In discussions here on HubPages, a common topic arises when discussing the media. In most circles, people believes what they read and see on TV. That is why we Conservatives don't trust the media for providing the truth...because we know who we are and the media is mis characterizing conservatives all the time.
Put your selves in our shoes for just one moment...suppose you are a liberal. You have liberal beliefs and ideals. You were taught that by your parents and professors at college. You are a good human being...you try to live a good life and teach your kids the same...treat everyone with respect...work hard and provide for your family, pay your taxes and volunteer your time to help others...respect our laws...
Now you hear in the news that you as a group, are a racist, you are heartless, you are white supremist, you are against women, you are a homophobe...you want people to die, you want to hurt the environment, pollute the air and water...here is the kicker... you are extreme... you are worse than ISIS...
What would your reaction be?
Well now you understand why we conservatives are not buying what the media is putting out. If they can lie and distort about conservatives, you have to wonder what else are they distorting?
That is why the media is less trusted by the American people today than any other period in time.
In this election cycle, with the election of Trump, who by the way is no Conservative, has totally lost their credibility and objectivity... I am not sure they will survive as a news organization.
Just as well. We need a new paradigm... With so many sources, it behoves everyone of us to seek out the sources that are honest and truthful. It is OK to have a biased opinion in the editorial page, but reporting news should be done by professionals who are taught the basics...who what when where and how...
Well it wouldn't be acting like a frightened turtle.
Make America Great Again,” Is it an reactionary call to return to an earlier time when US position in the world was unchallenged? When presidents and judges were all white males, when immigration was restricted and widespread racial segregation persisted. Is that not what MAGA means?
Your list is depressingly biased as if those who oppose you are:
* bad people
* live off the taxes of other people
* living a bad life as a bunch of lazy good-for-nothings
It is your type of question whose intention is to divide people and stir up conflict when there are none. By putting it a 'US" versus 'THEY' perspective, the entire premise is skewed from the start and anybody answering you will fall into the paradigm trap that you have set up.
Trump supporters are not idiots, walking barefoot around the barn. The average make about $68K/yr.
https://jspp.psychopen.eu/index.php/jsp … w/750/html
The Trump movement is not singular within the United States (the Know Nothing movement in the 1850s, the Wallace movement in the 1960s, and the more recent Tea Party Movement). Moreover, other democracies have seen similar movements (e.g., Austria’s Freedom Party, Belgium’s Vlaams Blok, France’s National Front, Germany’s Alternative for Germany Party (AfD), and Britain’s U.K. Independence Party (UKIP). In virtually all these cases, the tinder especially involved male nativists and populists who were less educated than the general population. But this core was joined by other types of voters as well. Five highly interrelated characteristics stand out that are central to a social psychological analysis – authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, outgroup prejudice, the absence of intergroup contact and relative deprivation.
Denial of facts does not make it go away. Overcome your own SDO and at least accept the more unpleasant things about yourself. Don't apologize, but don't deny.
Think I'm lying? It is so self obvious what the Admin is doing right now in front of you.
'Relative deprivation' means you're not poor but play the victim card because you feel you deserve more than other people. (Not you-you - I'm using the public 'you', not you personally)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_do … rientation
The Policies of White Resentment:
The Trump administration is preparing to redirect resources of the Justice Department’s civil rights division toward investigating and suing universities over affirmative action admissions policies deemed to discriminate against white applicants.
Your whole argument was based on race...
Non of my argument was...
In fact, I am not white, I am Asian.
I am a conservative based on my experience and my study of history...
I am not a Trump supporter but somehow you automatically assumed so...
It is not us vs them but good vs evil...
As far as the TEA party goes, it shows you know nothing but believe the lies of the media.
The TEA party stands for Tax Enough Already, you get it...
It was economics, people who don't want our country go the way of Greece...
"authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, outgroup prejudice, the absence of intergroup contact and relative deprivation."
Sounds like the Democratic party to me. Absolute authority, with no other philosophies admitted to the club. Social dominance; the poor, uneducated masses (and republicans) need not apply. Completely prejudiced towards socialism as the only method of governing. No cooperation with other groups, and as little contact as possible. And deprive others of what they have in order to fill the grandiose plans of socialism.
Yep - the Democratic party to a T.
Except that actual studies show otherwise.
For sure! The entitlement philosophy originates in the GOP. It is the GOP that forever advocates more socialism.
The rest I agree - neither party has an edge. Even the deprivation as long as one figures that "deprived" means one must work for what they get.
Democrats racing to socialism. Republicans racing to fascism. You're bad, I'm good. You're a patriot, I'm a traitor. Russia is our friend. Russia is our enemy. The odds are much higher that America becomes a fascist state rather than a socialist state.
Actually, this is an article that just came out. Some phychologist did some serious analyzing of Trump supporters. The 1st three 'types' of supporters sorely 'outscream' the last two types - which IS sad.
A psychological analysis of Trump supporters has uncovered 5 key traits about them:
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/08/a-psych … bout-them/
Well, you did say that the media paints conservatives, as a group, as racist, did you not?
"Now you hear in the news that you as a group, are a racist, ...."
Edited to add: Just taking that one statement about racism.... studies of racial attitudes have consistently shown a greater percentage of conservatives to have more negative views of black people than liberals. Plenty of liberals have negative views of black people, but they are outnumbered by conservatives.
So.... is there not some basis in fact for the idea that conservatives, as a group, are more racist? That does not mean that you, personally, are more racist.
Just taking one of you claims of inaccurate media coverage. You made so many, it would be hard to address them all. Liberals are not immune to be lumped into groups, by the way. Studies have consistently shown that liberals are not as happy as conservatives. Do I take this to mean that I personally am unhappy? No, it just means that a group I belong to is statistically more likely to be unhappy.
Are you able to admit that one can belong to a group that has negative characteristics, as a group, and recognize that the negative characteristic doesn't apply to you personally?
That goes without saying...
We learned that as children...don't generalize...
This business of relating nagative opinion with racism is the problem you stated.
I can be a person who have a negative opinion about someone who for example have tattoos, but that is simply an opinion and a choice...it is not based on race.
It is only racism if you can proof that someone is being hurt by what you act on...
For example, it is racist for a landlord to not rent to a black person merely because of his skin color. He can refuse to rent to anyone who does not have a job and therefore cannot pay the rent. I hope you see the difference. Not everthing is about race. I
You are mixing apples and oranges. When the media reports that conservatives, as a group, have more negative attitudes toward minorities than do liberals, as a group, it is based upon data and information garnered from reputable social scientists or survey groups. That is not the same as stating an opinion. It is reporting a fact about a demographic group, as closely as can be determined by current data.
Do you see the difference?
You had to mention studies. The right will attack academic studies because they come from a liberal bias. I don't think this is necessarily a conservative viewpoint as it is a nationalistic viewpoint.
Yes, I know. We cannot give up looking at real evidence, though, even if some choose to paint it as invalid. If it is invalid, show me exactly how. Don't just proclaim it to be wrong. That is what I tell people and it either shuts them up or leads to a real discussion of the source of the information. Or, most often, a mini-rant about academics, media, pollsters, scientists, all being liberal charlatans.
So, why do you think that the media is liberal? Is it because they do not print or broadcast things favorable to your point of view when it is not warranted? It is just the tired old excuse that conservatives always use. Through your behavior and actions you identify yourself, don't need the media to do that.
Yes, and Trump has invited the most controversial to join his administration. People who by their actions and records have shown themselves to be amenable to racism, white supremacy, etc. What am I supposed to think? Is all of this by sheer chance, random? What do the women think? Are conservatives supportive of the concept of fair and equal opportunity regardless of gender or are they busy watering down these provisions allowing the perpetrators to continue biased behavior without being held accountable? Are they hiding behind concepts of 'political correctness'. Trump appoints people to the EPA and the Interior Department who are nothing more than wolves in the fold. They are corporate cronies for who it is evident by their record and backgrounds would undermine the principle of a clean environment. Let alone add on all the hypocritical 'holier than thou' religious stuff. The so called evangelical right practically voting for Satan himself, expecting me to take them seriously.
That is my reaction.
You conservatives earn the position where you find yourself, change your policies and actions and the news will change.
The news and 4th estate will survive just fine, it is Trump who may not. You folks have got your Brietbart, Infowars and Fox News to counter. I am sure that you will find your 'objective' journalism standard there?? The 'basics' are not necessarily news that the conservatives want to hear and it has nothing to do with whether it is true or not. Another trick, Trump is not a conservative? Just run a yellow stripe up its back and you have the difference between a polecat and housecat. I consider Trump a conservative in the worst kind of way.
It does not matter what you think. Conservatives have a set of principles that defines it. Trump does not fit that mold. He has some conservative ideas on certain issues, but then so did Obama...
To be a true conservative, you would have to abide by the Constitution...
You mention some right leaning news sites...The reason they even exist is to counter the liberal leaning main street media.
I have no problem with having a left or right leaning news organization. They can report the news and
And provide editorial or commentary... The problem comes when a news organization like the New York Times who claims to be impartial but are as left as they come and distort the news instead of reporting on it. I will give you one example. During the Iraq war, there were hundreds of articles many on the front pages... dealing with Abu Graib... the torture of prisoners...
Does thst story deserve the amount of coverage?
I don't think so... it was used to embarass the Bush administration...
Maybe the NYT was trying to make up for the Judith Miller's reporting (cheerleading) on the run up to the war?
"It does not matter what you think. Conservatives have a set of principles that defines it. Trump does not fit that mold. He has some conservative ideas on certain issues, but then so did Obama...
To be a true conservative, you would have to abide by the Constitution..".
Conservatives love to wrap themselves in 'old glory' and such. Why don't you give me an example of how a conservative abides by the Constitution and the liberal does not?
"You mention some right leaning news sites...The reason they even exist is to counter the liberal leaning main street media."
They exist to promote lies from the other side of the political spectrum
"I have no problem with having a left or right leaning news organization. They can report the news and
And provide editorial or commentary... The problem comes when a news organization like the New York Times who claims to be impartial but are as left as they come and distort the news instead of reporting on it. I will give you one example. During the Iraq war, there were hundreds of articles many on the front pages... dealing with Abu Graib... the torture of prisoners...
Does thst story deserve the amount of coverage?
I don't think so... it was used to embarass the Bush administration..."
I remember the Abu Ghaib story, did it not deserve the press it received? You have the very basis of the American creed violated with this playing around and flagrant violation of the Geneva Convention. We claim to be there to make the world safe for Democracy, is this what were to actually witness? This was Bush's war, the Conservatives were well able to dismiss millions of dollars unaccounted for and wasted in that conflict, yet get after a poor woman trying to feed her children. So, I don't care what you think, the press that the tragedy received was appropriate. Bush and his administration deserved to be blamed and embarrassed.
Satan himself...LOL. Remember when the faith leaders recently laid hands on Trump in the oval office? I think Alex Jones could smell burning flesh.
Which “media” do you not trust? The so-called mainstream media; CNN,MSNBC,WAPO,NYT,WSJ? Conversely, do you trust Fox, Breitbart,Drudge,Alex Jones? You think conservatives are the only victims of lies and distortions? Do you trust that your sources of news and opinions are always dealing in facts and reality? Have you been told you are un-American, a traitor, and yes a racist elitist because you have liberal leanings? I have, so I can, on one level relate to your premise albeit from a different perspective. Welcome to the new age of information overload. When I was 21 years old there were far fewer sources of information. Maybe 3 television networks, various newspapers and little to no talk radio and no internet.
You conservatives certainly are buying what the media puts out…it’s just the media you choose to consume. When Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin etc, speak or write about the issues of the day do you think they are coming at it with an unbiased perspective? With all due respect, I don’t buy your premise that conservatives are victims of the news; however you choose to define “news”.
You wrote, “We need a new paradigm…”. We are living in the new paradigm where anyone can voice or write their opinion and make it available in seconds. If reading, watching, or listening to information that doesn’t appeal to your conservative nature all you have to do is click a new website, turn the channel, or tune to a different radio station. The days of Walter Cronkite, Huntley and Brinkley, and whatever down the middle news outlet you consumed are long gone and are never coming back. In my opinion, teach your kids to be critical thinkers. Expose them to different perspectives that may be outside of their comfort zone and maybe then the next generation will try to at least understand and respect reasonable points of view.
One more thing…what is a conservative? Is it a Barry Goldwater definition? Is it a William F. Buckley definition? Ronald Reagan? I’d suggest that the conservative movement of today is at war with each other…trying to out conservative the other. I like to think of it as the Ricky Bobby definition: “If you ain’t first, you’re last.” Or, if you’re not the kind of conservative I am then you are a liberal.
I agree that Trump is no conservative, although he sure is doing a bang up job of redefining the word.
If you can't see the difference between how liberals are treated vs. Conservatives by the main street media, I can't help you. The point is there are many more outlets in the liberal precincts...that they don't even consider themselves liberal. They think they are middle of the road...
The few conservative outlets you speak of, I do listen but I still do my own thinking and research. I trust mark Levin the talk radio host. He is conservstive and a constitutional attorney... he understand far more than the average joe on tv or radio. His analysis are spot on consistently. He is not a Trump supporter and will criticize him when appropriate, as do I. That said, the current media has lost all credibility with me and many clear thinking Americans. Their TDS has taken them over the fall...
This day in day out reporting on Russian collusion is going no where... yet they keep at it...why?
I just wish the media could be honest about conservatives for a change. By conservatives, I do mean the Reagan model of Conservatives. There are some variations of conservative pholosophy but Reagsn was my model. Trump is no conservative and the media consistantly paints him as one, and the same goes with the GOP leaders. They are not conservative either. Yet, the conservstives get blamed for all their folly...
You keep painting with the brush that if it isn't conservative its liberal. Not everything is black and white. The world, and its politics, is mainly gray, meaning we share common goals and ideals that shouldn't be labeled conservative or liberal.
I agree with you. Many issues are not left or right. Yet, the media does treat everything that way...don't they?
Also, what gets me as a conservative is that they pose a false choice between two things?
They never consider a third option...
A good example of this is if you are against gay marriage, you are a homophobe...
I am a conservative who is against gay marriage because of religious reasons. I have friends who are gay. Some gay people even are against gay marriage. I prefer civil union as a way to provide for the "right" of a spouse...
Jumping in off topic, but would you like to see "civil union" as any joining performed by the state, gay or straight, and any joining by a priest as a "marriage"? It might shock millions of people to find they aren't "married", only "unionized", but would it suit you?
Jack, not everybody subscribes to your religion. Why should it be prohibited just because it does not fit with your religious beliefs? Just one of many of the problems that I have with conservative reasoning.
This is because of the freedom of information that has become prevalent with the ease of Internet access.
This was recognized in the last election by the media sources, and by the likes of Google, Yahoo, etc. they are working to correct this situation now, not so that they are openly shutting down the internet like the do in China.
But rather so that their own programs sift through what is available on the internet, and they block from your searches what they don't want you to find, without you ever knowing about it... essentially programming the search engines to keep news from you that they don't want you knowing about.
This should greatly aid in correcting the people's discontent with their news sources as well as with the government.
The problem has been... for instance, when the Obama Administration, with the help of the MSM tried to sell America that Benghazi happened because of a YouTube video... that seemed so far fetched, so outlandish, to so many Americans, that it was one of those events that turned the people from trusting their news sources to wondering WTF?
Another would be the real results of the ACA. Its hard to believe that the ACA is such a wonderful thing, when people all over the internet are talking about their deductions doubling, and their costs doubling, in one year... the more people talk online about the matter, the more people can connect and compare information, the harder it is for the MSM to lie to America and tell them the ACA is helping millions and doing great.
So what is needed is censorship, YouTube is doing this now, they have stopped sites that they don't like from receiving earnings from advertisements, others they just shut down. I suppose Hubpages could be doing the very same thing, and few of us would notice. All they have to do is not feature articles they don't like, exclude them from being seeable by search engines, etc.
Anyways, Conservatives are typically not ok with new government programs, new taxes, open borders, they want Nationalism not Globalism, less government not more government... and that is not what the MSM nor the Liberals are selling.
Therefore, it is the way it is.
With regard to online stories about the ACA. I am puzzled by the prevalence of these stories because I have yet to hear a negative personal story from a single person I know. I'm firmly middle class and most of my friends and family are, too, so maybe that's why?
Just an observation. The latest story I heard was from a friend who injured her knee and needed surgery but had no insurance. She quickly signed up via the Oregon Health Plan. I guess the cost seemed worth it once she really needed it.
Every state is different, while it may be functioning fine in some states, in others costs have made it unfeasible for many.
Not just the cost of Insurance. sometimes its the deductibles, what good is Insurance for a 'average' family when it has a $15k deductible for any type of emergency care, or operation?
If I remember my stats correctly 6.8 million people chose to pay the penalty last year rather than pay for Insurance.
Imagine that, paying a penalty to the government because you choose not to(or can't afford) to have healthcare coverage... just amazing.
That's exactly what my friend did--pay the penalty--until she needed insurance. That's like waiting until you have a car accident to sign up so the insurer will pay your bill. It's cheating the responsible people who have been paying all along.
I am sure if the insurance provided a benefit for the money spent, she would have had it earlier.
That is what Insurance USED to do. You paid into it, the insurance covered YOU and YOUR family. And for the amount you paid in you got something back, like your doctor visits, vaccines, etc. costs were covered.
Today you pay into your insurance and it is a waste of money, unless you go out and get hit by a bus. The deductibles make it so you might as well not have insurance.
Like your friend, I have no interest in throwing my money away. I am not interested in busting my ass so that someone else's bills get paid off, rather than my own.
But then, this was always designed to fail, the goal of the politicians who devised the ACA was to ultimately have it collapse and usher in a Single Payer system that all but the rich, and the politicians of course, are stuck dealing with... take 50% of gross income for health care, which of course the government will do with whatever it pleases, and get crap healthcare out of it.
The problem with those who like ACA or that like the idea of a Single Payer system is that they don't understand that OUR system is far more corrupt than some small nation like Norway or Canada... they have less than 10% of the population we do!
Canadians if they want different health care cross the border to America to get it!
These are the reasons why Single Payer works in those countries, much smaller population, stable economy, fewer people living off of government support, etc.
I know many conservatives and Trump supporters are extra-wiggy about the media; and its really SILLY of you. Why? Because media has ALWAYS 'swayed' things their way; and politicians have ALWAYS used the media to frame things in people's minds.
Media manipulation isn't NEW (there is just a lot more of it since the internet), and conservatives should know that as well as any liberal. When ANY media is talking US vs THEM with regards to the American public - that's distorted propaganda coming at you; because in truth, we are far more alike than not. We are NOT each other's enemy!
The frustrating thing for anti-Trump peeps is that pro-Trump peeps (and many conservatives) don't seem to be able to discern when they are being outright manipulated.
You trust your own DISHONEST news sources that are JUST AS TWISTED as liberal sources.
"media is mis characterizing conservatives all the time" - while conservatives mis characterize 'liberals' and don't seem to consider that 'moderates' or 'centrists' even exist.
I know its damn hard from where you are at, Jack - but try to give people the benefit of the doubt and find the balance. The parties LIKE us divided. Stop being so willing to jump through their hoops.
You are preaching to the choir...I agree we have more in common than differences. Our difference is in the approach to solving problems...
Liberals for the most part believes that government is the answer to all problems and taxing everyone to pay for these programs is the best and most equitable way.
Conservatives believe less government is best, and many problems can be solved by the individual and private section and non-profit charities...They are more efficient, more accountable and have the right motives...
"Liberals for the most part believes that government is the answer to all problems and taxing everyone to pay for these programs is the best and most equitable way."
This is an untrue, manipulatived statement fed to you by your beloved concervative media... Absolutely no one WANTS 'more government'. I have, in fact, suggested that industries create their own regulatory commissions among themselves - but that doesn't seem to be an option, I don't know why.
I don't entirely know what 'liberals' want; but most of us 'moderates' understand that we need the government regulating the big things that affect us as a country - and yeah, that costs money that we should all be pitching in on.
Wall Street has proven that it cannot be trusted to regulate itself.
Banks have proven that they cannot be trusted to regulate themselves.
Many corporations have proven that they cannot be trusted to regulate themselves.
Insurance companies have proven that they cannot be trusted to regulate themselves.
Pharmaceutical companies have proven that they cannot be trusted to regulate themselves.
The reason why these aspects of our Capitalist society cannot be trusted is because apparently when you get rich you want more money and can never get enough. (I wouldn't know about that, ha!) They turn into GREEDY industries at the HARMFUL expense of 'We the People'.
While it IS frustrating that we can't really trust politicians either, I think most of us would LIKE to believe that most of them at least semi-work for us; and will at least TRY to do the best they can to create policies for the benefit of both 'the people' AND businesses in this country.
As far as welfare & healthcare policies & programs are concerned... We believe that giving people a chance to crawl out of the dire hand they may have been dealt (or created themselves) in life is a good thing; and direcly-feeding & caring for people who simply can't (or won't) take care of themselves - like so many elderly people today - is a good thing, also. It doesn't have to be a government thing to accomplish that, but it is an easy way to coordinate, REGULATE and distribute things as fairly as possible.
Conservatives push against this one concept in particular so hard... DON'T help anyone and do NOT make me pay for ANY of it!! Its one of the main reasons why things keep getting worse - look up 'Law of Attraction'. (I know some of you are getting really sick of me mentioning it, LoL!)
When we resist things in a big way, we are ATTRACTING it - and it only gets bigger. If we would ALL relax and let things roll forward, proverty & crime would slowly start to diminish. Its not like poverty needs to get WORSE so that our taxes keep going higher. We CAN diminsh this issue to the point that it costs less; and taxes for those types of programs could eventually be reduced as the situation improves. But at the moment, since this country barely pours enough money into those programs to cover necessities - it will continue to be a seemingly bottomless pit.
Its all just a matter of perspective.
Why is it a good thing to care for, feed and house people that won't do it themselves? The biggest thing it accomplishes is creating a sub-class of people that will be knocking on your door tomorrow for more as they learn they don't need to work like the rest of us. So why is it a good thing to ATTRACT more of the same?
The point of 'programs' is to give people a boost UP - its supposed to be help, not 'enabling'; although sometimes we can intentionally enable people for a while until they start to peddle on their own (I think we try to do this for foster kids; but we fall pretty short - still, there are success stories). Its about getting them 'on their own' - or as close to that as possible - and that helps us ALL.
They get 'cleaned up', they get jobs, they start paying taxes, etc.
All you hear about are the mooches, you don't hear about the success stories nearly as often - cuz those don't make media as much money. And we could practically elimnate the moochers IF we had enough money for these programs to HIRE enough people to process & regulate stuff. Like I said above, we don't pour enough money into them to do much. We don't have a shot in hell of IMPROVING things until we do.
When life becomes hopeless, that's when people become a burden (and no, they are not attracting very good things to themselves cuz they feel like sh*t). When you fall flat on your face in the mud, sometimes you need someone to help you stand up. Sure there should be limits. Its not like I'm proposing that people should get absolutely everything free indefinitely. This stuff needs to be taken more seriously instead of brushed off - that's why nothing ever improves about it.
You can think what you want about these people (and their children); but the ones I am the most surprised about conservatives not caring about are the veterans. I am truly amazed that these guys are just chalked up as 'losers' to so many of you - some of them have been through several tours in the Middle East. We've basically used them up like batteries.
Why do you think people turn into addicts? Its the same thing I was talking about with abortion with Jack that one time... We don't need to make laws against it. When we figure out WHY there are so many unwanted pregancies (especially within Christian communities) THEN we'll be one step closer to diminishing abortion rates in this country.
Its the same thing with all these heroine & opiods addicts - WHY are there so many? When we figure that out, we can start addressing solutions.
I would have to disagree with you respectfully on all your points here. Liberals do want big government... it is a fact. They believe the State is the answer to everything. Here is the thing, I wouldn't even mind it if they work. They don't and yet the answer is always higher taxes and more money to throw at programs that doesn't work and open to abuses and fraud...
Conservatives are against all these not because we are heartless or cheap... we are against them on principle and on the fact they don't work. The principle we abide by is the Constitution. Please read it for once. It is only less than 5000 words of English. It clearly states that powers not enumerated in the document are deferred to the State and local entities.
Also, there are many ways to go after problems. Not every solution involves money... some require a little discipline and self reliance and hard work and getting a good education and not do drugs...
All these traits are positive and creates an environment that will benefit both the individual and society...
We have a compassionate society. We take care our disabled and our aged and our young who are born in disfuctional families. We don't need programs that encourage bad behavior such as getting pregnant out of wedlock...
Wow, some of you in here really are like talking to a brick wall. You couldn't even get through what I wrote here, could you? It is not possible for my points of common sense & logic to sink into your skull with all that brainwashing, is it? Pharmceutical companies regulate themselves appropriately?!
I'm just another idiot who needs to be educated in your clan's ways. But, I came from your conservative order; and I KNOW why you think the way you do. It took me a long damn time to pry the fingers of dogma out of my mind. I'll just wish you good luck and move on, Jack.
Thanks for the well wish. I also wish you the best. A healthy debate is what is needed periodically. I am not one to shy away from controversy. In my 60+ years of experience, I always look for the silver lining...
We can just agree to disagree, at least we have cleared the fog...
There is so much distraction in this world and most of it is by design...
I always had a knack to cut through it and get to the heart of the problem and look for solutions...
It has served me well at my job, and in my private life and I am just passing it on, paying forward...
As the old saying goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
Take care and have a great day!
One last question Misfit Chick, I noticed from your profile you write for teens...
I also wrote a guide for millenials a while back. It is in my featured articles on my home page.
I am just curious, what specific items in my guide to millenials do you find objections with?
It totally depends on how you define a journalist. Too many people don't know the difference between a blogger, a commentator, and a journalist. Someone speaking off the top of their head their own opinions, that is not someone to be trusted to tell the unvarnished facts.
People usually stop trusting a news source when they too often tell them what they don't want to believe. It's easier to claim the source is lying than to accept that you are wrong.
The facts have become too uncomfortable for a variety of interest groups. So the facts must be disposed of.
Healthcare facts threaten the vast US health corporations.
Climate change facts threaten the oil and coal industry.
Economic data casts too harsh a light on growing inequality
The Republican Party has given up fighting these issues on the facts. And its supporters are forced to spew nonsense as a result.
You need a conservative party that faces up to the real world. It will get elected and it might do some good. The US could feel good about itself again.
I agree with much of what you wrote. What is fascinating to me, and we are witnessing it in real time, is the civil war the republican/conservatives are having with each other. Trump is the antithesis of a conservative and really isn't much of a republican. The "party of ideas" has no idea or clue what to do. They walk that razor thin line absolutely knowing that Trump is a liability to the party in the long run yet are willing to use his ignorance to further their agenda, i.e. healthcare repeal, entitlement reform, tax reform...There is one huge problem: A majority of Americans don't buy the crap their selling. Obamacare is still here. Tax reform will be harder than healthcare reform. No one will touch entitlements, not even Ayn Rand incarnated could win that one. Now factor in Trump who has energized the public to pay attention. All we hear is how his base will never leave him and he's played that hand brilliantly, but, they are no match to the millions who haven't voted or participated in our democracy in the past. Those people are pissed or afraid and they will stand up and be counted.
The conservative/republicans have always worked best in private and behind the scenes. Never too controversial. As long as people could live in peace and weren't threatened by outside threats or threats from within, they were cool with the status quo. The danger is, and we see it everyday on TV or online, Trump and his billionaire class cabinet are attacking the very institutions that make us America. Attack the free press. Attack the judicial system. Attack the Intelligence apparatus. We are 6 months into this presidency and we have never seen this level of blatant authoritarian action. Congress is taking notice and they are slowly putting up roadblocks to Trump's actions. We will attack North Korea and not because it is good military policy or out of protecting the homeland. We will attack because Trump will do it to save the only thing he cares about...himself. Lets see if conservatives finally draw the line and prevent that from happening.
"A majority of Americans don't buy the crap their selling."
Unfortunately, you're right. A large percentage (likely the "majority" you claim) don't understand or buy the idea that the country doesn't have unlimited resources. That the pockets of government aren't bottomless; that there is a cap on what can be spent. The average american thinks like Europeans; that there is money available for anything they want; unlimited health care, unlimited entitlements and even unlimited energy (without any cost outside of $$).
We can only hope that they grow up one day and realize that Uncle Sam isn't the Great Pocketbook and put a limit on what they demand be spent.
Let's all go to the bank's tomorrow and try and take out our money and you'll find out the truth
National health systems cost a fraction of private health care systems.
The sheer complexity of US healthcare is reckoned to cost every American over 600 dollars a year.
All that pointless bureaucracy... Selling policies, collecting monies, vetting applications, trying to keep healthcare providers honest etc etc.
That is one reason that Europeans can afford stuff that Americans cannot.
Very perceptive & insightful observations. Someone else has been paying attention - cool! We can all guess how wilderness was able to put such stupid words into the mouths of 'the rest of us Americans' who haven't been brainwashed like him - into his response to this.
This is obviously the most worrying thing: "We will attack because Trump will do it to save the only thing he cares about...himself. Lets see if conservatives finally draw the line and prevent that from happening."
His base would be ECSTATIC if he attacked North Korea (if he attacked anyone really, right?) - I mean, just LOOK how BRAVE & courageous he is, so MUCH moreso than Obama!!! He talks the talk AND walks the walk... He's freakin John Wayne!!!
It would be an impressive accomplishment to them - and cause an even bigger rift here back home among us than already exists beyond the 'normal harm' an attack like that has on the world.
Yes, it will be interesting to see how far they will let him go.
Exactly right. The word "media" is now spread so thinly that it doesn't mean anything anymore.
Journalism benefits democracy because it distributes information to everyone.
Conservatives don't like democracy. They prefer a republic with power in the hands of a small number of people who all think alike.
What are you talking about? Everything you said fits liberals to a T.
Conservatives follow the Constitution. If that is bad in your mind, so be it...
I am proud to be a conservative who is color blind and follow the Constitution and who believes in a strong defense and self reliance and a sound fiscal policy, pay as you go...
How you twist thing about conservatives is exactly why I started this forum...you have been brainwashed by the liberal media and you don't even see it do you?
Yeah, OK, Jack, whatever you say...............
You didn't read my post with the intent of understanding it. You also are claiming things that I didn't say.
"Conservatives don't like democracy. They prefer a republic with power in the hands of a small number of people who all think alike."
I am quoting you...right here....
I vehemently disagree with that statement....
What else do you think conservatives like or don't like...
Put it in writing... And I will debate it any day...
I respectfully suggest you read more about the differences between democracies and republics.
But in brief, campaign finance laws, flat tax laws, media attacks, voter restriction laws, tax loopholes, massive defense budgets, fake news sites, politically motivated media companies (Fox and Sinclair) and many other aspects of our country benefit a small number of people.
We have a much weaker democracy than we had even 10-15 years ago and much more concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a small number of people.
I haven't met a true conservative in a long time. Only fake conservatives who buy the propaganda they are given by the elite class.
Democracy here is dying fast.
For the same reason we don't go out of our way to insult Allah... Jews don't eat pork, Buddists are vegetarian, and many other beliefs that are religious based. You have problem with conservatives because you believe Conservatives are racist despite many indicators that they are not. What can I say...To each his own...
Conservatives in the US lie, as a matter of course, to get elected.
Conservatives in other parts of the world may lie occasionally or bend the truth (as do all parties), but their is nothing like the 'birther' nonsense, or 'global warming is fake news'.
You might ask why US conservatives choose to lie and why so many people are taken in.
You might also check out how conservatives in other countries manage to get elected simply on the strength of their policies.
I have no idea what you are talking about...
I don't lie and I am a conservative.
The fake news I see is reported everyday in main street media.
that is why their credibility is in the toilet...or are you defending them?
If you had a talent for lying you would be sitting with Roger Stone in the White House, or penning conspiracy theories with Alex Jones.
But you are not. You are merely one of the honest folk who are taken in.
Frankly, parceled up with the rest of the hoodwinked horde, you are just as much of a menace to democracy as Infowars and Breibart.
Your arrogance has no bound. Just because you disagree with conservatives, you think we are just stupid and being deceived by some conspiracy?
In fact, the real culprit is the media. They have lied and distorted news for years. It is only recent years with the internet and talk radio and drudge report that the truth came out.
You can't tell fake news even when it hits you on the head...haha
I am not your enemy. We disagree on policy which is the way it should be. Let the debate be about the effectiveness of government policies and not hidden motives.
I am conservative but I am also a pragmatist. If an idea solves an existing problem, I have no problem supporting it or paying my tax dollars...my issue is with the waste and abuse thst goes on in our government. There seems to be little accountability...tax and spend is par for the course.
It is arrogant to believe that you as an individual can spend a few hours reading about climate change and imagine that you know better than the mass of scientists who study the issue everyday. But that is what you believe.
It is arrogant beyond understanding to reject all of the tried and tested methods to reach a good enough approximation of the truth in every area of life.
That means academic research, professional journalism and good old-fashioned statistics. But that is what the political right in the US is all about: rejecting the methodologies patiently evolved over millennia in favor of what they would like to be true.
The isolation of the US is currently approaching pariah status. You can blame US right wing leadership or you can blame the fools who fall for it.
Either way it is a sad situation.
There you go again you assume too much...
You make an ASS out of U and ME.
I did not just read a few blogs...
I did my own investigation. I attended science colloquiums...
I used my engineering training.
I look at historical records, which you can do easily...Old Farmers Almanac have weather records going back 200 years...
Guess what? None of the dire projections of these climate models has come to reality, not even close.
There are over 28 different models and all of them have erred on the high side when it comes to global warming...and its effects.
Don't tell me I don't know what I am talking about.
I ask simple questions to climate scientists and they can't answer. How come?
They are so sure 95% ageed...consensus...
But it means nothing when reality does not agree with climate models.
Who are you going to rely on? The disgraced scientists at IPCC and the UN and NOAA?
You rely on those with a political and/or personal agenda to give you answers they want you to believe. It is, after all, arrogant beyond belief to think that you, too, can reason and think.
Who exactly is disgraced and why?
References would be appreciated.
Here is one, there are many other articles -
http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/11/22/ … 2009-2010/
Climate depot, lol? This is the problem with these fringe right wing sites... there are so many of them, all utterly devoid of integrity, and they waste so much time to pick apart.
But here is the temp change graph on their front page:
And here is a meaningful graph from NASA:
NASA cites its sources (https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/featu … temps.html)
The nutjob graph comes from https://patriotpost.us/opinion/50667
Nutjobs are allowed opinions but honestly, if you cannot read an x-axis, never look at a graph.
A graphic representing the right wing fake news ecosystem:
Quote: “vast satellite system of rightwing news and propaganda that has completely surrounded the mainstream media system”
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ … h-facebook
I cannot believe this depth of deception is all home grown.
Wow! Temperatures are up almost a degree! No wonder there is such concern!
Of course, that's up from the middle of the little ice age - pretty convenient to use that time frame to show global warming. And to forget that the models say we should be up 2 degrees in the last half century, while the graph shows something closer to 1/10th of a degree...
You might want to check the graphs here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_ … re_record, which shows we're in a pretty cold period of earth's history.
Deception indeed. Most came from climate scientists manipulating raw temperature data of the past to show a recent warming trend where none exists. In fact, some scientists are predicting a mini ice age coming in the next 25 years due to the lack of sunspot activity...
I guess only time will tell...
So, 99% of climate scientists have it wrong? The 1% funded by big oil have it right...we just can't be 100% sure so we should do nothing? Give me a break. If what you say is true...they manipulate raw data...to what end? Why? Are they part of some global conspiracy to crush the USA? Whether the rise in temperature is a natural cycle and man has no impact, or, man is directly responsible for the climate change should not matter. An ice sheet the size of Delaware just broke off from Antarctica. Ocean levels are rising. Florida, Louisiana, and much of the eastern seaboard have real concerns...and here is something all good conservatives should pay close attention to: Our military believes climate change is a national security issue. This isn't a red/blue issue, its a world issue. What's next? The earth is 5000 years old? The baby Jesus had a pet dinosaur?
"to what end? Why?"
To keep their job? To sell solar cells or wind generators? To cut pollution? Because their boss said to? To keep their grant money coming in? So they aren't made fun of?
I'm sure you can find other reasons for a "scientist" to falsify data or conclusions - there must be a thousand of them.
Come on man. Really? If were to sell solar and wind generators that would make them capitalists which would be good, right? Cut pollution? Of course. What's wrong with that? Now, what about the 3 guys who's job it is to counter the overwhelming consensus regarding climate change? What's their motive? Grant money? Because their bosses said to?
If 99 of 100 doctors said you have a treatable form of cancer would you side with the 1 doctor who said "no you're fine, live your life"?
It is just silly beyond belief for anyone to deny the research of the vast majority of professionals in a topic just to suck up to politic driven drivel from the Right. If the 99 percent are so in error, what gives credibility to the 1 percent who say otherwise?
Sorry, but there are just too many cases of false data. Of computer models that didn't work. Of predictions that haven't even started to turn out. Too much of a lot of things not to question the work and the work environment.
And the work environment is purely political. It is about selling a gullible public on renewable energy, with billions of $$ at stake. It's about keeping research money flowing. It's about refusal to admit mistakes. It's about fear of going against what politicians are telling the people. That's the environment these great predictions and conclusions are being formed in and anyone that doesn't question them is a fool.
Personally, I believe the globe is warming. Maybe even 1/10th of what is predicted. And maybe (probably) some of it is caused by man...maybe even 1/10th of what is claimed. And, just maybe, we can slow the inevitable process...by about 1/10th of what is suggested and at 100 times the cost (financial, social, environmental).
Surely some Americans have integrity?
There must be a good percentage who just believe in doing the right thing in any situation. Countries cannot survive otherwise.
How do you concentrate enough corrupt individuals in something like climate change research to make the whole thing a morass of deception?
Or do you believe that a good education and rigorous intellectual skills somehow rot the morals of a person?
"How do you concentrate enough corrupt individuals in something like climate change research to make the whole thing a morass of deception?"
By making their income and reputation dependent on the "right" answer. But I'm positive there are honest researchers, good ones, that claim climate change is happening and due primarily to human efforts. Probably about as many as claim the opposite (I don't believe for a second the highly touted 99%, not unless we simply declare anyone not agreeing is a fraud because they don't agree).
So American universities are staffed with moral cowards who lie habitually?
How do NASA and NOAA get staff of a low enough standard? I mean the kind of moral turpitude you are talking about is a rarity in most western societies.
And how do the national science academies of the rest of the world find enough lairs and cheats to fill their halls?
I am listening, Wilderness. Neither you nor I are Climatologists or climate scientists. Sure there remain a lot of questions. But the preponderance of research is leading in a particular direction. How can that be ignored?
You say that the 99 percent are being manipulated and are mere dupes to politics, is that true around the globe? What are the political motivations of the 1 percent? And let’s admit, they have their advocates and agenda as well. Well, it is the Trumps, the Koch Brothers and those that see their immediate short-term and selfish pursuit of profit as more important than turning the planet into a toilet that they themselves most likely would not have to be inconvenienced by. It is the attitude that almost brought to extinction the vast herd of bison that was once here on the North American continent. It is the attitude in the case of the Union Carbide disaster in India back in the eighties, perhaps you recall, where hundreds of residents of India were asphyxiated because the plant, moved there deliberately to avoid US regulations operating in a lax way. It may be great for profits, but not so good for living things. It is the attitude of the tobacco industry that have been prohibited here from peddling their wares the way they once did, simply moving to China and other markets more than happy to poison them. It is not that those purveyors of tobacco products were unaware of the danger of their product, it is just that they were in it for the profit, and people and their health problems was only a secondary concern. It is the tiresome cry of the whalebone corset, hand crank auto starter crowd and is so 19th century. Such is the world of the ‘rightwinger’.
I say that there are limits to how much man and his industry can carry on without detracting from our environment, a fragile balance. It has been only within the last half century or so that we are beginning to appreciate the danger that is being posed to that balance. So, if I am going to err, I am going to err on the side of environmental protection, not that of corporate excess and greed.
I am pleased to hear that you give some credibility to the science, acknowledging global warming. Trump and his gang talk about colonizing Mars, hopefully he says to begin during the end of his 8 year term? Well, he can take himself, his cronies there and try to eke out an existence on a frozen planet with a vacuum in the place of an atmosphere. If they stayed long enough, I am sure that they would develop an appreciation for Terra Firma and how unique it is in its capacity to sustain life.
If those doctors earned their living by conforming to what was already said, I'd take their statement with a grain of salt. If their reputation depended on the same thing, I'd think about it long and hard. If the politicians were trying to convince me to undergo cancer treatment I'd run the other way.
Wouldn't you? Or would you make a big cut in your standard of living, give up half of what you value, and happily seek treatment for what doctors with a political and financial stake tell you is wrong. Ignoring what those without any such stake have to say?
You are repeating the dire projections made by Al Gore in his documentary... The scientists are not the villians here. They are being used as the tool. The agenda of the left is to control our economy through redistribution of resources using climate change and environmental protection as the mechanism.
Many activists have admited that is their ultimate goal.
I wrote a hub on this very topic regarding melting glaciers. Please check it out...
Let me know if you learned something new...instead of repeating talking points.
Here is my article - "what if it takes 1000 years" search it. I can't post the link since it violates hubpages term of use regsrding self promotion.
An effort by the left to control our economy? Old and tired argument. As old as the liberals calling conservatives racist homophobes. You consistently complain that the media divides left and right with these issues yet you always fall back to the same old arguments.
Maybe just maybe liberals want to save the planet which in turn will save the economy. Auto makers are going green. It's the next industrial revolution. Do you not acknowledge that our military considers climate change a very serious geopolitical concern?
Well said. In the meantime, we are stuck with the Republican Party that we've got. Here's hoping they don't get us all killed.
All true, except I don't agree that Democracy is dying fast. I think it was dying, then Trump happened and the American people are waking up. At least, that is my high hope and seems to me to be happening...
Then again, I've always been the optimist that my friends & family say to me in just about every kind of situation, "Don't get your hopes up so high!" My energy goes where my hopes are; and I have a lot of energy - it can irritate or overwhelm people, LoL!
I'm not ready to give up on this country quite yet.
I wonder where this conversation would go if we dropped the labels?
Good point...I was never a fan of labels...I am a issues kind of guy. I lean conservative for the most part but have been liberal on other issues. Unfortunately, these labels have been loaded with all kinds of negative connotations...
The conversation would probably become much more constructive - except a label is used in the question; and dismissing labels seems to be part of the problem. Discussions have turned into arguments of left vs right: completely dismissing the central core - and majority - in this country. I don't think those of us in the middle realized that we needed to have a more pronounced presense. Now we know.
Interesting...so what do you think is the breakdown percent conservative, moderate and liberal progessive...?
I have stated in many past writings that we are 40% conservative, 30 percent liberal 20 percent middle and 10 percent have no idea what they believe...
by Jack Lee5 weeks ago
It has been almost a year since he left office. Though he seems to stick around DC and make his comments occasionally about policies...The question I have for all is this - what is your opinion of this President in his...
by G. Diane Nelson Trotter2 weeks ago
Evan mullins gave four suggestions:1. Examine the source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_f … s_websites Did you you know some sources are spoofing to make it seem like...
by Credence25 months ago
This should prove most interesting. I say sorry in advance to Trump supporters, but this is comprehensive and irresistible. http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-ed-o … president/For those that have the problems...
by ahorseback7 months ago
Not the sensationalizing "face -book " mentality of todays mainstream news media . Once , there was a time when selling the headline was the profiteering, business method of...
by Josak5 years ago
In counter to any logic or evidence.Obama is a MuslimObama was born in KenyaThe Media is controlled by liberalsSnopes and factcheck are liberal agencies Obama is going to take away our guns with the international arms...
by Jack Lee4 weeks ago
How about a poll here on Hubpages - not scientific....This is just a general discussion on the media in general.How many think the news media is balanced or moderate in their presentation of news?How many think they are...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.