Thursday, July 05, 2018

Left & Right July 4th 2018


I defend the right side of the political spectrum. For this show, Mark Guerringue defends the left. We start with Roe V Wade and whether it might be overturned by a new conservative majority on the Supreme Court. Confirmation hearings will be contentious. We go to the Constitution and its division of power between federal and state. Citing the Baltimore newspaper shooting, Mark asks if Trump's "Media is the enemy of the press" statement was causal. I say no, that it was a "one off." Then I again point out the overwhelming leftist bias in Mainstream Media." Mark says that is insulting. I offer hard data and decades of examples to support it. Regarding Russian involvement in the 2016 election, we speculate about how effective it was. I say not; Mark says somewhat. I compare fifties and sixties cold-war propaganda the US broadcast into the Soviet Union to today's Russian involvement. Mark worked briefly for Voice of America decades ago. Mark points to both Trump and Sanders appealing to "have nots" in cities and in rural areas. I agree to an extent, but Trump injects patriotism into the mix. We briefly discuss Muslim immigration in Europe and Danish attempts to prevent radicalism by educating the newest generation of Muslim children in that country.

12 comments:

Reality Check said...

You have tried to claim "leftist bias" in the media for years and have never come remotely close to proving it. Just because outlets don't champion your far right causes does not make the "biased".

Facts are facts wether you like them or not.

Charles Martel said...

I recommend people read about an acceptable compromise on abortion in Carl Sagan’s 1977 book, “The Dragons of Eden”, pages 204-209. It centers around the development of the neocortex which is that part of the brain that differentiates humans from all other species. This development occurs roughly at the end of the first trimester. Thus, all abortions after that point in time should be illegal. Do I personally like this compromise since I believe life begins at conception? No, but it is the most logical argument based on science that I’ve heard.

Charles Martel said...

Why does Mark equate the words progressivism with enlightened? It’s an oxymoron.

Tom is correct that the Left controls the language (and pop culture).

SCOTUS needn’t be politicized if the judges upheld the original intent of the authors who wrote the Constitution.

Video games anesthetize young people but so do I-Phones, the internet and social media.

Why is it “insulting” to call journalists biased if 90% vote for Democrats and contribute to their campaigns?

Rush was talking today (7/5/18) about what a gentleman Mitt Romney was but the Leftist media destroyed his character anyway. People like Trump because of this America First agenda AND that he doesn’t back down. It makes the Left’s heads explode and I’m ALL for it!

Charles Martel said...

Lastly, EVERYONE should read Bat Ye’or’s book, “Eurabia”, which details the 1973 “Euro-Arab Dialogue”, if you want to understand the roots of the current migrant/refugee crisis in Europe today.

Brian said...

It makes leftist's heads explode that Trump doesn't back down? What? The guy is always backing down:

https://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/lawrence-trump-backs-down-repeatedly-1270444099751

You really wonder why it is “insulting” to call journalists biased if 90% vote for Democrats and contribute to their campaigns?

So nobody could report without a "bias" on Jeffrey Dahmer unless they were a tiny minority who didn't condemn him, or donate money to charity helping such causes?

Journalists were "biased" reporting on Hitler's death camps because they were against them and maybe contributed funds to help the fight? Or could they maybe have just reported the facts without their personal feelings effecting the truthfulness of their news stories?

So what if most journalists are intelligent enough to see through the BS and recognize the stupidity and harm being done by this simpleton's actions? That doesn't mean that an outlet like the Boston Globe can't state the facts and also have an editorial section. Papers have been running like this since the revolution. Investigate the history of totalitarian regimes attacking and shutting down the free press.

I do agree with you that SCOTUS needn’t be politicized if the judges upheld the original intent of the authors who wrote the Constitution.

Peter said...

There were a couple of items in on back to back pages of today's Daily Sun that seemed fitting to the conversations here. One was a nice letter from Ann McGarity calling for strong borders that ended with: "I hope a solution to the immigration and homeless crises will emerge through civil discourse and legal process. It is not likely to occur through hateful rhetoric, insane antics and histrionic demonstrations."

Agreed.

The other was a column by Susan Bruce, who sometimes comes off a bit too mean-spirited for my tastes (as Tom also tends to do), but really sums up the hostility shown by some towards the media. I don't see much too argue about with what she says.


https://www.conwaydailysun.com/opinion/columns/susan-bruce-rope-tree-journalist/article_3ed38164-8075-11e8-928a-c7884469ed14.html

Steve said...

I didn’t watch this episode, but I’m guessing you didn’t provide “decades of hard data” but rather decades of carefully selected, hard anecdotes that support your claim of a liberally biased media while ignoring the reporting and broadcasting that simply don’t support your claim of biased media. This story is so perfectly tailored to partisan republicans, because it’s so easy to ignore the reporting that doesn’t support this tired, old claim. In a recent blog, you and I went back and forth on your claim that Mueller is now a corrupt, conviction-happy democratic operative, and your entire case was made by an opinion piece from the Boston Globe, which is part of the liberal media you so relentlessly condemn. You assail the media at every opportunity until you agree with their reporting, and suddenly those progressive, Democratic acolytes become Edward R Murrows.

Depending on who you read, the percentage of journalists who vote Democrat is anywhere from 60 to 90, and based on that, they can’t be trusted to report objectively, yet there are hundreds of conservative journalists who write for WSJ, CSM, National Review, American Spectator, Weekly Standard, American Conservative, Human Events, Washington Examiner, Forbes, Investors Business Daily, etc. Why is it that conservative journalists are gloriously free and unencumbered from their political penchant, but liberal journalists are slaves to theirs?

This boring, old screed of the liberal media is nothing more than a self-induced ruse. By labeling all of the media outside of a few anointed sources as liberally biased, you’re able to dismiss hundreds of newspapers and magazines and thousands of hours of broadcasting and hook yourself up to a slow drip of reporting and opinion that does nothing but reinforce what you’re already disposed to believing. Socrates said an unexamined life is not worth living. Your consumption of political current events is the unexamined life to which Socrates referred. Your life is spent not thinking, but simply agreeing.

I understand that challenging your own beliefs is a painful thing to do. It stings when I come across a well-written, well-researched story that forces me to reconsider a position I’ve spent some time forming, but it’s absolutely incumbent upon me to do exactly that. I suffer in the long run if I don’t, because I go into the voting booth less informed than I otherwise would be.

I think it’s no coincidence we’re the most polarized we’ve been during my lifetime while the opinion media is at its most prolific and successful point for as long as I’ve been aware. The hard reality of this is the people who subsist on opinion media don’t want to know the truth; they want to be lied to.

Tom McLaughlin said...

Steve writes:

"I understand that challenging your own beliefs is a painful thing to do. It stings when I come across a well-written, well-researched story that forces me to reconsider a position I’ve spent some time forming, but it’s absolutely incumbent upon me to do exactly that. I suffer in the long run if I don’t, because I go into the voting booth less informed than I otherwise would be."

On this we agree. Some in liberal media do well and Glenn Greenwald is a good example.

There must be a dedication to truth. When you do go off the reservation there is a price to pay and there very definitely is a reservation on the left. Ask Alan Dershowitz. There's one on the right too, but there's no death penalty for going off.

Maybe you don't know this, but I spent over twenty years on the left. I voted for Bill Clinton in 1992. After that came a metamorphosis that lasted about five to ten years before I arrived at where I am now on the political spectrum.

The hard data I offered was from memory but it's mostly polling from Pew and others about the Washington press corps going back thirty years.

How would you like to be my opponent on "Left and Right"?

Peter said...

Tom, what makes Glenn Greenwald "part of the liberal media"?

And I have never heard, from you or from anybody else, any evidence whatsoever that overall, the "mainstream media" - which certainly includes Fox - is "biased" in their reporting, regardless off their employee's voting records.

Steve said...

Thank you for the debate offer, especially because it seems sincere and not a taunt. I appreciate that. Though it sounds like fun, I think I would be outmatched. You get into some topics – Lolita Islands, white ownership of farms in South Africa, Catholic persecution in other countries, etc – that I simply know nothing about. I’m much more comfortable keying in prepared remarks. I’m not good on the spot and awful on camera. I’d struggle to recall the most common names, dates, and associations only to remember them all on the drive home. Plus, I live in South Portland and trucking out to the Valley and back isn’t in my schedule.

The orthodox partisans of both sides have a death penalty for heretics, not just the left. After criticizing Limbaugh’s influence and his worth to the conservative movement, his office was so besieged with discontent, he had to go on Rush’s radio show and plead for absolution. David Frum, ex George W speechwriter, was fired from the think tank American Enterprise Institute for criticizing how the Republicans handled the Obamacare debate. The intractability in the extremes of both parties is too discouraging to take sometimes. We should all aspire to debate to learn first, and educate second.

I’m not familiar with Glen Greenwald. I’ll look for him. I get most excited hearing from proven conservatives who condemn Republicans and commend Democrats, and proven liberals who condemn Democrats and commend Republicans. There, I feel like I get the most honest reporting, because, as we’ve both illustrated, the consequences can be severe.

I was raised in a conservative, Catholic family and used to be a card-carrying Republican, but dropped that after the Iraq war. I don’t think I’ll forgive any politician who voted for that resolution.

Steve said...

I'm a dope. I meant to identify US Rep Phil Gingrey as the person who criticized Limbaugh and had to go on his radio show to apologize.

Anonymous said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGSntI8-OLo