![[mccookgazette.com]](http://www.mccookgazette.com/images/nameplate31.png)
|
|
Fair ~ High: 87°F ~ Low: 57°F Wednesday, May 16, 2012 |
|
Common MisconceptionsPosted Tuesday, June 9, 2009, at 10:26 AM
There has been a lot of mudslinging on the blogs as late and thought I would take a second to correct some of the misconceptions.
Most liberals are Christians, not all Conservatives are. If you are a regular reader of any of the blogs on here, you have probably gotten the impression from the constant beating of the drums that most if not all Liberals are non-Christian. That is just simply not true. The same goes for Conservatives. Though, the number of Conservatives who count themselves as Christian is slightly higher than the liberal count, there are people on both ends of the spectrum, that are non-Christian. But the last time I checked, this was the United States, a non-denominational country. It wasn't founded as a Christian country. It was supposed to be a country where one could practice their own religion in privacy and not have to worry about being persecuted, from either side of the political spectrum. Rush Limbaugh is not the leader of the Republican Party. The fact is, right now, there is no true leader that a majority of the party can get behind. They will find one. Let's hope, for their sake, that it doesn't take as long as it for the Democrats to find someone they could get behind. Liberals aren't always right. We like to think we are, but in the end we are only human and we will make mistakes. There has been a lot in the media about the federal government buying out GM and then the company still having to file bankruptcy. There has been little about the attempted buying of Chrysler by a foreign company. I blame the media for this. Speaking of the media. There is not "liberal" or "conservative" bias in the major networks. On cable on the other hand, oh boy. First their is Fox News, though they won't admit to it, has a very conservative bias at their network. There have been several emails released from the top of Fox News that have often parroted the Republican talking points for the day. They often will splice and cut a speech that President Obama has given to give its viewers the impression that he has said something completely different than what he said. Then there is MSNBC, who is trying to be to the liberals what Fox News is to the conservatives. They have three devout liberals on between 5 and 9 o'clock at night. Then there's Chris Matthews, whose show is on twice. I don't really know what to make of Chris. He seems to like to sit on both sides of the fence. Those who don't like him, like to say that he is a liberal, but any true liberal will tell you straight up that he is no liberal. I won't even touch education on this blog. I have tried setting the record straight, but the hate for the American Educational System on this site is so strong it's futile to argue the truth. Maybe, though, I reached one person and in education these days that's the best you can hope for. You want to reach all of them, teach them something they didn't know before, but in the end if I reached one person on here then I am a success. An eye for an eye is never the answer no matter how badly you despise someone for what they do. That is why I will never ask another torture defender to actually go through waterboarding to prove to me that waterboarding isn't torture. The two ideological sides have been competing from day one and we have made it over 200 years, what we are seeing now is no different than any other time period where there has been a deep divide between the two sides. This too shall pass. Stephen Colbert is not a conservative. He plays one on today. Yelling at one side about insulting and degrading and then doing it yourself is not the answer, and yes I have been guilty of this, but I am not the only one. Denying that you are guilty of it is ... well ... Bill O'Reillyish. Liberals and Conservatives are not evil people we are just humans with different beliefs. We need to find common ground and we can if both sides actually work on it instead of trying to convince the other side that we are right and they are wrong and all would be better if they would just agree. The United States has been a country that has run in a blend of most ideologies for most of its history, that's why our government, our way of life is called "The Great Experiment". To say that now, just since Obama has come into office, other ideologies are seeping in to our government and economy is ignore our great history. Our government and economy work at their best as a blend of all ideologies. The United States is not a democracy it is a republic, where the people are represented. If it were a TRUE democracy we all would hold office at some level, not just those voted in. Finally, the sun rises in the east. Comments Showing comments in chronological order [Show most recent comments first] |
Hot topics A Case Against Merit Pay(12 ~ 6:08 PM, Mar 2)
Hot Springs, America's First National Park
President Obama's Speech
A Most Disgusting Lie
Republicans and the Far-Right Have Hit Rock Bottom
|
Email link
Read comments (24)
Blog archive
![[Feed icon]](http://www.mccookgazette.com/images/icons/feed-icon-14x14.png){kind=icon}
You know, steffanie, you still haven't explained away your lying about who you are. First you said you were a student at the school that I taught at then you had no idea when school let out for the summer.
So, anything you say is just dust in the wind as far as I am concerned.
So I caught you in a lie and your response is to deny it and then claim that I am lying? Is that what you were trying to say?
What does that even mean steffanie? I wasn't debating you I was asking a question.
Oh wait I know you are trying to get focus off the fact that you are a liar.
My question still stands if you were a student at the school I taught at then how come you had no clue when school let out for summer?
You will lie to spite your face won't you steffanie
I don't care much politically which way one person votes or how they feel but in reading this blog and the comments over the past couple months i have come to the following determination...
Michael - you do a great job of making your point and backing said point... sometimes sling a little too much mud but you at least stand behind the things you say...
GI - you are the same way as michael you present your argument in planned and thought out fashion so that it makes sense to the common public
last but not least...
Steffanie - you are an idiot... thats all that really needs be said... i can see you must have dropped out of high school before debate class because everytime you open that hate spewing hole you call a mouth you make me realize why people who drop out of high school end up working in fast food or at wal - mart
Steffanie,
If you go to a high school in Arkansas then how in the world did you ever find a blog for McCook, Nebraska. By chance?
Mike,
You need to find an angry radical leftie that can trade insults with Steffanie so that the big kids can talk.
"There has been little about the attempted buying of Chrysler by a foreign company."
Do you mean they haven't been critical of it or they haven't reported it? I only ask because while I've heard little criticism of the sale to Fiat, I've been hearing about the sale for months and the subsequent bondholders and pension managers trying to prevent it in court. The sale itself has been widely reported.
Fiat will receive a maximum of 35% and I believe they are just about ready to close that part of the deal. This sale was a requirement that Obama placed on Chrysler. Perhaps, that is why it hasn't been criticized that a foreign company will be taking ownership in Chrysler.
http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/30/chrysle...
Good idea McCook1,
We need to get steffanie the burrito specialist a babysitter so those of us with diplomas can discuss in an adult fashion.
Steffanie,
I have seen firsthand an angry radical leftie and Mike is not it. You are the extreme right of our side so you should see your true opposite some time. Might I suggest Georgetown during any type of rally. Your almost guaranteed to find one at some point, I promise.
I think Steffanie is really from England because they're the only people I've ever heard of that would call somebody a "twit" and actually expect that person to be offended.
No McCook,
She can't be from England because English people know grammer.... and they certainly would not make themselves an embarrassment to not only their family but their gender...
S&DC,
I present to you Prince Charles.
While I'll admit that I hardly ever agree with Mike's point of view, I will say this. His blogs always inspire great debate. There are plenty of mudslingers on here that are just as guilty as the next guy. However, to insinuate that a "degree" is needed to sound intelligent and have a thought provoking conversation is even more asinine. I, myself, quit college after only one full year in McCook. Since that time, I've always worked my way up through the ranks of my job and have taught myself a good majority of everything I know. I will admit that I can sound a bit naive once in a while, but anyone that knows me personally can attest that I'm an intelligent man that does not need a piece of paper and a $75,000 college debt to debate logically and intelligently. On the other hand, Stephenie, pay attention to what you're actually saying. You make the rest of us conservatives sound like uneducated morons. If you're smart enough to use a computer, then check out a search engine or two if you want to seriously debate. No offense intended to anyone. As Dennis Miller used to say, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
G.I.,
Thanks for the breakdown of that for everybody. It is interesting from a business perspective how a lender (US Gov't) can obtain an 8% interest in your company, direct the operation of your business, divide up your company and still require a full repayment of the loan. By interesting, I actually mean frightening.
Randall makes a good point. You can look throughout this nation and find intelligent, successful people without college degrees and some that don't even have high school diplomas. I believe the average person is capable of extreme intelligence through hard work and dedication to a goal. On the other hand, they are also capable of extreme stupidity through excessive apathy or pure ignorance.
I only hope that Steffanie finds a way to follow the former path as opposed to the latter.
I might also add that some of the most traditionally educated people I have ever met are the most ignorant as well. That's not a shot at anyone. It's just a personal fact that I've come across in my own experiences. Thanks for the addition G.I..
My apologies. I meant to say thank you to McCook1.
"I am already in the former you fool Mccook."
Really?! I guess I am a fool because you sure fooled me. Let's take a look at some of your examples of "extreme intelligence":
"Liberals are evil"
"You sound like that trollish looking guy in the Princess Bride trying to outwit the hero over which vial contains the poison. If you'll recall the hero outwits the troll."
"I dropped out you idiot."
"Gilly gloppy mass, THE TROLL you fool!!"
"Leafy is an angry radical lefty you twit."
These are just from one blog. Oh yes, you just exude intelligence.
"If you think Aaaaaaaanold is the reason for the fiscal mess in CA then leafy AND yourself are the biggest noneducated ignorant fools I can imagine."
You admit to dropping out yet you are criticizing me for being uneducated? Hello, Hypocrisy.
Schwarzenegger's had 6 years to fix the mess in California and make it a better place. How's that been going so far? Btw, Schwarzenegger isn't exactly the epitome of conservatism, in case you hadn't noticed.
Randall
you are correct in saying you don't have to have a college degree to debate in a sophisticated fashion... high school diploma helps but i also know that some of the older generations that didn't finish school for various reasons can be extremely intelligent...
I do feel however that in today's world a high school diploma shows a certain level of maturity that steffanie completely missed out on...
it seems to me that she only gets on these blogs to make a feeble attempt at sounding political when she really has no clue what is going on... thus she resorts to name calling and mud-slinging to try and bring the more educated and mature to her level
S&DC,
I don't argue the point about her one bit. For once, I'm in total agreement. All I'm saying to anyone is to please not bash someone's education level too much. I don't disagree that a full high school education helps in an intelligent debate, but as you said, there are plenty of drop outs that can debate very intellectually. My wife dropped out of high school in the tenth grade and couldn't debate on these boards, but she can hold her own most of the time. The name calling and the mud slinging could stop as far as I'm concerned as well. All we needed was "poopy head" and I would have thought we were all in third grade again.
Steffanie,
Quoting your posts is a gross misuse of the term "research". What idiot liberal are you referring to and please explain this plethora of liberal traits you're so convinced of?
G.I.,
I suppose I wasn't clear that I'm not in support of using the taxpayer's money to control private businesses in the first place.
Just remember the "Bush" bailouts are also the "Obama" bailouts because they couldn't have passed without the provisions in TARP that Obama voted for and he did not challenge the lack of oversight and accountability in the bill when he voted for it.
If they needed the money then I would tell them to have the hospital (their creditors) send me the bill and I would have control over where it goes and I wouldn't have to spend more than they need. In your example we wouldn't have scraped together the money, we would have the equivalent of taking out a 6th mortgage on the house.
You bet I expect to be payed back that's why I support letting the auto companies and the banks pay us back every time they make the offer to do so.
"It's pretty fun because it is not a challenge to argue with them and if you loose a king hell insult at them every once in awhile everybody understands why. Welcome to the club."
I know. Defeating Steffanie in a debate is to intelligence what shooting fish in a barrel is to marksmanship.
Now I've been called a democrat and a liberal. I've been called a republican and a conservative. I suppose I can shoot for independent and centrist now. It seems I'm in all kinds of clubs these days.
You are very correct randall...
I apologize and i retract my previous statement in all cases except in the case of steffanie
Randall to answer you question a little late. I haven't been paying attention all that much today. I was referring to the fact that on the blogs on this site we've been hearing quite alot about the government taking over an American car company in GM, but hardly and of the posters that are outraged about that have mentioned that a foreign car company has been trying and now has succeeded in buying out and American car company in Chrysler. I just thought that was interesting.
My apologies for going off topic if that was the case. I understand what you're saying about the buy out and the bail out. Personally, I'd rather see another car company buy one out than have the government bail out a company that control it's own spending and assets. That's just my own two cents worth though. As far as the media coverage goes, I can't verify one way or another on television exposure. I can say that I've seen plenty of news on both situations plastered all over the net. Everyone has their own preferences as to which website they read and such, but I tend to stick with the Associated Press, Reuters, and Yahoo.
Mike,
I'm not irate over Fiat buying Chrysler because they could do that in the free market anyway if they wanted to. I don't see why the government should make a special exception now. Canada's getting a stake in the company too, a foreign government's 2% stake is more concerning to me than a private foreign company's 35%. How many foreign countries are buying stocks in other American businesses?
G.I.,
The second half of TARP is a continuation of the original bill. What is the new accountability? They are using TARP funds that were supposed to be used for banks and spending it on auto companies. Where is the accountability there? The government should be held accountable too. I do agree that Obama is trying to portray an image of more accountability. He definitely added more stringulations (Bush '04 supporter, I'm allowed to make up my own words).
"It seems that saying to these companies that if you take federal money you surrender some measure of control that the new accountability lies squarely on the shoulders of the Obama administration. That is what I mean by new accountability."
That sounds more like a transfer of accountability not a new form of accountability. Not to mention, this administration spends as much time pointing fingers as it spends addressing the issues. I let it go for quite awhile but I'm thoroughly tired of hearing this administration playing the blame game. It seems like every time someone asks a question, the response starts with some excuse for why it's not Obama's fault.
Would that accountability then mean that the Obama administration is responsible for the banks that and the auto companies that are failing after receiving bailout money? I seem to recall in the beginning when Obama and the Democrats swore up and down about how a car company can't go through bankruptcy and look at him now.