(V): again... not talking about entertainment, just the so called 'news'

here is a mild example I just witnessed.... the news anchor says "no surprise, but Obama has been named man of the year for time magazine".... is it really their job to tell us if we should be surprised about a news story???? Just tell us the story and let us decide if we are surprised or whatever?

He goes on to tell us about other people considered, including, he says with a smirk on his face, sarah palin


Look, I know this example is a minor one, but it is the tip of the iceburg, and it happens all the time in a far more egregious amnner

(V): I am not complaining about not enough pro conservative points of view... the point is that so called "news" should not be biased. I know its not possible to be completely unbiased, just the fact that a story is chosen to be aired shows some sort of bias in and of itself.

Its bad enough that we have to endure bias on shows like david letterman or saturday night live, thats their choice and it is so called entertainment, there are plenty of outlets for peoples biases to shine without bringing it to our news.... in a way we conservatives should be happy about the fact that libs are so afraid of conservatives that they feel like they need to slant their news stories and warp our minds just to make liberalism more tolerable.

anastasia: hillbilly



LMAO! I believe you have just coined a new phrase without even realizing it...That is the best name I have ever heard for Hillary!!!!

Billary was a good one, but hillbilly is awsome!

(V): So they keep each other in check... you have conservative biased networks and liberal biased networks who take each other to task exactly like your political parties do.


Thing is, there is not one other news outlet that is pro conservative besides fox, and I believe that fox actually only slants like that because there has to be at least one guy pushing back against the overwhelmingly liberal news media.

Even government sponsored (all citizens pay for) tv stations, like pbn are so obviously liberal biased, its just a joke. And dont tell me it used to be that way in favor of bush and the republicans, I dont remember it that way, I would like to see some evidence for that one.

Like Art said, it doesnt have to be really obvious.... just look at the next political scandal that comes along, if it is a republican, it is almost always part of the lead, that they are republican, it is part of the story, but if it is a democrat, well it might get mentioned, but it is not part of the story, it happens all the time.... "breaking news, republican blah blah blah".... or "breaking news, joe blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah democratic blah blah blah blah".

Jim Dandy: The "fear" I mentioned isn't in the same league


...maybe I shouldnt put words into your mouth, maybe you can tell me exactly what you mean with the above comment? Because I happen to believe that it isnt 'fear mongering' when it is backed up by evidence, and so the 'fear' you mentioned isnt really 'fear mongering' at all...

Jim Dandy: Its not about word games.... you implied that the fear Bush used to get us into war was a lie and cost us way more than the fear dems use on the elderly and the poor uneducated, which you imply is more accurate and less costly, so that somehow makes it less of a problem?

anastasia: You may think they are all over it, and as far as the Governor is concerned, you may be correct.... but image this was a republican, and instead of Obama it was Bush???? Obama says he had no involvement, and thats it, God has spoken and everyone goes on their merry way.... I find it hard to believe it would be the same for Bush, the press would be crawling under every rock looking for even the most vague connection!

Jim Dandy: The "fear" I mentioned isn't in the same league


I agree... the fear you mentioned is REAL(see 9/11), and the fear I mentioned is imagined, so, no, they are not in the same league at all!

coan.net: why does the thought of going to war against Iran scare you? I would be more scared of Iran with the ability to arm terrorists with nuke weapons, but that is just me.

Jim Dandy: fear is a very valuable tool


Yeah, like when liberals scared the elderly into believing that mean republicans were going to take away their social security, or when liberals scared the poor uneducated minorities that mean republicans were going to take away their welfare, without scare tactics aimed at ignorant people, democrats wouldnt have near their support base!

anastasia: Good point.... after all, it is all our money, both what the congress makes and what they are planning on giving away to the auto....

I mean, since we just bailed out the banks, cant we make them give loans to the autos?

Artful Dodger: a huge blow which the US economy could not withstand."

I have to agree with you on this one, except that I am sure economists would have opposite opinions just as scientists have different views on global warming.

I tend to believe that the US economy would be resilient enough to rebound from anything sooner or later.... just like the global climates

anastasia: Upper management SHOULD give back..

If I were in congress right now, I would tell them that I would not listen to one word they have to say until each and everyone there begging for us to help them survive was to quit!

Only then would I be assured they have the best interest of the industry in mind and not their own well being!

coan.net: As anastasia has said - it is more of a loan then a bailout.


I dont have to read more than that right there to know it is a bad idea! If this was really a loan and a good idea, then there would be hundreds of private banks etc lining up to give them financial help! The fact that they are asking the federal government for help tells me straight away that they have no banks or other private institutions that think this is not a huge risk! Why should we take a risk that nobody else thinks is worth it?

What thet are asking for, pure and simple is a bail out, it is notever going to get paid back, using the word 'loan' is a bunch of crap!

Artful Dodger: Nice story AD! About sums it up doesnt it?

I think it already has run its cycle....

But the answer is, a little bit of both?

coan.net: You got it.... sell them on the streets, thats the best way to get rid of old drugs, and profitable as well

Pedro Martínez: I believe I had actually never commented on this issue here.

I know I am losing my mind now... I would have sworn... must have been Gogul, or Andre or someone like that who told me what an idiot I was for not supporting it (the kyoto)

anyway, I have debated with so many for so long on so many topics, no wonder I confuse myself!

Oh yeah, you supported invading Iraq too right?

anastasia: Sorry, I kind of respond to them as I read them, there were 25 unread when I got here... I thought I remember a few days back on gen chat you were surprised that I didnt agree with the global warming crowd? Anyway, from what I read lately you seem to have moderated more on the topic, and although you are for environmental protection, you arent out there saying we need to ruin economies to keep the glaciers from melting and the sea from flooding NY.

Pedro Martínez: My bad memory I guess... seems to me you used to be one of the biggest supporters of the Kyoto Protocol and a huge proponent of 'global warming'?

Jim Dandy: He's in alot of trouble,did you not hear of his arrest today?


LOL, sounds like politics as usual to me, isnt everything for sale in some fashion or another?

coan.net: but I don't like the idea of the governor picking either

Yeah, whats up with that anyway? What if the governor is from a different party? I think the senate can refuse to let the nominee in anyway, but then does the governor pick someone else? How does it work? I see that in NY they are gonna give Hillaries spot to Kennedy, girl, just because her name is Kennedy? She has never been in any political position her whole life?

Anyway, seems like weird deal, but was probably always like this, just never noticed before.

Pedro Martínez: So if we said OK, now we'll move back to caves, stop using all the "pollutants", etc etc, it would stop the sea level from rising, it would stop the glaciers from melting? I have to apologize to you for what I am now going to say, but that's just an unbelievable ignorance of the entire history of our planet, it's just so ridiculous. You know what's the biggest threat to Earth? People like you.


Did somebody give you a lobotomy while you were gone?

anastasia: I think man can stop the climate changes from going any further by reducing polution and other greenhouse gasses into the air.....plant more trees,preserve what we have


Before man and our pollution and our greenhouse gases, what cause the climate to change back then?

(V): I dont think anybody is arguing that man does not have an effect on the planet!

Its just are we really 1 year away from irreversible and catastrophic problems if we dont ruin our economy even more by adopting the Kyoto protocol?

This is so true! I mean, are we supposed to believe that..... if Gore did not get ripped off from becoming president he never would have figured out that we only had 3 years left to save the planet from irreversible climate change? (that was 2 years ago)

Whew! How close was that one then? Everybody complaining that he really won the presidency, but if he had, the world would be lost forever!

(V): . I plan to here for at least another 30-50 years... what about you?

The point about us being dead, was that most people dont really care about after we are dead, its all about today...

I listen to the news and they say something like, it hasnt been this warm since 2002, or we havent had unemployment like this since 2005..etc... like its some earth shattering thing!


let me know when its five straight years of decline, not sure where I am going with this, early here still, I just want people to be able to see a bigger picture than just how am I affected today or the past 4 years, and say that we have a great foundation that has worked for 200 years, dont panic now and make changes that are good for the short term but have no real future....

(V): I am not saying that Obamas ideas arent god ones or that they wont work or are not doable, I just am not sure they are any type of permanent solutions to our economy... the government pumping money into the infrastructure will be good for everyone, and it will provide temporary jobs, but what happens when the road or the bridge is built, and the high speed cable is buried, then what do the construction workers do? What do the restaurants and the other hospitality people do after construction wrokers are gone? Its just not a long term sustainable plan, but who cares right??? we will all be dead by then, and someone else can figure out what to do then, right?

anastasia:
so now global warming doesn't exsist??

Well, yes the globe has been warming recently, if thats what you mean, but I think these days the term global warming is a generic term for permanent climate change.... and no I dont believe it is permanent nor is it not reversible.

It was a couple of years ago already when Gore told us that in 3 years it will be too late, that we had to reverse it now or it would be too late... I cant wait for the end of the 3 years to see what they will say then, when we have done almost nothing....

Tell me, how does Al Gore know for certain that a planet millions of years old has 3 years left before the tipping point of no return???

Our globe has been warming since the last ice age. and before that it was cooling, and before it cooled it was warming.. hehehehe its what this planet does, its nature, are you really suggesting that we change nature?

Yes, man does have an influence and an impact on our environment, and yes, I am all for conservation and all the carbon foot print blah blah blah, my personal carbon foot print is a lot smaller than Gores, I can guarantee you that!

You might be one who hates the big bad greedy oil companies... well believe me, there are some pretty greedy people out there ready to make billions on this global warming hype too! Dont be naive enough to think its all just conscientious people pushing this hype, there is a lot of money to be made by many pushing this thing, and its not all about saving the planet to them either.

BTW, last i heard, the ice glaciers were growing again?

Jim Dandy: Repairing the infrastructure is a wise move in this place in time.It's not going to solve the financial mess,but it's a logical start point towards the big picture.


I agree, its a good plan, I think federal government should be responsible for infrastructure types of projects, and I have no problem paying for them, and they do provide jobs,at least on a short term basis, IE 10 years or so.

(V): I am not sure the kind of economic stimulation we will get from Obama is something sustainable 20 or 30 years down the road? At some point these are really temporary jobs created. Not that it wont help in the short run, but its not an economic plan to stand the test of time.

Its no different than anything else these days, our economy over the past 200 years has been second to none, but everyone just wants to look at the last 4.

The globe has gone through many climate changes in its long history, but now we hear people complain they havent seen it so hot in their lifetimes as some sort of definitive irreversible global warming hysteria.

Czuch: ENERGY: "[W]e will launch a massive effort to make public buildings more energy-efficient. Our government now pays the highest energy bill in the world. We need to change that. We need to upgrade our federal buildings by replacing old heating systems and installing efficient light bulbs. That won't just save you, the American taxpayer, billions of dollars each year. It will put people back to work."

—ROADS AND BRIDGES: "[W]e will create millions of jobs by making the single largest new investment in our national infrastructure since the creation of the federal highway system in the 1950s. We'll invest your precious tax dollars in new and smarter ways, and we'll set a simple rule – use it or lose it. If a state doesn't act quickly to invest in roads and bridges in their communities, they'll lose the money."

—SCHOOLS: "[M]y economic recovery plan will launch the most sweeping effort to modernize and upgrade school buildings that this country has ever seen. We will repair broken schools, make them energy-efficient, and put new computers in our classrooms. Because to help our children compete in a 21st century economy, we need to send them to 21st century schools."

—BROADBAND: "As we renew our schools and highways, we'll also renew our information superhighway. It is unacceptable that the United States ranks 15th in the world in broadband adoption. Here, in the country that invented the Internet, every child should have the chance to get online, and they'll get that chance when I'm president – because that's how we'll strengthen America's competitiveness in the world."

(Incoming White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had talked about expanding broadband access, but this is the first time the transition has formally proposed it.)

—ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS: "In addition to connecting our libraries and schools to the Internet, we must also ensure that our hospitals are connected to each other through the Internet. That is why the economic recovery plan I'm proposing will help modernize our health care system – and that won't just save jobs, it will save lives. We will make sure that every doctor's office and hospital in this country is using cutting edge technology and electronic medical records so that we can cut red tape, prevent medical mistakes, and help save billions of dollars each year."

I dont think he can deliver most of what he promised. I think he is learning rather quickly that his promise for a fast end to the war is not possible nor prudent, and the funding for a lot of his other promises was based on savings from not being in a war.

(V): So, you are trying to tell me that there are idealists in all parties... that's no surprise.

I tend to think of myself as a realist, I dont think utopia is achievable nor do I subscribe that we attempt to attain it.

(V): Is that why under Bush the USA national debt has sky rocketed.

Partly because of a war, partly because he didnt stay true to his conservative root, and he acted more like a liberal.

Vikings:

anastasia: So instead of the portion of the tax revenue that would go to the public school to babysit, I mean teach, your child, that portion of the budget would go to you to use for your child in the private school, and then you would have to pay any balance for the private school out of your own pocket.


How do you feel about not having any children yet still having to pay school taxes?

Artful Dodger: Since you have the ability to edit in here, maybe every once in awhile you could add something to the top of the page, something like a suggested topic for the day or week , something to help change the focus of an old debate, or to get something going when it gets slow... kind of like vikes changing the name of a specific board now and again to reflect a certain topic, like is Obama really change we can believe in?

Just an idea!

(V): Demons tend to be well... just shadows.

Well I personally know some of those shadows.... yes I even shared some of the cool aid back in the day, thats partly why i am so passionate in my attempts to enlighten people to some of my views.... I am sure i know way more people who have started where I did and become conservatives than there are conservatives who later in life see the light of liberalism

Liberals tend to be idealists, so do young and innocent and frankly, naiive people... idealism may be a fine, acid induced theme for a song or two, but I dont see it as a sound political venue

(V): Regardless if it's a public or private boost up.



Well a public boost up usually means ripping the cash right out of my wallet, not so with a private boost up! You never seem to mention the up to 70% taxes some people pay in socialized countries, or the 9 dollar a gallon of gas and the like, its a matter of priorities, government boost costs more money than private boosts do, I prefer to keep more of my own hard earned money to do with as i please and let the private sector take most of the load, leaving the government to do only what is necessary thereafter...

you obviously dont mind handing the government your hard earned money to boost others with, i personally dont think the government is very good at spending money, huge amounts of waste everywhere, you always hear about the $1000 dollars the government spends on a bolt or whatever.. you obviously think your money is best spent by government bureaucrats, my experience is that government bureaucrats are not very thrifty when it comes to spending money, and when it is my money they are spending, well it relly bothers me!

(V): I really do think you have pre conceived ideas of what liberalism stands for that are wrong.


I am sure I do, and I look forward to finding out what they are? I admit that one problem I have is blanketing all liberals with the broad brush of the far left..... I know just like conservatives there is a continuum from far extreme to moderate, and maybe a place in the middle where they cross. I know there are some fiscal conservatives, for the open and free markets with little government interference who are also socially minded when it comes to welfare etc. and some just the opposite too.

I dont think you though quite have a grasp on what the American liberal actually represents.... as it seems to me to be a bit different from what they are over there?

But let me assure you that generally speaking when you hear about what I refer to as silly rules like no keeping score in youth sports, that 99% of the time comes from the mind of some bleeding heart well intended but misguided liberal!

and it comes from the hippie days of the john lennon 60s where we dream of the day when we all live in a commune and all share in all the chores and grow food for everyone to share and are all happy and sing and hold hands and we give peace a chance... its all a good dream on acid, and those people have grown up and have their own children and they still have their drug induced fantasies and they are trying to implement that fantasy dream into the reality for their children, and they believe if we just make everyone the same with no haves and no have not and no one person better or smarter or faster of richer or poorer, then we will just have this happy magical world.... and some of these people have made their way into politics and have made their idyllic dreams into some laws and rules and regulations.... and in a few years those people will all be dead, and left in their wake we will have a huge mess of mediocrity, and grown children who do not have the instincts for survival or the prowess to strive fro excellence, and America will not be the proud leader and innovater that I grew up with and love!



See now??? Do you see the demons I have to live with every single day of my life??? The demons that I try to fight in here and everywhere I go, day in and day out? Do you see now where i come from??? Somebody anybody please please help me, help me, help me...

Artful Dodger: He still may get out in 5 years... i wonder if in his parole will be where he gets the most prejudice from the system in regards to his past?

Artful Dodger: Any thoughts on vouchers? I would think that public schools would be happy the more kids they could get out of their system and into private schools, making their student ratio easier to manage?

(V): but that we are all equal or in some respects are is not a liberal idea


I am not saying liberals think we are all equal, liberals think we all should be and have to be equal or they feel some sort of guilt about it, and do all in their power to remove that guilt by implementing silly rules and laws designed to even the playing field for everyone.... like somehow not keeping score in a game really changes the fact that someone got their butts kicked!hahah

ellieoop: I dont think you will get much debate on that one! Not too many people feel sorry for OJ right now, I just hope this had no revenge factor to it, as it seems legit that it did not!

Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and affairs?

again i just dont like the redundancy of the word politics, replacing it with the word affairs?

hahah, shocked coming from me that I am against redundant anything huh?

Artful Dodger: Children from affluent homes generally do better in school anyway so it stands to reason that private school would fare better.

This is true it seems... affluent parents are likely better educated than non affluent parents, making it more likely that the level of education in the home from the parents is likely higher in affluent homes, helping the child to do better in school than the child from the non affluent home.

I also agree that there are many public schools that do better than private ones, but in general and overall, private has got to win out, even if simply based on the student teacher ratio, i think my school it was something like 8 or 9 to 1!!!

Artful Dodger: Yeah, kind of a current events gen chat without all the fluff...

anastasia: is it for only political debates or all kinds of debates??


Dont worry, I can find a way to make any debate about politics, so its all good here!