Pacifists are the enemy?

[yendi]

So, Bush and his Merry Organization of Fascist Scum have placed anti-war activists on the no-fly list. Because if you don't restrict the movement of and harass good citizens, the terrorists win!

Of course, since Bush has conveniently thrown the gay marriage issue front and central, and the conservative-run media is eating it up like candy, don't expect any serious outrage from the sheep over this one, any more than over his last 84 offenses.

Wonder how long before all Libertarians are on the no-fly list. Ditto the Green Party. And then all Democrats. Followed by all Blacks and Jews, of course.

Comments

[vyseryn.livejournal.com]

Your statement makes it sound like the conservatives dominate the media, which is entirely untrue.

You make it sound like the idea of killing or burying stories is something new and unique to the Bush Administration. They called CNN the "Clinton News Network" for a reason. This same sort of stuff when on during his administration too, but you didn't hear about it. Why? Liberal president - Liberal media. It was not in their interests to report things that they didn't have to.

Why are all these things coming out in this administration? That is quite simple. Republican President/House/Senate/Supreme Court - Liberal media. It is in their best interests to have a Democrat in power. This is politics... This is how it has been done. This is NOT new for this administration, and to think so is purely biased. I guarantee that if there was a conservative dominated media, you wouldn't be hearing about any of this stuff.

[mfree.livejournal.com]

So, if you've got conservatives calling the media leftist, and liberals calling the media right-wingers, then is there the possibility that *gasp* the media might be centrist?

Or at the very least pivoted in the middle and swinging. or reactionary.

[yendi]

I've actually noted that my reactions of anger to articles I read in The Week (the best news magazine for the buck, imho) are likely a result of their centrist attitude. But that's always struck me as the exception, not the rule.

[vyseryn.livejournal.com]

No, the media is NOT centrist. Not by a long shot. Being centrist would mean providing news and commentary that was not slanted by a political point of view. The day that this happens will be the day the sky falls.

[dwivian]

Oh, but it most certainly is centrist. That keeps the advertisers from pulling out and killing the revenue stream.

The left sees it as right, and the right as left, because the center will always appear such.

Independent reviews I've seen of the popular media shows it to vary only slightly from the center, and then on an individual reporter basis.

It's very centrist, because it is bad business to be anything else.

[yendi]

Which, come to think of it, is a pretty solid definition of conservative. :-)

[dwivian]

Nope....that's a definition of self-interest.

Which is a pretty good definition of Democrat, too, if you only look at those hot-button issues that define their party.

Conservatives want government to get OUT of business, because they want the size of government to reduce.

This is **NOT** the view of the right wing, which wants government to expand to be a moral police.

So, right off, we have to distinguish the right wing from the conservatives (I know many conservative democrats), which causes enough headaches as it is, as it isn't easy to wrap your brain around that transition...

[yendi]

I was using the lower-case conservative -- those who want to maintain the status quo. Which I differentiate from Conservative (which, like you, I take to be a slight variation on Libertarianism), Republican, and Right-Wing.

That's why I never liked those "simple" political tests and labels.

[dwivian]

Thanks for the clarification! Always good to know what we mean when we talk. :)

[dwivian]

Woo hoo! You got it! :)

[yendi]

Your statement makes it sound like the conservatives dominate the media, which is entirely untrue.

How so? Seriously, I'm fine with saying that the reporters lean left (I haven't seen any stats one way or the other, but I'm not sure how easy it would be to prove, either way). Maybe even editors. But publishers? Name a prominent newspaper that's not a corporate cog (even the NY Times is now a part of a larger empire). Ditto television (and don't get me started on Clearchannel, the Medium Formerly Known as Radio). They have no interest in anything that hurts the corporate agenda.

As for Clinton, what didn't get reported? Newsweek, that so-called liberal bastion, wasted 50 pages in an issue on the travesty that was the Starr Report.

As for your last paragraph, you're mistaking the need for the media to always maintain a partially adversarial relationship with the powers-that-be for liberalism. If Leno is busy cracking wise about Bush's stance gay marriage, and the Times is reporting on a minor Bush slip-up from months ago, then the big stuff happening right now just conveniently falls through the cracks, and the sheep are entertained.

[vyseryn.livejournal.com]

There is some news that even the media can't conveniently not report. I didn't read the Newsweek report of the Starr report, but I am sure much like everything else they print, it is slanted to the left.

As a side note: I use to be a registed democrat and voted that way. I will even admit I voted for Clinton in his re-election campaign. I abandoned the Dem party once it started sliding too far left. Sadly, there are elements in the DNC that believe they have not gone far enough left. If either party slides that far from center, this country will be in SERIOUS trouble if they ever come to power. If you think Bush is a far right winger, think Pat Buchanan or Ann Coulter... That is far right.

[shadesong.livejournal.com]

yendi, hon, this guy's a mental defective - stop feeding the troll. *sweet smile*

[nomadmwe.livejournal.com]

Normally I try not to step in on things like this... but Vyseryn happens to be a good friend of mine. I reread the comments and while his viewpoints may happen to differ from those of others here, I don't think he's crossed the line into flaming or trollishness.

He just likes debates.

Um. I'll shut up now.

[shadesong.livejournal.com]

*hugs* You, I adore. But this is just plain trollishness.

[nomadmwe.livejournal.com]

Guess we just do things different up here in the Great Northern Reaches. *laugh* I poked him much earlier to make sure he wouldn't fall to the dark side of flames, and he promised he'd keep it to the level of friendly debate.

I can certainly see how it can be trolly, though. We're stubborn folk.

Now I'm gonna go sit out on my (nonexistant) porch on my (nonexistant) rocking chair, tell people that they can't get theah from heah, and be all curmudgeonly.

Yeah. :)

[shadesong.livejournal.com]

poked him much earlier to make sure he wouldn't fall to the dark side of flames, and he promised he'd keep it to the level of friendly debate.

He broke his promise quite a bit, darlin'; when you invade a stranger's journal in order to post illiterate ranting and harass them and all of their friends, well, we call that trolling down south. *grin*

Again, not you, you I adore, but this guy's a tool.

[vyseryn.livejournal.com]

I will entertain this once, and once only...

I will ask a simple question - Posting a dissenting opinion is "Trollish" or a sure sign of mental defects? Is everyone who does not share your political views "mentally defective"? Are you expecting any debate to be a "preach to the choir" experience? If that is the case, where is the debate? That sort of environment is nothing but an echo chamber.

I am disappointed you have resorted to name-calling. It is very sad. I have managed thus far to debate in a fashion where there was no flaming what so ever. It isn't that hard. You may not agree with my point of view, but that is just fine. You are entitled to disagree with me, just like many other people do. If you do not agree with me, that is your prerogative, but there is no reason to resort to name-calling. If I can respect (while not agreeing with) opposing viewpoints, why can't you?

That is what makes our country great. We are able to debate positions without violence breaking out or the Gestapo coming to drag us away...

Political opinions are just that - OPINIONS. Is my opinion more valid than yours in the grand scheme of things? No. Is your opinion more valid than mine in the grand scheme of things? No. That is why they call them opinions. They are just that.

All that aside, we should just agree to disagree and leave it at that.

[shadesong.livejournal.com]

My objection to your trolling isn't that you have a dissenting opinion; I have many friends whose opinions differ from mine. My objection is that you've entered my friend's journal solely to harass him and his friends and present "arguments" that defy all logic.

Shoo.

[dwivian]

There are liberals at the top of the corporate structures....

When Turner was still running TBS, you could point to him. The Cox sisters are decidedly not right-wingers. Just being a media enterprise publishing entity doesn't make you right wing.

There are corporate issues that can be argued without swallowing the whole of the right's views. Publishers push from a position of enlightened self-interest. Always the way of things in business, actually.

[yendi]

Actually, I think Turner didn't have the first clue about how to run a media company (I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt and say that he was hands-off, but I don't believe it). I honestly believe that he would have been the exception (which is no more a good thing from the Left than from the Right) in controlling his media empire.

Publishers push from a position of enlightened self-interest. Always the way of things in business, actually.

True. But the enlightened self-interest of corporations ends up very solidly on the economic right.

[dwivian]

That I can't argue -- I was showing, however, that economics is a very small portion of the right wing, and it is possible to be very left, except when your own business is threatened....

And, I think Turner did a damned good job bringing WTBS up through the ranks, and expanding across the cable and satelite landscape. He's very shrewd (I've met him, and he's also incredibly charismatic). He does have some wacked out views, but what genius isn't mostly insane? :)