Hey Edi, looks like we have seriously high jacked this thread.
You make some very good points and while I don't really want to get into a debate counter debate over each and every individual point I would like to offer some comments about a few of them.
Quote:
This claim about the US media being controlled by liberals is a flat out lie. It cannot be formulated any more charitably than that.
|
The media is in the business of entertainment. They do what they do to drum up ratings. When the media is controlled by a few power mongers, be they righties or lefties, the message becomes skewed. When they own the information, they can bend it any way they want. That is true about any media, public or government controlled. Ours is just in the business to sell advertising time. Whatever truth brings in the most revenue is the holly grail of the day.
Quote:
Know what they have been up to in some of the midwest states? Those gay marriage bans they rammed through the legislation?
|
In every state that had a bill up for voter approval regarding gay marriage the voters turned it down. Nearly everyone agrees that gay couples should have the same exact legal rights as strait couples. And thankfully in every bill that was turned down by the voters wasn't about gay rights, it was about gay marriage. The voting public has spoken, they support equal legal rights, but not gay marriage. This debate over the term marriage will go on for many years before it is finally resolved.
Quote:
Do you consider this debate a verbal attack?
|
There is a difference between a spirited debate and verbal attack. Much like there is a difference between attacking the person over the idea. Calling a person a name directly is considered a verbal attack. Stating that, for example, republicans or liberals are dumb, isn't a personal attack. In that sense you are attacking the ideals of a group and not an individual. While you could say that Republicans suck, it doesn't mean the same thing as saying to someone that "you suck."
Quote:
Fox "News" and it's "fair and balanced" approach is nothing but a right wing propaganda channel and can get away with all of that behavior with no backlash at all
|
I love how the liberals here in the states and across the world keep proving my point for me. If you don't tout the liberal left line, your attacked, harassed, called names, and so on. If this isn't true, then why all the hate for Fox News? Look at MSNBC and how they are. Do you see any liberals attacking Keith Olbermann now do you? Come on, if Fox News was such a propaganda machine, then why is it that they dominate cable news? They quite literally blow MSNBC out of the water day in and day out. If they are just a propaganda wing for the right wing republican conservatives then why do they hold dominion over MSNBC and all of the cable news networks? Simple truth, more people identify with the Fox News and the truth than they do with left wing liberal bias in the media.
I personally don't think they are a propaganda channel Edi, in fact I do think they are exactly what they claim to be, fair and balanced and to be honest it would seem that many, if not all, dedicated left wing liberals sincerely hate them for it. I state this as a fact and point at the evident manor in which the left wing liberals have constantly been bombarding Fox News with attack after attack. This level of left wing liberal hypocrisy is actually quite funny when you sit right down and think about it. They love MSNBC, but hate Fox News.
Quote:
Ah, the old staple argument about how us Europeans should be grateful to the US.
You should take a good look at your history books before attempting to use that on a Finn.
|
There is no doubt that you Finn's are some tough son's a bi***es.
I know its old staple arguement, but it is a valid one. Times change and no matter what happens between us we both know that come a ligitimate fight, we would all stand together as we have in the past. Like they say, America might be full of idiots, but they are our idiots.

We feel the same way about our European brothers. We fight and bicker but come hell or high water, we are friends.
Quote:
That is not exactly the fault of the TV, but the fault of the parents who think that the TV can raise the child for them. Such parents are lazy and irresponsible. It is a parent's job to raise a child and there is no abrogating that responsibility.
|
I agree with you Edi, 100%. Absolutely correct.
Quote:
Atrocities said:
Liberals have taken the power that the parents once held and gave it to the children. This is no lie, it isn't propaganda, it is fact and it is ugly.
Edi Said:
I would like to see evidence of this unsupported claim. I will not accept it as a statement of fact at face value. AS I said, by the time it gets to that point, the parents have already failed.
|
I should clarify that comment by adding to the beginning of that sentence these words "I believe."
I wish I could prove this to you Edi but I cannot. It would be akin to attempting to prove that God exists. All I can say is that the prevailing emotional feeling of many folks, Republican and Democrat, is that too many fundamental parental rights are being circumvented by an elite few who believe that their way is better. This is a sad and ugly truth, and one that most parents will doggedly resist. But the push toward taking the right of the parents to raise their children by their own moral code and standards is slowly being eroded by an insidiously insistent drive toward giving those rights directly to the schools and law makers.
I feel, and this is pure speculation on my part, that there is a real tangible and active on going threat to undermine our very way of life in that when you can control what a child is tough, you can control the child and by the transitive properties of nature, you gain control of society when those children come of age. Indoctrinate them while they are young to believe in nothing and you weaken them as adults and make them pliable for control throughout their lives. Insert your favorite bad guy into the formula and you have a recipe for totalitarianism. But then again WTF do I know? This could all just be research material for book I am writing.
Quote:
Only when the opponent thinks that the substance of what is said can be ignored in favor of the way it is said.
|
I sincerely do not have any problem with any one calling my ideas flawed and or using colorful terminology to do so. But I do have a concern when someone attacks me personally. I genuinely like to keep an open mind about things. I want people to prove my points of view wrong if they can. That is what is so absolutely wonderful about a free society, the fair exchange of ideas. Prove me wrong and I will tell you, but please do it with your argument, not with angry or hateful words.
Edi you are indeed a solid debater with skill and genuine passion.
