Jump to content

Why Does the Political Right And Left Feel the Need to Demonize Each Other ?


GAROVORKIN

Recommended Posts

On 3/8/2018 at 6:50 AM, larrytheimp said:

I fucking give up.  Fuck this stupid lame ass shit.  

I again challenge you to actually contribute something other than these bullshit false equivalencies.  

Your entitled your opinion Larry.  I don't happen to agree with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

Some need to pay attention to the news.

'News' is a strong word for Steve. He had to take that nationalistic pony show on the road to two-bit 2nd oldest Democracies in the world 'cause 'Murica countered his weaksauce dictator peddling by going all in on proving that we get shit right the first time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

'News' is a strong word for Steve. He had to take that nationalistic pony show on the road to two-bit 2nd oldest Democracies in the world 'cause 'Murica countered his weaksauce dictator peddling by going all in on proving that we get shit right the first time.

Perhaps, but it is relevant to the "discussion" here, imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Darth Richard II said:

Perhaps, but it is relevant to the "discussion" here, imo.

'MURICA!

When we elect dictators, you know that their insane and clearly dementia inspired rants only ever strain at OUR institutions!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

Here is your badge, sir.

Fuch that shit, 'cause I ain't the one

For a punk motherfucka with a badge and a gun

To be beating on, and thrown in jail

We can go toe to toe the the middle of a cell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

'MURICA!

When we elect dictators, you know that their insane and clearly dementia inspired rants only ever strain at OUR institutions!

In essence, America does elect a king who reigns for four years. So far, though, while many have made catastrophic mistakes with their power, I think that now is the first time somebody is ruling who is genuinely a tyrant. He is in it to drink the treasury dry, rule over the nobles who love him and ignore the serfs in his fiefs.

America's greatest flaw in its constitution is the fact that the president is above the law. It was incredibly naive to put the power to prosecute the president during his term entirely into the legislative branch's control. They even saw this threat coming: Washington was basically bullied into running as they didn't trust their other leaders to be noble examples of power, and then had no choice running again and it took the fact he was elderly for his peers to accept he wouldn't go for a third term.

Was Washington perfect? Of course not. But he was trustworthy to be patriotic, and not partisan. They assumed that only such men would ever be elected.

Barring that, if America insists that their president is indeed a king and indeed above the law throughout his reign no matter what, then at the very least they should use the Electoral College for the one and only reason it was designed for: to override the votes of the commoners and prevent any tyrant from taking office. Trump could have been circumvented! If he wins office again in 2020 and the EC still allows it, then the Republic is truly doomed.

37 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said:

That fountain of agenda free unbiased truth and wisdom.

"Media has biases" is a truism. That's when a statement sounds prophetic but it is impossible to be anything but true. You are biased. As am I. It is absolutely impossible not to be.

Bias is only an issue when it leads to dishonest coverage, such as outright lies, or coverage so limited in scope as to be essentially lying anyway.

In the case of media, their bias is normally not really toward an agenda per se, it's toward a target audience. They will have advertisers aiming to reach particular demographics and then will hope for a large audience within that demographic to watch it. Therefore they'll tailor which stories they run, as well as which editorial directions to take, based on what their audience will probably like and therefore watch. This is shown by the fact that Fox News went from revulsion and vitriol towards Lord Drumpf to sycophantic love, as it was better for ratings.

This is why the least biased news tends to be state-owned news in free countries. Australia's ABC and the UK's BBC have no particular reason to appeal to advertisers, since their funds and guaranteed by their governments. They're also given a lot of latitude about what they can report. They also must meet certain targets, to show that the money is being well-spent, so instead of an appeal to advertisers, they'll instead appeal to aiming to run exposes on major issues other networks may ignore.

This means that both networks have a peculiar anti-governing party bias. It has long been observed that these networks will frequently undercut whichever party is governing. It's how the strange cases have happened of Australia's insulation scheme fires, the children overboard lies and the cabinet file breaches were all broken by the ABC, despite the fact that all of them were damaging to the government of the time. Similarly, the fact that there was an outcry in the Labor party against the Iraq war, an imminent leadership spill for the UK leadership, or the difficulties the UK have had in EU negotiations were exposed by the BBC.

You should read the news and watch it as part of being an informed member of society. Looking at many sources will help, as you'll fast learn which are reporting well.

But if you're aiming to avoid bias, it really means you'll have nothing and nobody to communicate with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

No, tha'ts Peggy Carter.

Don't worry, I just had to scare off the sealions.

@Yukle

The President is not above the law, we just haven't had to decide that question yet because (as you mentioned) we never had a blatant traitor in office before at the same time as having a partisan allied congress desperately clinging to the shreds of power it possesses in an attempt to secure a dying victory of the Bourgeoisie that might extend their blatant thievery long enough to explore new arenas of kleptocratic exploitation in a changing social reality. 

Just sayin'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

Don't worry, I just had to scare off the sealions.

@Yukle

The President is not above the law, we just haven't had to decide that question yet because (as you mentioned) we never had a blatant traitor in office before at the same time as having a partisan allied congress desperately clinging to the shreds of power it possesses in an attempt to secure a dying victory of the Bourgeoisie that might extend their blatant thievery long enough to explore new arenas of kleptocratic exploitation in a changing social reality. 

Just sayin'.

Well, it has never been tested. I just assume that if it went to court it would rule against common sense, as five of its members are wont to do.

Article I, Section 3, Clause 7 of the American constitution states:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

This seems to imply that a conviction can only come after removal from office, and therefore while holding office, the President and VP are both immune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...