Excellent Rant on the Republican Party

[secrets0stolen]

YouTube - Ed Show w/ Cenk: GOP Is Party Of Hate

[James81]

"Our two party system in America is essentially a bowl of **** looking in the mirror at itself." --Lewis Black

[dulaney0330]

That video is a joke! It was painful for me to watch but I couldn't help but notice that the video clips were abruptly stopped, perhaps to mask the context of any "hateful" quotes.

It seems as if they are picking apart a speech simply used to illicit an emotional response from their viewers, Democrats.

I found it pretty sad that they came up with their conclusion of "hating Muslims" because Gehrich did not want a Mosque to be built near Ground Zero.

These logical conclusions make me shake my head in disbelief!

Finally, it seems pretty easy for liberals to associate disapproval with hate.

[James81]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

I found it pretty sad that they came up with their conclusion of "hating Muslims" because Gehrich did not want a Mosque to be built near Ground Zero.

So, what other conclusions are we to draw from that, then?

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by James81

So, what other conclusions are we to draw from that, then?

Many people do not feel comfortable with having a Mosque run by a man who believes that America was in some ways responsible for the attacks on 9/11. Furthermore, they question the funding for this project and wonder if terrorists overseas are giving money for this Mosque to be built.

Or they may question the wisdom of it. 9/11 is still fresh in the minds of New Yorkers.

You or I may not believe this. You or I may not agree with it.

But, to make a sweeping generalization of "hate" is clearly drawing an illogical conclusion.

[James81]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

Many people do not feel comfortable with having a Mosque run by a man who believes that America was in some ways responsible for the attacks on 9/11. Furthermore, they question the funding for this project and wonder if terrorists overseas are giving money for this Mosque to be built.

Why would terrorists being funding the Mosque?

[secrets0stolen]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

That video is a joke! It was painful for me to watch but I couldn't help but notice that the video clips were abruptly stopped, perhaps to mask the context of any "hateful" quotes.

Which in particular? If you're referring to the Palin and Bachmann quotes the point was simply to show "violent imagery"--which may or may not be actually relevant.

It seems as if they are picking apart a speech simply used to illicit an emotional response from their viewers, Democrats.

Well, of course it's targeted at their viewers. But it's not as if words were strung together to make it appear as if individuals said something they never said. It interesting that in this political climate quoting people on the other side tends to be view as some sort of manipulation, and has even been called radical!

I found it pretty sad that they came up with their conclusion of "hating Muslims" because Gehrich did not want a Mosque to be built near Ground Zero.

These logical conclusions make me shake my head in disbelief!

The conclusion was less drawn from his end position, and more from the fact that he compared Muslims to Nazis! And that was just one quote. The point of the entire video wasn't even just about this controversy, but a general trend in the GOP.

Finally, it seems pretty easy for liberals to associate disapproval with hate.

Only when that disapproval results in certain groups being in danger and/or losing rights.

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by James81

Why would terrorists being funding the Mosque?

I gave you reasons why many people, especially in New York, do not want to have that Mosque built.

That ridiculous video slapped a "hate" tag on it and I wanted to use some of my critical thinking skills in place to show that perhaps these feelings/thoughts were fueled by something else.

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by secrets0stolen

Which in particular? If you're referring to the Palin and Bachmann quotes the point was simply to show "violent imagery"--which may or may not be actually relevant.


Well, of course it's targeted at their viewers. But it's not as if words were strung together to make it appear as if individuals said something they never said. It interesting that in this political climate quoting people on the other side tends to be view as some sort of manipulation, and has even been called radical!



The conclusion was less drawn from his end position, and more from the fact that he compared Muslims to Nazis! And that was just one quote. The point of the entire video wasn't even just about this controversy, but a general trend in the GOP.


Only when that disapproval results in certain groups being in danger and/or losing rights.

You really think this video is objective? I understand that nothing is 100% objective and all the major cable news channels have had their problems with objectivity.

Republican party members say something and the opposing party may either twist, mask, or disregard facts or contexts. And it definitely can apply for the opposite party, too.

Quite frankly, I am annoyed at politics that rely on the misquotes of others and make sweeping generalizations.

I don't wish to argue with what some politican said simply because you will maintain your position and same with mine.

Do some Republicans say things that could be inappropriate? YES! Do some Democrats say things that could be inappropriate? YES!

Obviously, these comments will feed into our beliefs about Republicans/Democrats.

But, we generally rely on our bias and emotion to draw conclusions, not fact or truth. This goes for everyone and it is not necessarily a bad thing but we must strive for objectivity.

[secrets0stolen]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

You really think this video is objective? I understand that nothing is 100% objective and all the major cable news channels have had their problems with objectivity.

Republican party members say something and the opposing party may either twist, mask, or disregard facts or contexts. And it definitely can apply for the opposite party, too.

Quite frankly, I am annoyed at politics that rely on the misquotes of others and make sweeping generalizations.

I don't wish to argue with what some politican said simply because you will maintain your position and same with mine.

Do some Republicans say things that could be inappropriate? YES! Do some Democrats say things that could be inappropriate? YES!

Obviously, these comments will feed into our beliefs about Republicans/Democrats.

But, we generally rely on our bias and emotion to draw conclusions, not fact or truth. This goes for everyone and it is not necessarily a bad thing but we must strive for objectivity.

Of course I don't think the video is objective! It's obviously liberal biased, but I'm not sure how biased automatically means it makes no good points--and that goes for anything.

If I were drawing my conclusions based on emotion, I'd still be a Republican. (Not that all Republicans are, but my personal environment lends itself to conservatives.)

If we actually do want to be objective, than we need to look at what people are actually doing and what those consequences are.

[JSB]

Two quotes from Lewis Black on American political parties:

I don't know if you noticed, but our two-party system is a bowl of ♥♥♥♥♥ looking in the mirror at itself.



The only thing dumber than a Democrat or a Republican is when those pr*cks work together. You see, in our two-party system, the Democrats are the party of no ideas and the Republicans are the party of bad ideas. It usually goes something like this. A Republican will stand up in Congress and say, "I've got a really bad idea." And a Democrat will immediately jump to his feet and declare, "And I can make it sh*ttier."

[secrets0stolen]

Originally Posted by JSB

the Democrats are the party of no ideas and the Republicans are the party of bad ideas. [/I]

Ha! That part stuck out to me. It seems to me the Republican party bows to the corporations and appeals to voters through religion, while the Democratic party appeals to people through being "for the people" and then bows to the Republican party. And both parties are experts at straw mans and manufacturing taboos, making rational discussion next to impossible.

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by secrets0stolen

Of course I don't think the video is objective! It's obviously liberal biased, but I'm not sure how biased automatically means it makes no good points--and that goes for anything.

If I were drawing my conclusions based on emotion, I'd still be a Republican. (Not that all Republicans are, but my personal environment lends itself to conservatives.)

If we actually do want to be objective, than we need to look at what people are actually doing and what those consequences are.

Well, what were the good points of that video? The conclusions that I received were that Republicans were hateful and full of violent repertoire.

Is this really true? The video would certainly make it seem that way!

There are thousands of quotes by Republicans and Democrats that we can analyze and pick apart. Anyone who consistently goes on camera for any length of time WILL have a quote picked apart. It's the nature of the game.

I just do not like videos, this goes for either side, that pick apart something someone said.

It is about action and the character of that person that ultimately matters.

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

Well, what were the good points of that video? The conclusions that I received were that Republicans were hateful and full of violent repertoire.

. . .

I just do not like videos, this goes for either side, that pick apart something someone said.

It is about action and the character of that person that ultimately matters.

How about this as a lesson: There is a dangerous rise in Islamophobia in the United States which has worked its way into our politics.
Or, to be broader, there is a dangerous rise in extremism in rhetoric and in folks' actions in this country?

Having looked at each of the quotations, the only one that I think might be out of context would be the one Bachmann. Which do you think are out of context?

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by ThoughtAddict

How about this as a lesson: There is a dangerous rise in Islamophobia in the United States which has worked its way into our politics.
Or, to be broader, there is a dangerous rise in extremism in rhetoric and in folks' actions in this country?

Having looked at each of the quotations, the only one that I think might be out of context would be the one Bachmann. Which do you think are out of context?

Why do you think there is a "dangerous rise in Islamophobia?"

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

Why do you think there is a "dangerous rise in Islamophobia?"

Because there is one.

From the "Burn the Qur'an Day" church to multiple protests of mosques to random attacks on Muslims.... even as far as attempted bombings of mosques. I'd be more than happy to post multiple links but I really hope it isn't necessary.

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by ThoughtAddict

Because there is one.

From the "Burn the Qur'an Day" church to multiple protests of mosques to random attacks on Muslims.... even as far as attempted bombings of mosques. I'd be more than happy to post multiple links but I really hope it isn't necessary.

Yeah, but why? Why do you think there is?

[Daffy Duck]

You can lead a politician to water, but you can't make him think.

[ZephyrusX]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

Why do you think there is a "dangerous rise in Islamophobia?"

I find it interesting that you ask this question when your own observations on the Republicans could be described as Islamophobic.

Many people do not feel comfortable with having a Mosque run by a man who believes that America was in some ways responsible for the attacks on 9/11. Furthermore, they question the funding for this project and wonder if terrorists overseas are giving money for this Mosque to be built.

What do they mean by this exactly? Many people think that the US governments are indirectly responsible for terrorist acts, including the events that took place on 9/11, due to the US foreign policy. If you keep intervening in other States and the lives of other people, some of those people will retaliate with violence. This is an objective fact. The more Israel and the US intervenes, the greater the number of terrorist acts. Are they suggesting that we ought to penalize this man for simply stating the truth?

Do they have proof the mosque project was funded by terrorists overseas? Or is this a unfounded claim?

Or they may question the wisdom of it. 9/11 is still fresh in the minds of New Yorkers.

How are Muslims in general connected to 9/11? Are they taking a handful of extremists and generalizing their actions to the entire Muslim population?

There is no objective basis behind these arguments. So what exactly are we suppose to think when people make these sort of arguments? Are they motivated by ignorance? Hate? Fear? Pride? Is this not the very nature of Islamophobia?

[ZephyrusX]

Personally, I’m more interested in why the American people keep voting in the same two parties over and over again. It is not as if the Democrats are much better. Obama has pretty much continued the foreign policy pushed by the Bush administration, and in doing so, he is continuing the violence in the Middle East and terrorist retaliations. Talking about whether or not the Republicans appear to be more ‘hateful’ in public is rather a mote point when you keep this in mind. Is it next to impossible for another party to form in the US?

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by ZephyrusX

I find it interesting that you ask this question when your own observations on the Republicans could be described as Islamophobic.

How so?

Originally Posted by ZephyrusX

What do they mean by this exactly? Many people think that the US governments are indirectly responsible for terrorist acts, including the events that took place on 9/11, due to the US foreign policy. If you keep intervening in other States and the lives of other people, some of those people will retaliate with violence. This is an objective fact. The more Israel and the US intervenes, the greater the number of terrorist acts. Are they suggesting that we ought to penalize this man for simply stating the truth? ?

I am not here to agree/disagree with these sentiments but my primary motive was to give reasons, other than just "hate," of why many do not want this Mosque built.

Originally Posted by ZephyrusX

How are Muslims in general connected to 9/11? Are they taking a handful of extremists and generalizing their actions to the entire Muslim population? ?

Were these extremists obeying the Qur'an?

Originally Posted by ZephyrusX

There is no objective basis behind these arguments. So what exactly are we suppose to think when people make these sort of arguments? Are they motivated by ignorance? Hate? Fear? Pride? Is this not the very nature of Islamophobia?

Is it appropriate? That is the question nagging on the hearts of many New Yorkers.

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by ZephyrusX

Personally, I’m more interested in why the American people keep voting in the same two parties over and over again. It is not as if the Democrats are much better. Obama has pretty much continued the foreign policy pushed by the Bush administration, and in doing so, he is continuing the violence in the Middle East and terrorist retaliations. Talking about whether or not the Republicans appear to be more ‘hateful’ in public is rather a mote point when you keep this in mind. Is it next to impossible for another party to form in the US?

Obama is a great motivational speaker but he is not qualified to be President. And it's definitely showed in the last 2 years.

It's tough because I have conservative views but I also like the Liberalitarian party. I enjoy the priorities of responsibility and freedom to choose, although this sometimes conflicts with my conservative beliefs.

Ultimately, I don't like how these beliefs pull people apart and encourages dissension. While it certainly would be "boring" if everyone was the same, part of me wishes we could just agree on the same thing.

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

Yeah, but why? Why do you think there is?

The underlying reason? Misunderstanding. An attribution error spurned on by unnecessarily fiery rhetoric. Largely utilized to help solidify political power in certain groups.

[NDN Scholar]

Originally Posted by James81

"Our two party system in America is essentially a bowl of **** looking in the mirror at itself." --Lewis Black

Oooooooh CANADA, our home and naaaative laaaaaaand!!!! Truuuuuue paaaatriot's looooooove, in all thy sons' commaaaaaaand!!!

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by ThoughtAddict

The underlying reason? Misunderstanding. An attribution error spurned on by unnecessarily fiery rhetoric. Largely utilized to help solidify political power in certain groups.

What do you think many Americans misunderstand?

[Chris_1977]

The anchor man complains about demagogy..... uh huh.....

[Curtis2011]

Originally Posted by secrets0stolen

YouTube - Ed Show w/ Cenk: GOP Is Party Of Hate

All political parties suck ass.


Kthxbai.

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

What do you think many Americans misunderstand?

Muslims are just people... not "the enemy". Only a small minority of Muslims are extremist and violent.

The rhetoric, however, is that "Islam is the devil", etc. etc. As I said, an attribution error. Followed, I guess, by a generalization fallacy.

[ZephyrusX]

Originally Posted by Duluney

I am not here to agree/disagree with these sentiments but my primary motive was to give reasons, other than just "hate," of why many do not want this Mosque built.

Well, I don't agree with the reasons you gave, but I do agree that the motivations behind the Republican party are a little more complex than an isolated variable - 'hate'. No matter how we massage those variables, however, I don't think it is going to reflect well on the republicans.

Were these extremists obeying the Qur'an?

Are you assuming that all Muslims interpret the Qur'an in the same fashion? Shoud all Christians be denied constitutional rights because some Christians interpret the Bible in a extremist fashion? I don't understand your reasoning. Again, terrorism has nothing to do with religion. Religion is merely a simplied explanation for deeper political and economic conflicts. If Isreal and the US respected the sovreignty of the Muslim states and people, there would be a sharp decrease in the amount of terrorist attacks regardless of the status of world religion. Religion is not a significant causal factor in this analysis.

Is it appropriate? That is the question nagging on the hearts of many New Yorkers.

So you are suggesting the the constitutional rights of minorities ought to be taken away when the majority feels it is appropriate to do so? Isn't this the reason why the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was entrenched in the constitution to begin with (or whatever the US equivalent happens to be?)

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by ThoughtAddict

Muslims are just people... not "the enemy". Only a small minority of Muslims are extremist and violent.

The rhetoric, however, is that "Islam is the devil", etc. etc. As I said, an attribution error. Followed, I guess, by a generalization fallacy.

Of those who are extremist and violent, why do you think they went down that path?