaiodh]

[color=darkblue]I don't consider myself a liberal. That's why I had a hard time answering the question of the thread. I'm neither.

I just believe what I believe. Why label myself? Any label I give myself will not be accurate anyway.

I try not to be very political. I'm just tired of it, & I don't think anything's going to change anytime soon. [/color]

[Subversive]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by gokents [/i]
[B]
The truth is, although we all hate war, there are times that we must do things we hate. [/B][/QUOTE]

so true my friend...War is inevidible maybe not now but sometime.

[Orien_Xel]

[quote]I guess it was just a refreshing thing to see friendly, patriotic people out in the community letting their out numbered opinions be heard. [/quote]

[color=blue]So if I don't support our government I'm not patriotic?[/color]