I admit, I have not been on this webpage in a long time… however it was another joy to see It is such an important topic and ignored by so many, even professionals. I thank you to help making people more aware of possible issues. Great stuff as usual…. http://www.online-casino-ratings.de/
I must apologize. I did, in fact, make an implied assumption about you in my first response to you. I said you’d be quoting me John Stewart and Keith Olbermann. But then you did quote Stewart after all. Still, I apologize. I don’t like assumptions. Admittedly, it is hard to avoid them sometimes.
Again many assumptions from you. I neither assumed nor called you ‘left-leaning.’ I merely commented on the content of what you said. Once we start deferring to labels when trying to have a respectful dialogue, it goes off the tracts and becomes a waste of effort as it increases emotion.
As for Reagan, Bush, Clinton, or Obama… blah, blah, blah. I hold to the principle of a LIMITED government. I do not hate government. I simply believe it is a necessary evil, and, therefore, should be kept as small as possible. As government grows it ALWAYS infringes on the freedom of the people.
As much as Bush (or Obama) loaded/loads our grand-children (or steals) with a debt that cannot feasibly be paid is unconstitutional at best and treasonous at worst (that’s right, I said treasonous. But only to communicate the level of severity that these issues hold, in my belief).
And on the NYT article you linked, of course I read it. But it does not communicate certain essential facts. For example, cutting taxes always INCREASES the amount the revenue the government brings in. Coolidge, Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush tax cuts all prove this. And yes, Bush’s tax cuts brought in record government revenue–the most ever, in fact. The problem is he didn’t believe in LIMITED government as much as he should have. And the solution by this (Obama) administration? Spend more AND raise taxes in a deep recession. Brilliant! Economics 101 can tell you this is disastrous. This will only make less government revenue come in. The result? A deeper recession. The fact that the NYT won’t report these types of common sense facts (and reporters are supposed to report facts, after all, NOT craft news), just shows its lack of credibility.
More on the NYT, sure they supported Bush going into Iraq. But then they proceeded to rail him nearly every day for the rest of his presidency. And let’s not forget how they endorsed Barack Obama for president. Sure, it was the opinion section. But still, this is certainly worth noting. You say the NYT is “the paper of record.” That’s funny. And maybe that’s the problem. They might actually have believed this a little too much a little too long, which is why they have lost much of their objectivity. I’d say their failing market share is also evidence of this. You can’t blame ‘technology’ for everything. There are plenty of avenues growing in market share. They have lost their credibility and therefore influence, if you ask me.
So there, I am judging the news based on its own merits. That is to say, the merits of reporting facts, since that is supposed to be the foundation of reporting.
I say report ALL the facts and let people decide for themselves. Don’t craft the news you think they need to hear or you want them to read.
So in closing, back to my original observations, are they or aren’t they legitimate?
You have yet to deal with the content I have presented. We are just dancing with the emotions surrounding it.
Yes, I did make a lot of assumptions…but not without cause. Your previous posts lean right, so I made an educated assumption that you were more of a fan of Bush than Obama.
And to defend myself briefly, I did not read your generationpost.com blog, so I do not know your Bush-era thoughts/gripes/complaints/praise/etc.
All I was trying to point out is that for political conservatives (which I think you are), it is easy to blame Obama and his administration for the national debt when, in truth, Bush (and Reagan) had a REALLY LARGE SAY in how big our current debt is, as illustrated by the NYT article I sent (which I hope you looked at).
And give me a break about the NYT not being reliable and objective. There is a reason it is the paper of record. When the NYT does a poor job, they are called to task.
As far as your not-so-implicit assumption that the NYT is a left-wing mouthpiece, remember when NYT supported Bush’s bid to invade Iraq?. Not so liberal, eh? How about their decision to hire the leading conservative intellectual, Bill Kristol, for their editorial board? That’s a far cry from Lefty Land.
(I personally prefer Newshour with Jim Lehrer. It’s about as neutral as you can get.)
Judge a news article on its own merits. Definitely take into account the source, but don’t dismiss an article outright just because it’s in a paper that you tend not to agree with.
One more aside: Stewart recently made NYT look silly. The irony of Stewart is that sometimes his show’s reporting comes off (and is) more substantive than many “real” news shows, MSNBC and FOX included.
Mr. Dragon, You make a lot of assumptions in that statement. I was not happy with many things in those 8 years either (which I often posted on my previous blog generationpost.com). But are my observations illegitimate if I wasn’t?
And no offense, but the New York Times is not really the best source for unbiased and reliable information. Next you’ll be quoting me John Stewart and Keith Olbermann.
Where is your rage? Or are you fine with all this?
This stuff makes me mad indeed.
Thanks Anthony.
I admit, I have not been on this webpage in a long time… however it was another joy to see It is such an important topic and ignored by so many, even
professionals. I thank you to help making people more aware of possible issues.
Great stuff as usual….
http://www.online-casino-ratings.de/
This stuff makes me mad indeed.
One more thing Mr. Dragon.
I must apologize. I did, in fact, make an implied assumption about you in my first response to you. I said you’d be quoting me John Stewart and Keith Olbermann. But then you did quote Stewart after all. Still, I apologize. I don’t like assumptions. Admittedly, it is hard to avoid them sometimes.
Good Morning Sir Dragon,
Again many assumptions from you. I neither assumed nor called you ‘left-leaning.’ I merely commented on the content of what you said. Once we start deferring to labels when trying to have a respectful dialogue, it goes off the tracts and becomes a waste of effort as it increases emotion.
As for Reagan, Bush, Clinton, or Obama… blah, blah, blah. I hold to the principle of a LIMITED government. I do not hate government. I simply believe it is a necessary evil, and, therefore, should be kept as small as possible. As government grows it ALWAYS infringes on the freedom of the people.
As much as Bush (or Obama) loaded/loads our grand-children (or steals) with a debt that cannot feasibly be paid is unconstitutional at best and treasonous at worst (that’s right, I said treasonous. But only to communicate the level of severity that these issues hold, in my belief).
And on the NYT article you linked, of course I read it. But it does not communicate certain essential facts. For example, cutting taxes always INCREASES the amount the revenue the government brings in. Coolidge, Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush tax cuts all prove this. And yes, Bush’s tax cuts brought in record government revenue–the most ever, in fact. The problem is he didn’t believe in LIMITED government as much as he should have. And the solution by this (Obama) administration? Spend more AND raise taxes in a deep recession. Brilliant! Economics 101 can tell you this is disastrous. This will only make less government revenue come in. The result? A deeper recession. The fact that the NYT won’t report these types of common sense facts (and reporters are supposed to report facts, after all, NOT craft news), just shows its lack of credibility.
More on the NYT, sure they supported Bush going into Iraq. But then they proceeded to rail him nearly every day for the rest of his presidency. And let’s not forget how they endorsed Barack Obama for president. Sure, it was the opinion section. But still, this is certainly worth noting. You say the NYT is “the paper of record.” That’s funny. And maybe that’s the problem. They might actually have believed this a little too much a little too long, which is why they have lost much of their objectivity. I’d say their failing market share is also evidence of this. You can’t blame ‘technology’ for everything. There are plenty of avenues growing in market share. They have lost their credibility and therefore influence, if you ask me.
So there, I am judging the news based on its own merits. That is to say, the merits of reporting facts, since that is supposed to be the foundation of reporting.
I say report ALL the facts and let people decide for themselves. Don’t craft the news you think they need to hear or you want them to read.
So in closing, back to my original observations, are they or aren’t they legitimate?
You have yet to deal with the content I have presented. We are just dancing with the emotions surrounding it.
Yes, I did make a lot of assumptions…but not without cause. Your previous posts lean right, so I made an educated assumption that you were more of a fan of Bush than Obama.
And to defend myself briefly, I did not read your generationpost.com blog, so I do not know your Bush-era thoughts/gripes/complaints/praise/etc.
All I was trying to point out is that for political conservatives (which I think you are), it is easy to blame Obama and his administration for the national debt when, in truth, Bush (and Reagan) had a REALLY LARGE SAY in how big our current debt is, as illustrated by the NYT article I sent (which I hope you looked at).
And give me a break about the NYT not being reliable and objective. There is a reason it is the paper of record. When the NYT does a poor job, they are called to task.
As far as your not-so-implicit assumption that the NYT is a left-wing mouthpiece, remember when NYT supported Bush’s bid to invade Iraq?. Not so liberal, eh? How about their decision to hire the leading conservative intellectual, Bill Kristol, for their editorial board? That’s a far cry from Lefty Land.
(I personally prefer Newshour with Jim Lehrer. It’s about as neutral as you can get.)
Judge a news article on its own merits. Definitely take into account the source, but don’t dismiss an article outright just because it’s in a paper that you tend not to agree with.
One more aside: Stewart recently made NYT look silly. The irony of Stewart is that sometimes his show’s reporting comes off (and is) more substantive than many “real” news shows, MSNBC and FOX included.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=230076&title=end-times
Mr. Dragon,
You make a lot of assumptions in that statement. I was not happy with many things in those 8 years either (which I often posted on my previous blog generationpost.com). But are my observations illegitimate if I wasn’t?
And no offense, but the New York Times is not really the best source for unbiased and reliable information. Next you’ll be quoting me John Stewart and Keith Olbermann.
Where is your rage? Or are you fine with all this?
Where was your rage for the last 8 years, Jason?
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/06/09/business/economy/20090610-leonhardt-graphic.html
Want to see whay you are saying!