I think this is pretty much a dupe of the other one, but meh.. the sound bite is so good that it deserves it's own sift.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Wow. Funny, edgy stuff. But did he go too far on some of these? Faux News is going to rip these into little out of context sound bites for consumption in Jesus-stan.

^Doc_M
Yeah, that was what I meant, but in a stupid, sound-bite sort of fashion

Our kind of sex is of course much more sophisticated and reliable, but in both cases the end result is a new individual where the genes are mixed together from both its "parents".

Personally I agree with what DFT and Ornthoron suggest, the labels themselves are more the problem than either socialism or capitalism in themselves is. We, and most other nations, have always had aspects that were socialist, capitalist, and a few other things such as authoritarian besides at times or in places. The difference tends to be in degree, what policies or areas they are applied in and to what extent. Extremes of any in the wrong places can get pretty ugly, the trick is more in finding the right balance between them. We're just so used to sound bite politics and easy two minute answers that we forgot real problem solving involves a bit more time, effort, and judgment than that. That's the thinking that got us into this problem and it won't get us out.

Drug war, war on terror, finances, and so on, it's all the same. We want easy one step bumper sticker answers and real life just won't cooperate with us on that. What we need are intelligent processes that keep all options open and adjust as needed based on current conditions and past results. I hold little hope of us actually getting it though. It won't happen just because it should and the American people for the most part can't be bothered to get involved in their own lives and nation, they'd rather watch reality TV. If we want better we've got to make it happen and I don't think we will.

Well, he seems to have all the stereotypical gestures and sounds bites of a career politician down pat.

I don't think his mother gave birth to him at all, I think he was probably just assembled in Alabama with spare parts from dead republicans. Coulter was probably so excited about the project he donated his penis.

New blood is new blood, but it's pretty sad when both your party and your country are in a state of crisis and free fall that you turn to a 14 year old for guidance and ideas; that goes for any political party that would be so desperate to retain some amount of its power.

If he actually turns out to be the one that "saves" the republican party, I'll eat my hat.

This makes me so happy. I can't believe how much those little sound bites add to my day. I just forwarded this about...

I give him a B.

On the economic questions, he gets an A overall. He showed a pretty solid command of the subject, without letting himself get in over his head. Good mix of sound bites and substantive answers. Same with the issues of bipartisanship and changing the culture of Washington.

On the foreign policy questions, he gets a C. He kind of stumbled on the question of Iran a bit, and said a couple of things he probably shouldn't have. But overall, he kept the right tone and sense of openness to diplomacy that he's promised. He also skillfully avoided any entrapment in regards to Afghanistan troop deployment and overall strategy (military and diplomatic). I would like to have heard some more comprehensive and substantive replies on the issues regarding central Asia.

On Helen Thomas' question. They both get an F. He was clearly upset by the question, cutting her off at the end, and didn't give her a straight answer (which would not have to have been compromising). But WTF was she thinking asking that second question, "Do you know of any countries in the middle east that have nuclear weapons?" Are you fucking kidding? Even if he knew for certain, had seen the weapons with his own eyes, did she really think he would, could, or should acknowledge that? What possible purpose would be served by the President not only compromising our intelligence, but outing an undeclared nuclear power? I have immense respect for Helen Thomas, but what an inane question.

Oh I definitely agree with you Dystopian, but the part I feel is being misrepresented is that this headline of "Limbaugh hopes Obama fails" makes it sound like Rush would spitefully prefer that America go further into economic/social recession rather than hope some good will come of the new administration.

It isn't so much Limbaugh that I'm defending, but rather the media that I am exposing at sensationalizing a sound-bite that doesn't mean what they imply it to.

Edit: it reminds me of the recent hoopla concerning Dennis Leary's new book which some of the media took a chapter on autism out of context and claimed that Dennis was saying that Autism doesn't exist and that the parents are just douchbags. In reality, the criticism was about parents who don't want to raise their children right and just self-diagnose them with autism to explain misbehavior and poor parenting. Leary's point was that parents who use the disease to cover those things up detract from the REAL cases of autism which he clearly states in the same chapter are not in any way "fake."

To me this is a similar situation where the media takes a small snippet out of context and blows it way out of proportions creating more discord. Mind you, I don't doubt that there are idiots out there who will read the headline and agree with the misinterpreted message.

A sheep says "Baaaaaaaa", if my childhood speaking toys were at all accurate.

I watched all of it, and I want my 30 minutes back. I was waiting for some actual evidence to back up the claims being made here. They make broad, damning accusations, most of which I had not heard before (though some I had heard from John Bolton, who I do not respect). If I am to be convinced of any of it, they need to back these up with something other than additional unsubstantiated claims or playing the same sound-bite clips two or three times. To me, these guys sound like "UFOlogists".

I am not convinced that an organization like the UN, which does not seem terribly effective in most ways, and in which the US has veto power, is in any position to negate any part of US constitution or establish world "dictatorship" that resembles China in the 50s. I see no danger that the UN will eliminate Christianity in the US. It *might* be true, but this video does not convince me of that. We get one guy pointing out a few sentences from a UN resolution that is similar to a law passed in the US. That does not necessarily mean that that law was written by the UN and forced onto the US. Again, it *might* be true, but the video does not convince me.

The statements I could verify, which were few (and I didn't really try very hard--you are very welcome to convince me), I found to be patently false. Such as the idea that Atheism and Paganism are the same thing, or that humanism is based on the occult. I see no signs of pressure from the UN to eliminate the 2nd amendment or any other part of the Bill of Rights. I am unaware of any statements or resolutions by the UN that are related to enforcing any type of religion. I tried the Google search suggested at the end of the first video and found some legislation that is absolutely disturbing (The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act), but which has nothing whatsoever to do with the UN.

In my opinion, a nation that adheres to the treaties it has signed is not surrendering its sovereignty--it is exercising it. Just as a man who honors his promises is not less of a man for it.

I think that many aspects of freedom and privacy of Americans are under threat, but these threats are coming from within the US, not from the UN.

A sheep would buy the argument of whoever shouts the loudest, and these guys are shouting pretty loud. A sheep would agree with an argument just because Ron Paul or The John Birch Society made it. I am skeptical about this video. That may be because I am badly informed, but is not a sign of my being a sheep. I usually enjoy the videos you submit and the arguments you make, CP, so I was extra disappointed with this one. I would like for you to enlighten me about some of the issues here, thereby redeeming part of my 30 minutes, but name-calling will not do that. I'd like to see some discussion, which is why I did not down-vote the video even though I was so thoroughly unimpressed with it.

It's not a long article. I'll just post it and save you guys the click:

Obama is Stoking Racial Antagonism
by Rush Limbaugh

I understand the rough and tumble of politics. But Barack Obama -- the supposedly postpartisan, postracial candidate of hope and change -- has gone where few modern candidates have gone before.

Mr. Obama's campaign is now trafficking in prejudice of its own making. And in doing so, it is playing with political dynamite. What kind of potential president would let his campaign knowingly extract two incomplete, out-of-context lines from two radio parodies and build a framework of hate around them in order to exploit racial tensions? The segregationists of the 1950s and 1960s were famous for such vile fear-mongering.

Here's the relevant part of the Spanish-language television commercial Mr. Obama is running in Hispanic communities:

"They want us to forget the insults we've put up with . . . the intolerance . . . they made us feel marginalized in this country we love so much."

Then the commercial flashes two quotes from me: ". . . stupid and unskilled Mexicans" and "You shut your mouth or you get out!"

And then a voice says, "John McCain and his Republican friends have two faces. One that says lies just to get our vote . . . and another, even worse, that continues the policies of George Bush that put special interests ahead of working families. John McCain . . . more of the same old Republican tricks."

Much of the media that is uninterested in Mr. Obama's connections to unrepentant 1970s Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers and Rev. Jeremiah Wright have so far gone along with the attempt to tie me to Mr. McCain. But Mr. McCain and I have not agreed on how to address illegal immigration. While I am heartened by his willingness to start by securing the borders, it is no secret that we have fundamental differences on illegal immigration.

And more to the point, these sound bites are a deception, and Mr. Obama knows it. The first sound bite was extracted from a 1993 humorous monologue poking fun at the arguments against the North American Free Trade Agreement. Here's the context:

"If you are unskilled and uneducated, your job is going south. Skilled workers, educated people are going to do fine 'cause those are the kinds of jobs Nafta is going to create. If we are going to start rewarding no skills and stupid people, I'm serious, let the unskilled jobs that take absolutely no knowledge whatsoever to do -- let stupid and unskilled Mexicans do that work."

My point, which is obvious, was that the people who were criticizing Nafta were demeaning workers, particularly low-skilled workers. I was criticizing the mind-set of the protectionists who opposed the treaty. There was no racial connotation to it and no one thought there was at the time. I was demeaning the arguments of the opponents.

As for the second sound bite, I was mocking the Mexican government's double standard -- i.e., urging open borders in this country while imposing draconian immigration requirements within its own borders. Thus, I took the restrictions Mexico imposes on immigrants and appropriated them as my own suggestions for a new immigration law.

Here's the context for that sound bite: "And another thing: You don't have the right to protest. You're allowed no demonstrations, no foreign flag waving, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our president or his policies. You're a foreigner: shut your mouth or get out! And if you come here illegally, you're going to jail."

At the time, I made abundantly clear that this was a parody on the Mexican government's hypocrisy and nobody took it otherwise.

The malignant aspect of this is that Mr. Obama and his advisers know exactly what they are doing. They had to listen to both monologues or read the transcripts. They then had to pick the particular excerpts they used in order to create a commercial of distortions. Their hoped-for result is to inflame racial tensions. In doing this, Mr. Obama and his advisers have demonstrated a pernicious contempt for American society.

We've made much racial progress in this country. Any candidate who employs the tactics of the old segregationists is unworthy of the presidency.

I'm thinking that McCain can call bullshit that has been thrown at him, and considering the massive amount of it, he does very well. Apart from only having the support of the far right media, he's alone other than the sound bites he can get. Of course, the rest of the media would rather focus on....oh, lets say...."that one".
That is the only soundbite you will be hearing from last night.

She honestly does sound a lot more rational when you hear her past sound bites, but she's clearly confused about the moment of conception, and simply saying that she wouldn't want to send someone to jail for getting an abortion doesn't imply she'll keep it legal. She does certainly come off as far more reasonable and moderate with her positions on teaching creationism, and gay rights, but then she may simply be feigning those kind of views to bring in the independent and swing Democrats when she knows she has the religious right wing in the bag.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Nice fast fingers in the control room to get that sound-bite queued.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

It's in the Slate article, the "disastrous sound bite" link.

My comment about the stock market and the dollar requiring "belief" may be shorthand, but it is still rock solid true.

During the Great Depression, the stock market collapsed and the banks went under when all "belief" in them failed.

When we left behind the "gold standard" -- that is, there wasn't enough gold in vaults to match the money printed, the dollar was valuable only because the entire system was "believed in."

And absolute FORTUNES were made during the Depression by folks who had the resources to go in and buy up all the undervalued stock. Buy when others sell in a panic -- that's one way to make some money.

I know that the dollar is shaky right now -- we have got to do something about our debt to China blah blah.

I still contend that McCain is correct in his impulse to calm everyone down. He isn't absurdly out of touch -- despite Obama and Januari repeating that same phrase -- he is doing the responsible thing.

And he has had to back off from it and now says that psychobabble b.s. about meaning that the "American Worker is fundamentally sound." Give me a break.

It's political sound bite gotcha, and I hate it.