hPOD

Member Profile

Real Name: hPOD

Member Since: August 6, 2010
Email: y2hh at mafia dot org
Last Power Points used: never
Available: now
Power Points at Recharge: 1   Get More Power Points Now!

Comments to hPOD

siftbot says...

Happy anniversary! Today marks year number 12 since you first became a Sifter and the community is better for having you. Thanks for your contributions!


siftbot says...

Happy anniversary! Today marks year number 11 since you first became a Sifter and the community is better for having you. Thanks for your contributions!


siftbot says...

Happy anniversary! Today marks year number 10 since you first became a Sifter and the community is better for having you. Thanks for your contributions!


dystopianfuturetoday says...

I find commercial media political analysis to be pretty stupid in general. They often get hung up on petty details, missing the important points, or perhaps not allowed to speak of important points for fear of scaring off corporate investors. I don't waste my time with either Olbermann (though I don't think he should have been booted off his network) or O'Reilly, although Maddow is pretty good. PBS, NPR and print media offer much deeper, more intellectual coverage, probably because they worry less about pleasing advertisers and can focus on doing their job.

The center is all very relative in our politics. Right of center Democrats who support common sense programs like health care are considered extremists; in the rest of the world, healthcare is a bipartisan issue. The American 'center' lies between right of center moderate dems, and batshit loonies like Sarah Palin on the right. It's not really a middle at all, it's more of a mean; a mean that shifts further and further to the right.

I challenge you to find a genuine liberal extremist who holds any political sway.

Anyway, I agree with Maher that being centrist for the sake of being centrist is a fools errand. It doesn't make you wise, intelligent or in any way independent. When you look at the agenda of the American right, it's easy to see that it is all based around sucking up to corporations. Cap and trade, corporate tax cuts, limiting social services, climate science "skepticism".... They offer nothing helpful to the average Joe. Once you cast a vote for corporatism, you lose the right to call yourself independent.

Anyway, the laptop is almost out of juice, so I'm going to cut this short...



In reply to this comment by hPOD:
It's hard to take an obviously biased [and somewhat insane] Bill Maher seriously. Maher hasn't been watchable for about 4 years now, and he's getting worse and worse. I understand the point you're trying to make, but as a person who truly stands in the middle, I see the extremes in both sides all the time, and that includes Olbermann. Unlike most, I actually DO watch Olbermann AND O'Riley. Well, not Olbermann anymore, but you get the point. I know you want to believe that everything Olbermann touches on is fact based, and everything O'Riley opines on is propaganda based, but that's not reality. There are times both make solid points, and there are times you can tell their <insert right/left> leaning opinions shine on their biased tendencies.

My voting record stands by the fact I call things as I see them, down the middle. In the last 5 Presidential elections, I've voted for 2 Republicans, 2 Democrats and 1 Independent.

A lot of people love to say they're down the middle, and they can see/hear both sides, but their slanted voting records show otherwise. I don't vote for parties, I vote for candidates, whether those votes end up being mistakes in the long run there is little I can do about, but the fact is, I'm one of the very few that actually does ride the fence. Quite a few of my friends, for example, claim the same...but their voting records show pure republican or pure democratic bias.

Maher has let his anti-religious lunacy get the better of him, and this is coming from an avid Hitchen's fan, who is also anti-religious. Hitchen's said it best when he mocked Maher's crowd for believing anything he says and laughing at any Bush joke he used. If I cared enough, going back to the beginning of the United States, I'd venture to say that I could find good things and bad things every single President has done, including Bush Jr and Obama.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
0:50 is relevant to our conversation:

http://videosift.com/video/Bill-Maher-Critiques-Stewart-Colbert-Rally

dystopianfuturetoday says...

I see a huge difference in argument styles between the two parties. Conservative arguments are usually little more than a stringing together of buzzwords and slogans, with little understanding of the thinking behind the concepts, or the ability to follow up when put under scrutiny. Fiscal responsibility (code for tax cuts for the rich), socialism (code for public works that don't directly benefit corporations), small business (code for big business), small government (code for limiting that parts of government that don't massage corporations as opposed to say... defense), constitutionalist (I can never get a conservative to explain how corporate ideology fits into the constitution, especially when you consider that corporations were illegal at the time the constitution was composed), etc.

Liberals simply don't have access the same kinds of corporate, think tank propaganda that conservatives do. If they did, I'm sure many would use it, but because that kind of propaganda is scarce and often amateurishly put together (Air America), liberals generally have to logic it out for themselves.

The liberal commentary on this site is very thoughtful.


In reply to this comment by hPOD:
Well, it's hard for me to disagree with you on this specific point. While there are those that I disagree with politically, I don't mind disagreeing with them so long as they at least make solid points, whether I agree with them or not. While it's pretty arrogant for me to 'guess', when it comes to online forums such as VideoSift, Digg, Reddit, I'd say 95% of those posting/responding know very little [or are void of self-opinion] and are merely repeating what they've heard/read from others. And that goes for those on the far left and those on the far right.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
I don't mean it as an insult, they are literally lacking in political knowledge. If you'd like me to use a more respectful term for ignorance, I'd be happy to oblige. Knowledge impaired? Intellectually disabled? I'll go with whatever you like best...

>> ^hPOD:

Calling people ignorant because they have different views/opinions than yourself is, in and of itself, ignorant.
Fiscal Responsibility isn't a vague-to-the-point-of-meaningless slogan unless applied to politicians/politics, be it on the right or the left, as IMO, neither are fiscally responsible. It's hard to be fiscally responsible when you aren't spending your own money. I live my life in a fiscally responsible way. Aside from my mortgage, I have no debt. None. I do not live beyond my means. I do not spend more now expecting everything to work out later, as sometimes it doesn't work out as we expect. That is fiscal responsibility.
>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
^'Fiscal Responsibility' is a vague-to-the-point-of-meaninglessness slogan designed for use by those too stupid to formulate their own arguments. It will indeed be interesting to see how well the tea party does tomorrow, as a gauge of just how easy it is to manipulate ignorant Americans.


Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Top Comments