The Push For Colbert's "Restoring Truthiness" Rally 703
jamie writes "A grassroots campaign has begun to get Stephen Colbert to hold a rally on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial to counter Glenn Beck's recent 'Restoring Honor' event. The would-be rally has been dubbed 'Restoring Truthiness' and was inspired by a recent post on Reddit, where a young woman wondered if the only way to point out the absurdity of the Tea Party's rally would be if Colbert mirrored it with his own Colbert Nation.'"
What the hell? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is this on Slashdot?
I couldn't care less about the Tea Party or Colbert. It isn't real news. It certainly isn't for nerds.
Re:What the hell? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Count me in (Score:4, Insightful)
Ignore the Troll (Score:2, Insightful)
Idle? (Score:4, Insightful)
Shouldn't this be in idle?
It's the answer!!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
If you put in the proposed date into a binary translator, 10/10/10, you get an output of 42!!! The answer to everything is this rally!!!
This is better than geese flying over.
Journalism (Score:5, Insightful)
Every so often I think it's a sad state of affairs for journalism when satirists like John Stewart and Stephen Colbert on a comedy channel are considered more reliable, trustworthy, and objective in their reporting than "serious" (for lack of a better term) journalists like Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly on what's supposed to be a news channel.
Re:Most of the pople who Watch Colbert..... (Score:5, Insightful)
Are usually nerdy college students or people who live in their parent's basement rent free. In other words dependents who are dependant upon staying out from the daylight. You really think they are going to get a bunch of them pryed away from their gamestations and computers long enough to go outside to a rally in the hot burning sun?
You would have better luck convincing Vampires to eat a cloves of garlic while standing in an open air church at high noon.
You shouldn't assume that everyone who watches the same shows you do is like you.
Re:Most of the pople who Watch Colbert..... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Go Stephen! (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sorry, but every political/issue rally is absurd. Million man march anyone? The countless demonstrations for the environment? Any rally with a politician?
These events only serve to make the participants feel like they are doing something.
It's certainly easier... (Score:3, Insightful)
where a young woman wondered if the only way to point out the absurdity of the Tea Party's rally would be if Colbert mirrored it with his own Colbert Nation.'"
It's certainly easier than, you know, actually acknowledging and dealing with their ideas...
Re:Count me in (Score:5, Insightful)
It was sad enough to see Beck's shameless self promotion, let alone to now see Colbert's cynical copycatting of shameless self-promotion
Haver you never seen Colbert's show?
The Date (Score:4, Insightful)
The date they want to hold the rally is 10 October of '10. I.E., 10/10/10, however they have the poster written with the date as 101010, which is binary for 42, which, as we all know, is the answer to life, the universe and everything. Its the ultimate truthy thing. It's the ultimate nerd thing. Only thing its missing is a sign saying "Repent! The Singularity is Nye!" with the Science guy himself staring everyone down like Uncle Sam.
Re:What the hell? (Score:5, Insightful)
We don't debate things anymore, we have competing demagogues shouting past each other, lying, and using naked appeals to emotion to push their agendas. Beck is the most visible at the moment, but he's certainly not the first nor the last. Hell, they don't even really debate things in the halls of Congress anymore, they just shout their talking points at each other to rile up the extremists on either end of the political spectrum because they're apparently the only ones who still vote.
Meanwhile, comedians like Colbert try to point out the absurdity of it all, and everyone has a good laugh, and no one changes their behavior. A rally at the Lincoln memorial would accomplish nothing. Beck's followers would either ignore it or use it as fuel to steer even further toward the extreme and follow Beck even closer. Beck's detractors would have a good laugh about it, but they're already convinced Beck is a nutbar so it's preaching to the choir for them.
On the other hand, if it was well-executed it would probably give Colbert a ratings boost, so at least he and the guys over at Comedy Central would get something out of it.
Re:Count me in (Score:5, Insightful)
Colbert's entire shtick is parodying shamelessly self promoting pundits like "Papa Bear" O'Reilly and Beck.
Re:Journalism (Score:5, Insightful)
"serious" (for lack of a better term) journalists
The better term is "opinion show hosts".
Re:What the hell? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Journalism (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ignore the Troll (Score:3, Insightful)
Both sides still get it pretty regularly.
But let's be honest, there isn't a liberal Glenn Beck. There just isn't anyone even in that league in terms of humor value. You have to go where the jokes are, and a guy who writes crazy conspiracy crap on a chalkboard while crying is a gold mine.
Even if you somehow secretly cloned, say, President Obama and raised him in a secret lab to be the worst parts of everything his detractors claim him to be, then somehow swapped him for the real president, the result would still not be the comedy fodder of a Glenn Beck.
Re:It's certainly easier... (Score:4, Insightful)
You mean like how pretty much all of what they complained about was happening also under Dubya's reign in office and yet they only started complaining about these things once Obama got into office and continued the stupid policies of the previous administration?
Re:What the hell? (Score:5, Insightful)
The Tea Party isn't news?
The group whose dominating and inept control of the conservative voice in 2009 was a key factor in passing the sweeping healthcare reform bill isn't news?
No, they're news. It's just that no matter which side of the aisle you're on, they're bad news.
Re:Page hits, my man, page hits (Score:3, Insightful)
Should the dark side be somewhere in the chain of reasoning?
Re:Count me in (Score:1, Insightful)
No, the Nation of Islam and the Million Man March did it first, then the Promise Keepers did it, now it's goddamned political theatre.
Re:Journalism (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know that that's entirely fair. These things are on a continuum.
You look at an O'Reilly or an Olbermann (to pick two guys with very different politics), and if you're not in line with them politically, you'll probably disagree a lot with their interpretation of an event or its implications, but in some sense their starting point feels based in reality even if where they end up isn't.
I don't get that same sense out of, say, Beck.
Re:What the hell? (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you really want your kids to learn creationism in school, have 99% of the budget spend on military and hunting homeless and immigrants become a recreational activity? This is what will happen if everyone (including nerds) will keep saying - "That none of my business".
Don't forget the oceans will rise to swallow the coasts and corporations will take all our rights.
All because of that party of FEAR!
Smug Internet people. (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow, you mean some smug Internet denizen came up with a way to launch a "hilarious" yet substance-free attack on a group she and all her cool friends just "know" is silly? What stunning news! Strawman used by baselessly smug group of left wingers against group of right wingers!
What next, are we going to have a story about a group of right wingers painting left wingers as Anti-American and playing the Outrage Card to rouse the rabble?
A pox on both their houses.
Doesn't it get boring after a while, reveling in how clever you and your Internet buddies who have developed some lame shared-language of goofball Internet memes are?
Oh, wait...
Re:It's certainly easier... (Score:1, Insightful)
Exactly. When logic and reason aren't on your side, resort to mockery. It's the liberal way!
Re:It's certainly easier... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's certainly easier than, you know, actually acknowledging and dealing with their ideas...
What ideas? You mean ideas like somehow thinking that Patrick Henry was a supporter of the US Constitution http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/09/patrick_henry_and_the_tea_part_1.php [scienceblogs.com]. Or maybe you mean Glenn Beck's pseudoscientific ideas about how the Smithsonian is involved in a massive conspiracy to cover up 19th century archaelogical facts?http://anthroslug.blogspot.com/2010/08/glenn-becks-pseudo-archaeology-part-1.html [blogspot.com]. Or maybe you mean the idea that Obama is going to put Republicans into concentration camps http://boingboing.net/2009/03/17/foxs-glenn-beck-says.html [boingboing.net]? You know, what? I'm sick of the notion that there is anything resembling worthwhile ideas coming from this man. At a certain point, it is a waste of time to actually respond to this paranoid nonsense in any other way than ridicule. And to the people who believe him or listen to him? Fuck 'em. Fuck every one of them for being too lazy or too stupid or too tribalistic to exercise their brains at all.
Now, if you just we're talking about the saner end of the Tea Partiers then there might be some argument that they have actual ideas, mainly resembling the form "I like government policies that make life better for me but not for other people." Do I need to address what's wrong with that also or are we done?
Re:Page hits, my man, page hits (Score:4, Insightful)
I think the fellow below had it right when he completed the cycle with "Getting laid leads to marriage, and marriage leads to SUFFERING!"
Re:Go Stephen! (Score:2, Insightful)
What exactly is funny about it? I'm no Glenn Beck fan, he's a delusional religious nut. But I don't get what's deep about what basically amounts to "Durr, let's do a mock rally". Seriously, the idea to lampoon somebody is original or clever?
He won't do it because anybody with half a brain sees how unoriginal, dreary, obvious, and boring the idea is. I don't watch his show, but going for the obvious tack doesn't seem his style.
They already had a counter-protest (Score:3, Insightful)
The race profiteer Al Sharpton led a small group to protest the "hijacking" of MLK's memory.
Re:It's certainly easier... (Score:2, Insightful)
Exactly. She waves her hand and says something like "Oh, they wouldn't know real debate so we shouldn't bother". The ironing cracks me up. One group of dim, smug assholes mocking another group of people for being dim, righteous assholes.
Yes please ... (Score:1, Insightful)
... throw an anti-tea party rally. To be fair, you'd have to have your platform be the opposite of the tea party platform. So I guess the RT rally would be for a non-balanced budget, pro-emissions trade, pro-more complex tax system, anti-auditing the Federal Government, pro-escalating federal budgets, pro-earmarks, pro-tax increases.
Sounds like we already have all that. So you are rallying for the status quo.
Good Job you socially progress folks.
You mock yourselves.
Fools All (Score:3, Insightful)
To think that ANY political ideology, no matter where it sits on the spectrum of political thought, provides an optimum framework for solving the world's or nation's problems is the sign of a very small mind.
Re:It's certainly easier... (Score:2, Insightful)
That's my issue with the teabaggers. Where were they when Dubya was spending us into the poorhouse? Granted, he was Scrooge McDuck compared to Obama.
I think they're largely religious nut Republicans fed up with how "RINO" (they love that term) filled their party has become. Sure, there is a subset of them who are more of a libertarian bent and have logical, rational points of view but I don't think they're a majority.
I hate both spectrums. The left sickens me with their dreary smugness and complete lack of grasp of obvious reality (we can't keep spending like this), while the right bores me with their flag-wrapped religious jingoism, World Police bullshit. I fucking hate them both.
Re:Count me in (Score:2, Insightful)
*whoosh*
Re:What the hell? (Score:3, Insightful)
they just shout their talking points at each other to rile up the extremists on either end of the political spectrum because they're apparently the only ones who still vote.
Actually, the republicans scream/vote to appease the extreme end of the spectrum. The democrats vote to appease the republicans. If the democrats actually listened to the people who elected them the US would be out of the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan and we'd have a single payer health care system.
Re:Ignore the Troll (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Think not what your country can do for you.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Getting rid of Beck would be like getting rid of Hitler, you risk having someone competent replace him after giving the followers a martyr and renewed (frothing mad) fervor.
Re:What the hell? (Score:5, Insightful)
It is precisely because I care about the environment that I am concerned about people who conflate caring for the environment with fearmongering.
Re:It's certainly easier... (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly. Both sides are assholes which is why neither extreme should be the one holding power.
Re:Ignore the Troll (Score:4, Insightful)
It's obvious you haven't watched either recently.
Re:Journalism (Score:3, Insightful)
Sadly, it's the same thing on other networks. ESPN: Mike & Mike show in the AM blathers about something. Later the same day, ESPN news coverage is largely about the crap said earlier in the day on Mike & Mike.
When you have a 24/7 news channel, sometimes you have to manufacture news.
Re:What the hell? (Score:5, Insightful)
"hunting homeless and immigrants become a recreational activity?"
HELL YES. Bring this on, immediately.
Seriously, why do people insist on trying to equate illegals with immigrants? The first act of an illegal is disrespect our national and its law, their very method of entry into the nation demonstrates they are unfit to enter our society. The first act of an immigrant is to show respect for our nation and culture and to undergo significant (but not unreasonable) efforts to become a part of it.
There is a reason why legal immigrants integrate into america and make it stronger with parts of their former culture while illegal immigrants form pockets of what they consider to still be their culture.
Re:What the hell? (Score:4, Insightful)
Sheldon Cooper is the nerdiest nerd on TV in the US.
Re:Go Stephen! (Score:4, Insightful)
After a Colbert rally, I am quite confident that there will be trash all over the place.
Huh... so I suppose you've done an in-depth survey, and have thus proven that Colbert Report viewers are slobs... or something?
Fuck, I'm saddened, yet unsurprised, you got modded up... apparently there are 3-4 idiots out there who believe that baseless opinions insulting groups they dislike qualifies as "interesting".
Re:Count me in (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the part about Colbert I always found so awesome...through parody, he speaks more truth than those with a "serious" agenda.
Of course, nothing is funnier than someone who thinks Colbert is serious. My friend's mom is a die hard conservative, and she thought Colbert was serious about everything he did (taking it as Comedy Central's counterpoint to The Daily Show, in the interest of being balanced.) I showed her clips of Colbert getting his start on The Daily Show, and of him talking politics outside of his "Colbert" character.
Her head exploded.
*Sigh* More liberal BS (Score:2, Insightful)
Why is this liberal garbage on SlashDot? I didn't see anything on Beck on here and pray it wasn't because it should be here either. Please ppl, stop the ignorance.
Re:Count me in (Score:3, Insightful)
I was responding to this:
It was sad enough to see Beck's shameless self promotion, let alone to now see Colbert's cynical copycatting of shameless self-promotion
I felt it was pretty obvious what my point was. It is not sad to see Colbert's 'cynical copycatting of shameless self promotion,' because that is what Colbert does, and has always done, and it's funny.
It seems you have mistaken what I wrote to mean that I support Beck or O'Reilly. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Whoever keeps modding Wyatt Earp Flamebait, (Score:3, Insightful)
Stop it. It isn't flamebait. I may be a liberal and Wyatt may be conservative, but even I can tell he's not here to incite flames.
Re:Ignore the Troll (Score:4, Insightful)
The Daily Show and the Colbert report make fun of the brainless.
Fortunately for the Democratic party, they are spineless.
Re:Go Stephen! (Score:3, Insightful)
I have no idea how many people will show up at a Colbert rally, but I can tell you one very significant difference between the rally that Glen Beck held and one that Colbert holds. After the Glen Beck rally, it looked like the grounds crew had just finished getting the place ready for an event, everything picked up and put away, no trash on the ground. After a Colbert rally, I am quite confident that there will be trash all over the place.
I really hope that Colbert does hold such a rally, it will tell us a lot about what is going on in this country.
So is that a relevant issue? Should we decide the merits of MLK based on how many litterbugs where in his crowd compared to an equivalently sized Klan meeting?
Re:It's certainly easier... (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. Both sides are assholes which is why neither extreme should be the one holding power.
Sure... and then you get Obama, who's about as middle of the road as they come, hence why no one is happy. The Democrats wish he was more liberal, the Republicans wish he was more conservative, and everyone else wishes he was at least interesting enough to pay attention to.
Re:Ignore the Troll (Score:3, Insightful)
You obviously have never seen any of Keith Olberman's political rants.
I have. Partisan, absolutely. Demagogue-y, sure. As ridiculous as Beck? Not even close on his best day.
Re:It's certainly easier... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Go Stephen! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Go Stephen! (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait, you think we were on track to win in Vietnam? And it was the protests that screwed things up? And you think the citizens of Vietnam are 'relegated to live under communism?' Vietnam had one of the highest growth rates in the world since the government instituted free market reforms in 1986. Vietnam is a member of the WTO, and well respected in the international community. The human rights situation is still abysmal, but improving. Give it time and Vietnam will be indistinguishable from the free and prosperous hybrid socialist/free market economies of Europe. As of right now, their economy is doing quite a bit better than ours. Funny how it was capitalism that imploded recently, not socialism.
Re:Count me in (Score:5, Insightful)
"Colbert" is in fact a persona not a real person,
and the single best part of this is the Bush Administrations complete idoicy when they booked him for the White House Correspondents Dinner.
That was pure gold.
Re:Count me in (Score:5, Insightful)
Something about him having a dream [wikipedia.org] or something like that.
Re:Great idea. (Score:4, Insightful)
The best counter-protest signs I'd seen were from the attendees of Comic-Con this year when the Westboro Baptist Church (The "God Hates Fags" guys) protested the event:
http://www.comicsalliance.com/2010/07/22/super-heroes-vs-the-westboro-baptist-church/ [comicsalliance.com]
Re:Ignore the Troll (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly...They made fun of Clinton because he got a blow job. They make fun of Bush because he acts folksie and dumb. They make fun of Dick Cheney because he has a Darth Vader Complex. As for Obama, what are they going to do? They can't do racist humor. He isn't dumb or crazy, and he only seems evil to rightwing conspiracy theorists. So what jokes do you make?
Re:Count me in (Score:3, Insightful)
And your point is... what exactly?
His shtick is funny and has more truth in it than O'Reilly/GB's festering mouth(s) could ever dream of.
Festering mouths? Really? Why the hatred? I mean, it's OK to disagree on the subject matter, but do you really need to literally HATE those with a different perspective on life? I believe yours and nearly every other post here, are proof that it's not the right that are the "hate mongers", but the left.
So it's true. The left does project.
Re:Ignore the Troll (Score:4, Insightful)
Really? Count the number of times John Stewart makes direct fun of a Republican, then rewatch an episode and count the number of times he makes fun of a Democrat. Each episode is HEAVILY weighted to make fun of conservatives.
First, sure, but making fun of one more than the other != only making fun of one, which is what the post you replied to was rebutting.
Second, to be fair, if you removed mocking Fox News from the count, I think it'd be pretty even up. As a comedian, what can you even do about that? Half the day MSNBC is airing what amount to Dateline NBC reruns or the equivalent and there just isn't shit funny to say about that. Olbermann at his most blustering and ridiculous can't hold a candle to the sheer ludicrousness of Glenn Beck drawing something completely nonsensical on a chalkboard and weeping about it.
(Colbert is a little more middle but still ridicules Republicans more.) Comedy Central is just as left-leaning as CNN and MSNBC.
If you think the modern incarnation of CNN is left-leaning, you're seeing what you want to see and not what's actually there. If anything, they attempt to be "balanced" to a fault, giving voice to both sides of an issue even when one of those sides (be it conservative or liberal) is clearly insane. If I was a politician and came out tomorrow saying I thought we shouldn't set kindergardens on fire, CNN would find some nutball who thought we should to provide a counterpoint.
Sorry, you don't really believe that do you? (Score:3, Insightful)
Your comment is in line with "elect Republicans and they will take your Social Security away" or "Elect Democrats and they will raise taxes"
Even if somehow one party managed to control two thirds of both houses and the white house the courts would still be there as well as the court of public opinion. Even while Democrats had a majority in both houses they rarely got anything done. When they did they resorted to parliamentarian tricks and deception. Hell we saw bill after bill passed without Congressmen knowing what was in it and somehow this is better than what might come later?
If anything government is dysfunctional and they have made it so that the rules protect them in their rule. The tea party that many associate negative connotations with is that part which was absconded with by people looking to make money and increase their power base. As was seen in Alaska, the real tea party does not obey the Republican party and does not cede to the Democrats either. It is still up in the open what they may become but if all we have are people spouting FUD what we will have? Simple, the same crap we have now where both parties play people off each other so that THEY can stay in power. So while they cheer your inane comments, put there by endless talking heads on each side, nothing changes and that is the best solution they could hope for.
What..... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Count me in (Score:2, Insightful)
"Colbert" is in fact a persona not a real person, that is the personality on screen is not as he is in real life. The whole thing is a sarcastic cynical look at Fox News talk shows and other self important talking heads. That's why some people think it's funny, others (without a sense of humor) are offended.
I don't find him funny. It's not that I don't have a sense of humor, it's that I no longer find a joke funny after hearing it over and over and over and over again. We get it. Colbert thinks Bill O'Reilly and what he believes are conservative talk show hosts are ignorant, racist, bigoted, self serving, pompous asses. I got it in the first ten minutes the very first time I saw his show. After that, it's been the predictable telling of the same joke over and over and over again.
As an example, compare that to South Park. In South Park, you have Ben Afleck with an ass-face, Tom Cruize packing fudge and won't come out of the closet, Mel Gibson smearing poo all over the walls, Cartman as Beck, Al Gore as himself warning us all about man-bear-pig, Scientologists as frauds, Jesus looking at porn and Mohammed in a pedo-bear costume. They piss off everyone. Even Stewart, who also spends much of his time roasting the right, will go after the occasional liberal on extremely rare occasion.
"Colbert" is nothing more than a repetitive constant bashing of O'Reilly via parody and it gets old really, really, really fast.
Re:Count me in (Score:5, Insightful)
Cannot contain the laughter...
That was the perfect Colbert immitation of cyclical fallacy based arguments!
Build a strawman, name it hatred, claim "literal" hatred, denounce the made up statement, over-generalize and claim as proof.
The last line though, was absolute perfection. Projecting your own hatred in a statement about projection.
Classic Colbert.
Re:Go Stephen! (Score:3, Insightful)
Wait, you think we were on track to win in Vietnam? And it was the protests that screwed things up?
Uh, yeah. We lost zero major battles in Vietnam. Exactly zero. Had the bombing campaign been allowed to continue and not been limited (again, due to liberal protests), we bet your ass we could have won that war.
And you think the citizens of Vietnam are 'relegated to live under communism?' Vietnam had one of the highest growth rates in the world since the government instituted free market reforms in 1986.
So, what you are saying is that Vietnam had one of the highest growth rates in the world since the government realized that communism doesn't really work and tossed aside all that "to each according to their need" bullshit.
Vietnam is a member of the WTO, and well respected in the international community. The human rights situation is still abysmal, but improving.
What gets me is the respect coming from you, even though you are fully aware that " The human rights situation is still abysmal...". A country with an "abysmal" human rights record is what we were there fighting to prevent. Populations don't want to be oppressed. They are forced to allow it to happen because the oppressor is stronger than they are and is either stronger or more staying power than those fighting for freedom.
Give it time and Vietnam will be indistinguishable from the free and prosperous hybrid socialist/free market economies of Europe.
You mean, like they could have had since 1975? How many souls spent their entire lives under oppression because someone thought that if we showed peace and love that the world would turn into a John Lennon song.
As of right now, their economy is doing quite a bit better than ours.
Really? While our economy sucks, it only sucks when compared to itself. Our economy grew more in the past year than the entire economy of Vietnam. The US GDP per capita is $46,381. Vietnam's is $2,942. Um, I think our economy is a bit better than Vietnam's. So, given your track record of "non-facts", I guess we can throw out your last point of "Funny how it was capitalism that imploded recently, not socialism."
Re:What if Beck is a Colbert? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well of course. Beck, Limbaugh, and Coulter, it's pure performance art. The only difference between them and Colbert is that Colbert plays the whole thing for laughs, and makes few secrets that it's satire. The real eye opener here is just how fucking stupid the Teabaggers are that they don't realize that they're falling for a joke. Now I still Beck is an immoral pile of crap, not because of what he says, but because he doesn't wink at the audience like Colbert does.
Re:Count me in (Score:5, Insightful)
but Colbert and others continue to tell us all that nothing's wrong
Jon Stewart and Colbert are constantly talking about the budget problems lately...they both do many things, but acting like nothing is wrong certainly isn't one of them.
Re:Count me in (Score:5, Insightful)
The Best Thing Ever was when some Bush-administration lackey took Colbert seriously enough to invite him to speak at the 2006 White House Correspondents' dinner.
That speech made Colbert forever one of my personal heroes.
Re:Count me in (Score:3, Insightful)
I dunno. I think Beck doesn't necessarily believe what he says, but he /does/ believe (not without justification) that his viewers are morons who will believe whatever he tells them, as long as he includes the magic incantation to tell them to do their own research.
The man's *very* well paid to spread conservative propaganda.
Re:It's certainly easier... (Score:3, Insightful)
February 27, 2009 to protest the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) bailout bill signed by President George W. Bush in October 2008
Now, does it really seem so unreasonable that people were talking about this before the date of the actual protest? Dig around a little, and you'll see people were very upset about the bank bailout, which is the reason the first one failed. A lot of people were opposed to it.
One other thing, while Obama has increased the debt substantially, no Republican has reduced the debt since 1970
Um, are you trying to prove that Democrats are better than Republicans or something?
You aren't thinking clearly. Blaming an entire deficit on one president is silly. Using your approach, you might as well say, "no Democrat controlled congress has reduced the deficit since the Carter era." That would be silly also.
Look at the numbers more closely, and you will see that in strict terms, no president has managed to reduce the debt. Ever since Roosevelt, the debt has been increasing. Those who've managed to reduce it did so only relative to GDP, and they managed that because GDP of the country was increasing faster than the debt, which is what happened during the 90s, or because inflation really helps debtors when they're on a fixed interest rate (what happened during the 70s).
Look deeper, and you'll see that the main difficulty for Obama was also the main difficulty for Bush: increasing entitlement spending as the baby-boomers age. This isn't something a president has a lot of control over (you can't demand that everyone stay young).
It also isn't something tea-partiers have dealt with much. I will be interested in seeing how they respond if they ever become aware of this difficulty, which they will as they begin to gain power.
Re:Count me in (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sorry. But do Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly have some kind of dental infection that I'm not aware of? No? Then the "festering mouths" comment is a personal attack, an insult not to refute or forward arguments, but to insult these men personally.
So, yeah, that is what I'd call a hateful attack, or in more general terms, an attack based on hate. So, if it really was a hateful personal attack, then it was not a strawman, which is what your entire point was based on.
Here, let me try to say it in simpler terms so maybe you might understand:
Strange that every time I see an argument against the Tea Party or conservatives in general, it is almost always based on how hateful conservatives are. Yet, here are 300 comments, nearly all of which are based on personal attacks and insults.
So, I ask again, project much?
Re:Count me in (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Go Stephen! (Score:1, Insightful)
What gets me is the respect coming from you, even though you are fully aware that " The human rights situation is still abysmal...". A country with an "abysmal" human rights record is what we were there fighting to prevent.
Yeah and we went into Iraq to save the people from tyranny. If what you say is true, then you got a lot of splaining to do about South Korea where WE WON and they had similar human rights problems until well into the 80s too.
Re:Count me in (Score:3, Insightful)
And your point is... what exactly?
His shtick is funny and has more truth in it than O'Reilly/GB's festering mouth(s) could ever dream of.
Festering mouths? Really? Why the hatred?
Festering mouth is right, and its not hatred. Any Projection is on your part.
If I see someone walking around with a festering wound for a mouth I don't hate them, but I sure am concerned that something dangerously ungood is happening.
No, of course you don't hate them. You just call their mouth a "festering wound" and claim that their actions can only lead to "something dangerously ungood", but no hatred at all there.
Of course, these people are only guilty of have a point of view that is different than your own and as we all know, anyone that does not agree with you has a "festering wound" for a mouth.
Yeah. No personal attacks there. Only pure fact and logic. When someone disagrees with you, they are obviously scum of the earth with no hope of completing anything worth while. Seriously, how could I possibly refute the "festering mouth" argument? It's a plain to see as the Chewbacca defense and equally unrefutable.
Re:Go Stephen! (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait, you think we were on track to win in Vietnam? And it was the protests that screwed things up?
Uh, yeah. We lost zero major battles in Vietnam. Exactly zero. Had the bombing campaign been allowed to continue and not been limited (again, due to liberal protests), we bet your ass we could have won that war.
Except the political battle.
And you think the citizens of Vietnam are 'relegated to live under communism?' Vietnam had one of the highest growth rates in the world since the government instituted free market reforms in 1986.
So, what you are saying is that Vietnam had one of the highest growth rates in the world since the government realized that communism doesn't really work and tossed aside all that "to each according to their need" bullshit.
That would be a sterling example of winning a war by losing a battle and letting Vietnam realize that communism isn't a plausible way to run a country in the long term.
Vietnam is a member of the WTO, and well respected in the international community. The human rights situation is still abysmal, but improving.
What gets me is the respect coming from you, even though you are fully aware that " The human rights situation is still abysmal...". A country with an "abysmal" human rights record is what we were there fighting to prevent. Populations don't want to be oppressed. They are forced to allow it to happen because the oppressor is stronger than they are and is either stronger or more staying power than those fighting for freedom.
We can't force democracy on people, by definition.
Give it time and Vietnam will be indistinguishable from the free and prosperous hybrid socialist/free market economies of Europe.
You mean, like they could have had since 1975? How many souls spent their entire lives under oppression because someone thought that if we showed peace and love that the world would turn into a John Lennon song.
Again, you cannot force democracy on people who don't want it. North Vietnam would not be as free as it is today had we not withdrawn from the war.
As of right now, their economy is doing quite a bit better than ours.
Really? While our economy sucks, it only sucks when compared to itself. Our economy grew more in the past year than the entire economy of Vietnam. The US GDP per capita is $46,381. Vietnam's is $2,942. Um, I think our economy is a bit better than Vietnam's. So, given your track record of "non-facts", I guess we can throw out your last point of "Funny how it was capitalism that imploded recently, not socialism."
GDP per capita is not adjusted for the market value of goods. I bet they have iPhone clones that cost 1/10th of what ours cost.
Re:Count me in (Score:3, Insightful)
South Part is all about pricking the pretentious, as outrageously as possible. Colbert does that too, but he's mainly about the politics, not the politicians. so yeah, Colbert isn't much fun if you don't actually care about politics. and why is it that you don't care about politics?
Re:*Sigh* More liberal BS (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Go Stephen! (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh yes. Unfortunately, the famous liberal dove Robert McNamara doesn't agree with you if you read between the lines of "Fog of War".
One of the main reasons the bombing was less effective that you make out was the C Chi tunnels [wikipedia.org] which IIRC were far more extensive than bomber-command wished to believe.
From Operation Thunder [schoolnet.co.uk]
So, how many million tons did we fall short of achieving an easy victory? Another 700 tons per man, woman and child?
Thanks for playing.
Re:The Lone Conservative... (Score:3, Insightful)
Younger people are typically left-wing. As you get older, and if you're responsible, you'll begin swinging right... unless you're a career politician...
Usually what happens is people form opinions and rarely ever change them. Younger people for more liberal ideas and the definition of "liberal" and "conservative" (such as they are) changes over time so people so by the time a person who was liberal in their youth dies, the same opinions they've always held are now labelled as "conservative".
Or in short, old people mostly become set in their ways and don't like change, as they perceive it. Most people in general, have incorrect beliefs about what actually happened in the past and don't bother to research the truth. For example, the issue of taxation. Never in our history has taxation been as lacking in progressiveness (usually considered a liberal trait) as it is now. When "liberal" politicians try to move taxation to a more progressive level, like it was under Reagan or even Nixon, our society labels that as "liberal" and the opposite of conservative, even though it's actually moving things to be more like they used to be an always have been. Of course that's because the labels "liberal" and conservative" aren't about values, but about dividing society into two competing groups because it's the easiest way to get votes.
Re:It's certainly easier... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's certainly easier... (Score:1, Insightful)
Excluding single-payer advocates has the effect of pushing the set of options considered "mainstream" to the right. If I was advocating for single-payer, I wouldn't exclude advocates of (British style) nationalized health care, since they would help serve to make my views appear more moderate. As for the Obama plan, it's based on the reforms implemented in Massachusetts under Mitt Romney, and (at the time) promoted by the Heritage Foundation [politifact.com], which to me qualifies as at least moderately conservative.
As for Alan Simpson, he isn't just a token conservative; he's one of the co-chairs. And the earlier quote indicates that he has total disdain for Social Security. He has also repeated the old zombie lie [nytimes.com], "It's a bunch of IOUs" [thefiscaltimes.com].
If Obama was centrist, he would have balanced the commission by appointing an ardent defender of entitlement programs as the other co-chair; someone who is in favor of taxing the rich. Let's look at what the Democrat co-chair has said [cjr.org]:
Re:Count me in (Score:3, Insightful)
You might want to brush up on the history of the White House Correspondents' Association's dinner: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Correspondents'_Association [wikipedia.org] . Yakov Smirnoff was the speaker in 1988.
The content of Colbert's speech may have surprised some, but taking him "seriously" would have disqualified him from being considered as the speaker.
Re: *Sigh* More liberal BS (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is this liberal garbage on SlashDot?
Probably because of reality's well-known liberal bias.
(Hey, we're only 87 subscribers apart!)
Re:Count me in (Score:2, Insightful)
Default isn't a problem, since the US can simply print money : TRUE
Holders of US currency (eg: most US citizens) won't care : FALSE
If the US prints money, then Chinese exports get more expensive, and the dollars in your bank account become worth less and less. i.e. you get poorer (because you experience inflation). Printing money = a tax that no-one focusses on. If the dollar falls by 10% (say) then every piece of income, every piece of capital, becomes worth 10% less.
OTOH, if you own a house (a fixed asset) and pay a mortgage (you owe dollars, not own dollars) then inflation is a win for you.
Re:Count me in (Score:3, Insightful)
No, Colbert is about poking fun at CONSERVATIVE politics. That's why it gets old while South Park and even The Daily Show remain fresh. They spread it around.
Re:Go Stephen! (Score:3, Insightful)
What gets me is the respect coming from you, even though you are fully aware that " The human rights situation is still abysmal...". A country with an "abysmal" human rights record is what we were there fighting to prevent.
Yeah and we went into Iraq to save the people from tyranny. If what you say is true, then you got a lot of splaining to do about South Korea where WE WON and they had similar human rights problems until well into the 80s too.
South Korea? BTW, how are they doing compared to the North?
Thought so.
Re: The Lone Conservative... (Score:4, Insightful)
Having been visiting /. for over 15 years I'm shocked at the amount of, what appears to be, left wingers here. It's never really come up but am I in the conservative minority on Slashdot?
It's hard to say. A lot of people used to vehemently defend the Iraq war, but as the public soured on it they became a distinct minority. We still get a fairly large number of anti-Islam anti-Muslim posters... I was shocked by the views I saw posted here (and modded up) on a story a week or two ago.
But maybe all that doesn't really reflect conservative/liberal politics.
Traditionally we've had a very large number of "Latter Day Libertarians", by which I mean self-described Libertarians who apparently don't care about anything but gun ownership, taxes, and laws that might restrict their ability to become filthy rich.
Also... The most vocal group isn't necessarily the biggest group. We should have a /. poll on political orientation.
Younger people are typically left-wing. As you get older, and if you're responsible, you'll begin swinging right... unless you're a career politician...
This is conventional wisdom, but I'm not sure it's true. I have certainly gone the opposite direction.
Also, I suspect liberals and conservatives disagree intensely what "responsible" means.
Re:What the hell? (Score:3, Insightful)
The insistence on the technical illegality of their entry and presence in our country, and the spewing of pious rants about it are the shallow musings of simpletons. What would inspire you to walk across the Sonoran Desert for 48 hours guided by heavily armed murderous mobsters? You wouldn't do it. You don't have even a remote understanding of what leads others to do it. You are a simple-minded tea bagger talking out his ass, nothing more.
Re:Go Stephen! (Score:3, Insightful)
This one's cool, Beck rally vs. inaguration http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7y8gEcoqas [youtube.com]
A little longer with a funny title "Post-Barackalyptic Wasteland" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMrJE7J3fWU [youtube.com]
This one's all dramatic looking http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2009/09/13/they-say-a-picture-is-worth-a-thousand-words-photo-after-obama-inauguration-ceremony-versus-photo-after-9-12-tea-party-rally/ [audacityofhypocrisy.com]
Here's one from a liberal rag for you. Scroll down to "Tell your grandchildren: 'I was there'. Two people sitting on a pile of trash looking super happy about it http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/cold_weather/page/2/ [latimes.com]
Re:Many missed the point (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, they didn't actually /say/ much at the rally; the content seemed to be "mouth nice words, and also we need to turn to the Christian god", i.e. us heathens aren't Real Americans.
Lastly, with the hyperpartisanship of the previously mentioned, the only ones who'd physically show up were teabaggers anyway.
Re:Most of the pople who Watch Colbert..... (Score:3, Insightful)
So far I and my employer have paid just over $57,000 in to Medicare, and I estimate about another $60,000 will be paid in on my behalf before I reach retirement age. That is $117,000 taken from me by the government as payment in advance for providing me with Medicare services when I reach retirement age.
Ignoring the time value of the money that was paid in by me and on my behalf over my entire working lifetime (i.e., interest it should have earned), if that money was paid out on my behalf every month starting when I reach retirement age, it would fund a health insurance plan at $300/month for 32 years.
So, in some sense, it would be "my Medicare" that was being manipulated, wouldn't it?