-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2011: Of Weiners, Boehners, Santorum, and Teabags
- Thread starter PantherLotus
- Start date
- Status
BigPickZel
Member
It's a perfectly cromulent word.
empty vessel
Member
BigPickZel said:
Dumb people are not born dumb. People's constitution is a function of several factors: biology, physical environment (sustenance and safety), social environment (nurturing, access to stimuli). Only one of these is beyond the purview of the government.
And your gratuitous point about private schools, besides being false, is irrelevant to the discussion.
Aides To Former Maryland Gov Indicted For Ordering Calls To Suppress Votes
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsme...an_gov_candidate_indicted_for_ord.php?ref=fpa
BigPickZel
Member
empty vessel said:
Education does not equal smart. Genetics is the single largest predictor of intelligence. Education, or lack thereof, can only account for 5 points in IQ. So yeah, people are born dumb. And my true point about private schools is true. Shitty private schools have this problem in that no one is forced to go there, so if they don't provide a service people want, like providing a good education, then they go out of business. But there is nothing I can say that will change your mind, because you're coming at this with the belief that the government can plan for what people want.
empty vessel
Member
BigPickZel said:
You can keep asserting the same thing, but it isn't true. Flynn has shown beyond dispute that IQs of humans have been rising over time (ever since they have been measured in a way that allows for comparison); while the cause of this hasn't been (and probably can't be) isolated with any certainty, theories are that improvements in environment, including such things as nutrition and education, are responsible for this. All this to say, your "dumb people are dumb" theory is simplistic and wholly inadequate. But I never confined "dumbness" to low IQ in the first place, that's your doing. IQ isn't a very good measure for what we're talking about. People with high IQs can be incredibly stupid, for various reasons (including susceptibility to indoctrination). The capacity for critical thinking is I think a better measure for intelligence in this context.
But the point is that a government's actions can have effects, positive and negative, just like anything else. And I think it's rather dense to stubbornly deny that.
elrechazado
Banned
You have both embiggened this thread.BigPickZel said:
speculawyer
Member
Loudninja said:
Who are these sad foot soldiers that put themselves at risk of being thrown in jail just to get a corrupt politician elected? (I say corrupt assuming they know something about these activities.) Why?
Manos: The Hans of Fate
Banned
speculawyer said:
Best I could come up with:
1. Don't expect to be caught/charged
2. Expect only a fine
3. 2 and to be well compensated for their trouble.
4. Rewards not tied directly to them (family debt paid off)
5. Deferred payment/job.
6. Charges can be plea bargained to no contest
7. It was that important to win
8. Pussy/Dick
polyh3dron
Banned
You guys who hate government so much should live in Somalia, there's no government there.
TacticalFox88
Banned
Reminds me of this:polyh3dron said:
Manos: The Hans of Fate
Banned
Not wanting a massive Government financed news organization(instead of say in libraries or expanding internet access to all Americans)=hating the government?polyh3dron said:
LOLTacticalFox88 said:Reminds me of this:
I love that comic. I do like that the guy on the couch is smiling in the last panel (and so is everyone without a mask). I like that they've all moved past race.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Precisely. Commercial media presents two problems that prohibit it from effectively serving the public interest: first, it is beholden to corporate interests; second, as a corollary, it must maximize the number of viewers to please advertisers. As a result, they prefer entertainment to actual news and ignore issues and services that promote the public interest. That is why public media is essential to supplement commercial media. It is not beholden to corporate interests and can cover issues and provide services that are ignored by commercial media; i.e., serve the public interest.Alpha-Bromega said:
Manos: The Hans of Fate
Banned
Jackson50 said:
The question is what defines "serve the public interest", it just seems too nebulous of a term, and one where they can be legitimate room for debate.
I still feel a better use of the resources available would be improving access to multiple news sources for people(via expanding libraries and internet connection) and teaching better critical thinking skills is far better for a democracy, than a new news source.
Video here
Huffpo article here.
Fucking idiot.
Also, the Daily Kos reporter did a brilliant job. Well done
Huffpo article here.
Fucking idiot.
Also, the Daily Kos reporter did a brilliant job. Well done
Wah wah wah.Gaborn said:Video here
Huffpo article here.
Fucking idiot.
Also, the Daily Kos reporter did a brilliant job. Well done
That's pretty weak.
It seems nebulous. But the concept is fairly simple. The public interest is something from which society wholly benefits and not necessarily individual actors. An informed electorate is in the public interest as it benefits society. Yet commercial media is not focused on informing the electorate. They are focused on profits. Thus, the public interest will suffer from the divergent interests of commercial media and the public.Manos: The Hans of Fate said:
I do not think they are mutually exclusive. Otherwise, improving access and critical thinking is beneficial. Yet if they are accessing commercial media, the failure persists.
TacticalFox88
Banned
On that note, when did the Democrats become the progressives (And I use that term loosely) and the Republicans become ass backwards? Ironic that the Republican party was the one who freed the slaves.Oblivion said:
Manos: The Hans of Fate said:
I think we could more easily identify actions that do not serve the public interest rather than create a strict guideline on what does. unfounded and disingenuous conclusions (Obama does this therefore he is X) and subtle implications of treason, terrorist affiliation, etc. I'd say are pretty easy to define as not serving the public interest. I especially like how AlJazeera will constantly state "We cannot personally independently verify this conclusion/source so..." instead of taking small amounts of information and wildly speculating upon it.
Critical thinking is absolutely the pinnacle here. If Americans as a whole were more adept at critical thinking/analysis of their sources and of concepts in general then this issue would be greatly lessened.
timetokill
Banned
Gaborn said:Video here
Huffpo article here.
Fucking idiot.
Also, the Daily Kos reporter did a brilliant job. Well done
Totally pathetic, but sadly expected.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Gaborn said:Video here
Huffpo article here.
Fucking idiot.
Also, the Daily Kos reporter did a brilliant job. Well done
Pathetic
edit: I have no problem with the guy, he's just trying to keep his job; probably has no problem with gay marriage. But it's clear he wasn't prepared for that line of questioning, and how could he be with Obama's pathetic posturing depending on what's politically convenient
Manos: The Hans of Fate
Banned
Well could you humor me and say just for today make up a mockup for what the top stories might be and how it would be different that say if the AP, BBC, or Guardian reported. I don't mean to be annoying I get what you're saying I just want to see how it can be applied using real data. It doesn't have to be long or anything.Jackson50 said:
I am working with the assumption that resources are limited and improving access brings other non-related benefits. I also cannot believe that if versed in critical thinking and having access that they cannot use commercial media and be informed.Jackson50 said:
//B1G said:
Well I would just say that's good journalism and ignoring crap, once again critical thinking skills.
I do too. I've seen the BBC use that and CNN, not sure when it first started appearing and with who. Though I will say man did AJE post a really junk article the Japan nuclear crisis recently that could have used some verification (it's in the Japan Earthquake thread).//B1G said:
Meaning it could be solved with be access coupled with education and not need this new news source, and that's ignoring that other benefits increasing access will bring.//B1G said:
Manos: The Hans of Fate
Banned
Lucky Forward said:
She's a dumb, dumb, dumb, piece of shit. I'm surprised she wasn't parroting Teach The Controversy.
Reasonable doubt my ass.
TacticalFox88
Banned
I'm not even surprised. *yawn*Lucky Forward said:
Manos: The Hans of Fate
Banned
Cyan said:
Bah, I want the real controversy taught, storks vs vaginal delivery of children.
speculawyer
Member
60's & 70's. The Dems were the racists but the switch happened at the civil rights act. Dems left and became dixiecrats. Then Republicans.TacticalFox88 said:
Manos: The Hans of Fate
Banned
Gaborn said:Manos -
LOL. I honestly just made that up, I had no idea that existed, that's so awesome.
Manos: The Hans of Fate
Banned
I think you need to start a little earlier and go back to the New Deal at least for the start.speculawyer said:
Manos: The Hans of Fate
Banned
bananas said:lol, that site led me to the Voting Tea Party magnets. Some of these are great.
The one on the right is also used by Rick Santorum. lol
speculawyer
Member
She's not dumb . . . she's just a brain-washed Jesus freak.Manos: The Hans of Fate said:
She is so religious that she blots out anything that doesn't fit her demon-haunted world.
speculawyer
Member
Such a cute way to protest.
Of course the real controversy is "Why is a presidential candidate doing private paid speeches?" That seems like a way to get around campaign finance laws. Oh wait, we don't have campaign finance laws any more. :-(
Of course the real controversy is "Why is a presidential candidate doing private paid speeches?" That seems like a way to get around campaign finance laws. Oh wait, we don't have campaign finance laws any more. :-(
speculawyer
Member
I think she has a good shot of winning Iowa and that should give her lots of money to propel her for months.JCX said:
Totally. :lolCyan said:
The problem is not necessarily gathering the news. It is disseminating the news. Moreover, a British daily and a British public television channel are peculiar choices given the American milieu from which this discussion arose. I think a more apt comparison would be commercial television news. Rather than focus on Casey Anthony, Father's Day gift ideas, and other extraneous information, a public media channel could cover the removal of ethanol subsidies, the decoupling of sanctions for the Taliban and al-Qa'ida, and the prospective budget cuts for the nation's weather satellite system. And rather than a blurb, they could actually provide some depth and context.Manos: The Hans of Fate said:
TacticalFox88
Banned
Bill Maher will make fun of anyone, conservative or liberal.Oblivion said:
empty vessel
Member
Manos: The Hans of Fate said:
Not really. Southern conservative Democrats supported the New Deal. The split with the national party was always about race. The place it starts is integration of the army, which prompted Strom Thurmond to run as president for the Dixiecrat party (southern conservative Democrats). He was unsuccessful and they came back to the national Democratic party (the impetus for which came from the national Democratic party and which a Democratic president signed). Until the Civil Rights Act of 1964, after which they abandoned it for good (with Strom Thurmond leading the charge once again; he became a Republican that same year). Although that has been a slow process which is in fact still occurring today. That's why some southern states (e.g. Louisiana) still had Democratic Senators until recently and why some have them even still.
- Status