Sheldon? Is that YOU?! Did you hack newt's account?

Thank you Sheldon.




*snort*

I think Aden needs to meet Sheldon Cooper.

Sheldon was much, much faster.

All I hear is Sheldon Cooper.

Great Sheldon impersonation!

Good video. What irritates me is seeing instances where Aspergers is treated like it's the designer diagnosis of the decade. Seeing someone like Jerry Seinfeld or David Byrne comment about how they feel they have a "touch of Aspergers" and are on the "spectrum". Or the legions of Big Bang Theory fans who now "identify" as "Aspies" because Sheldon and what's her name have made it into a fun pop culture caricature. SMH on many levels.

@heropsycho

are we related?

well said my friend,and i totally agree with pretty much everything you just laid out.i love your commentary as a whole,but this was exceptional.

i guess i am coming from the dispassionate analysis camp.

i hope i wasn't coming across that i was dismissing the moral argument,because that was not my intention.i actually AGREE with the moral argument.i was just trying to add facets to the argument that a lot of people appeared to not even be considering.

i hold many liberal and progressive attitudes,and maybe i am just an old crotchety coot nowadays,but in my opinion..the left has lost it's way.

binary politics does not work.
dem vs repub does not work.
left vs right does not work.
demonizing people and calling them names....
does not work.

there has been a slow revolution in american politics,and has been over the past four decades.
what sheldon wolin called "inverted totalitarianism " and what john ralston saul deemed a "corporate coup detat'".

that battle is over...and we lost.

and i think that slow realization has finally sunk into the american psyche.

do i agree with their choice?
oh hell no...their choice is horrifying.
was a trump victory akin to a petulant child?
i guess thats as good analogy as any other,but now WE have to deal with the consequences.
all of us.(even including non-americans.so yeah..sorry bout this guys).

so just how do we tackle this new problem we face?

i say we start by not calling people idiots.
just a thought.

To more directly respond to the video though, the answer, as they already talked about is the media's fault. Bernie, despite his open socialism, is not very controversial. He's nuanced, shown that he can give complex answers to complex problems and actually seems to be interested in governance.

THOSE THINGS ARE BORING! Doing your job well is often boring. Media doesn't like boring. The media has their profits to think about, so they're going to generate controversy.

This is not groundbreaking at all. I call it the Cartman effect. South Park episodes usually focus on what crazy thing Cartman is going to do next. The show revolves around it. He does completely insane, amoral, disgusting things that no one should ever do...but the audience laps it up. Similar thing occurs with Sheldon of The Big Bang Theory. As I've already compared it to, Reality shows do the exact same thing. The contestant who everyone hates is kept on as long as possible, who otherwise would have been eliminated long ago. People love to hate that person. They keep watching to see what they'll do next.

This perfectly describes Trump. People who will never vote for him in a million years still follow what he does just to see what happens next. This also describes Fox "News" It recently just got ranked the highest in viewership for 2015 again. The right loves to pretend that means that their views are popular. No, that just means everyone wants to watch the trainwreck.

This is also why the Republican debates got more press than the Democratic ones. All the Republican candidates were fighting each other tooth and nail. All were going after Trump. There were a lot of catfights and lots of drama. Meanwhile, in the Democrat debates, everyone gets along. Even when they disagree, they do so in a constructive manner and everyone gets along. No drama, therefore no press. Being serious is boring and that doesn't generate ad revenue for media.

Having an outrageous, controversial candidate is still not enough to get elected though, in fact it cuts both ways. When you put forth a "Cartman" candidate, sure it rallies lots of supporters. But it also rallies lots of opponents (or more) against the candidate. This is exactly what happened with Palin.

Elections have turned into being more about voting against the person you don't want than voting for the person that should be in office. "Anybody but X"

i would not say i am anti-establishment but rather suspicious of power and authority,and rightly so in my opinion,but thats all that is..my opinion.

i tend to post chomsky because he is the most quoted and since he is so critical of power his research tends to be thoroughly vetted.i also post:chris hedges,henry giroux,sheldon wolin,carl popper all whom are extremely critical of the current power structures.

my faith dictates my politics and to me the argument is always,and i mean always:power vs powerlessness

i am critical of power.
i challenge authority and question its validity,forcing said authority to prove its relevance in todays society.

just because i criticize and challenge current power structure in no way dismisses the very good and beneficial accomplishments of the society i reside in.there are many positives to be acknowledged and applauded,but we must be vigilant and do our due diligence in order to challenge extremely powerful forces that seek to undermine the myriad of hard-won rights and privileges in order to benefit themselves at the detriment of everybody else.

so while my politics may be perceived as radical by some,it is not radical at all to me.which should be self-evident.

and disagreement is not only fine by me but welcomed,and i am glad you will engage with me (some people fear conflict).engagement forces me to refine and examine my own ideologies and if they are found lacking,then they must be discarded.without challenge and criticism we will all sit in our own hubris,an echo chamber of our own insular ideologies,smelling our own farts.

now where is the fun in that?

anyways..always a pleasure sparring with ya.
stay awesome brother and merry christmas happy new year!

@newtboy
thats why i love you brother!
it is your optimism that i absolutely adore,sincerely.

notice my wording:ideology vs reality.

in the first part of my argument i actually agree with you,though we may use different terms.

i think we may be crossing lines due to verbiage.
when i say "power" i am referring to what is my opinion,a plutocracy,so my argument flows from that perspective.

sheldon wolin makes an excellent example but uses the term "inverted totalitarianism" in his book "democracy incorporated".

you are making an ideological argument that is based on rights SHOULD be protected..in theory,but i do not see play out in reality.if you look at the history of how rights have been obtained over the past 100 years alone you will see that not ONE was ever just offered by our government.each and every one has been hard fought (and died) for.

now moving on to your texas reference,well...i totally agree with you but that is revisionism not indoctrination,at least in the manner in which i am referencing that term.

when i say this video makes a case for indoctrination i say so with my subjective AND objective understandings.
subjectively:i believe that the onus is on the very person,institution or government to prove they have a right to said authority.
objectively:this video...although extremely over-simplified..makes its case that there is a concerted effort to get very young children to tacitly submit to a centralized authority.

now when we consider what education actually IS,and this is not the thread to truly dissect such a complicated and multi-faceted subject but suffice to say,as succinct as i can:
education is the teaching of abilities,to consume data and information in order to come to informed and well-thought out conclusions,to better understand our:world,society and the reality we reside.

to be taught the skills the dissect and disseminate complex problems and the ability to formulate questions which can push boundaries and challenge pre-conceived ideologies.

so with that definition in mind.
how can we be expected to view this than anything other than a ploy to get that young mind to tacitly submit to a central authority?

and this is for 2nd graders? these kids are 8 yrs old!

education should be giving kids the tools to challenge and question not blindly submit.we might as well call the government jesus the way this thing is being taught.

so if you look at a religious family and find how they "indoctrinate" their young children into the ways of the church,then you should have the exact same problem with this tactic.

because the tactics being used are identical.

His last point, the one they dubbed soft authoritarianism, was outlined rather nicely as inverted totalitarianism by Sheldon Wolin.

posted wolin/hedges interview from TRNN.thought you might be interested ...wolin is looking his age.might be the last interview with this great mind:
http://videosift.com/video/sheldon-wolin-can-capitalism-and-democracy-coexist

http://videosift.com/video/sheldon-wolin-can-capitalism-and-democracy-coexist
posted.only 5 parts up so far but its pretty interesting.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/bill-moyers-sheldon-wolin-democracy-incorporated