http://tv.gawker.com/#!5776150/jon-stewart-exposes-foxs-hypocritical-attitudes-towards-teachers
Wow, this guy really nails it.
Wow, this guy really nails it.
Jon Stewart NAILS Conservative News / Republicans
- Thread starter chilli
- Start date
In general JS and Steven Colbert seem to be the closest to real news reporting to be found in North America.
Jon Stewart is brilliant.
And regardless of where anyone stands on the political spectrum he often makes very valid points.
And regardless of where anyone stands on the political spectrum he often makes very valid points.
Make your own thread.Because we all know the liberal media is never hypocritical.
Love to see your examples.
When someone makes a great point and you don't have a counter - the best thing to do is attack the poster, the media - do whatever you can to distract and derail - a very common tactic.
I get what you are trying to do, but I like others won't fall for it.
Stewart sums up things pretty well, and when people make sense and speak the truth - I see the box it puts you in FloridaGuy.
Why can't you accept the validity of something? Are you so indocrinated into Republican ideology that you have lost the ability to think for yourself?
Another interesting read:
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/hmm-prominent-conservative-radio-host
Yep - the Republicans do it constantly.
As do the CPC and their Tea Party North supporters here.
Hate to derail a thread but...
I found it interesting Florida Guy's comment:
"Because we all know the liberal media is never hypocritical."
Some folks jumped on the comment. Whether you subscribe to it or not is one thing. But I think the more telling thing about his comment is the difference between Canadian and American political ideology. It struck me a few years back. In general, I've found on similar boards that they can be more extreme right vs left in views that are extrapolated in other areas of life.
An example of this, that relates to the above comment is a post I came across on the IMDB board on the movie "Blind Side". I found it interesting.
The Left doesn't like it, because it sees a positive portrayal of a Right-wing Conservative Christian Republican family.
The Left hates seeing such people portrayed in a positive light.
Most black people, on the other hand, like the movie, because it wasn't invented in someone's imagination.
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/blacks-prefer-blind-side-precious/ story?id=9248639
It's a true story of a family who helped a young man in need. How can you argue with that? Should the Tuohys have ignored Michael Oher when he was homeless?
The Right thinks a person's race doesn't matter.
The Left thinks a person's race matters.
That's why Leigh Anne Tuohy is a Republican.
I found it interesting Florida Guy's comment:
"Because we all know the liberal media is never hypocritical."
Some folks jumped on the comment. Whether you subscribe to it or not is one thing. But I think the more telling thing about his comment is the difference between Canadian and American political ideology. It struck me a few years back. In general, I've found on similar boards that they can be more extreme right vs left in views that are extrapolated in other areas of life.
An example of this, that relates to the above comment is a post I came across on the IMDB board on the movie "Blind Side". I found it interesting.
The Left doesn't like it, because it sees a positive portrayal of a Right-wing Conservative Christian Republican family.
The Left hates seeing such people portrayed in a positive light.
Most black people, on the other hand, like the movie, because it wasn't invented in someone's imagination.
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/blacks-prefer-blind-side-precious/ story?id=9248639
It's a true story of a family who helped a young man in need. How can you argue with that? Should the Tuohys have ignored Michael Oher when he was homeless?
The Right thinks a person's race doesn't matter.
The Left thinks a person's race matters.
That's why Leigh Anne Tuohy is a Republican.
ummmm, I did not attack you, in fact I indicated that I thought you were smarter than the comment you made. You, on the other hand, don't seem to have any reticence to attack me. Repeatedly, in fact. I would politely suggest you read your reply, quoted above, as it actually applies to your behaviour, not mine.
As well, you're the one attacking the media. If you claim that you are unaware of the grossly left-leaning media bias in Canada and the States, you are being very disingenuous. The sky is blue, the media leans to the left. God bless!
You really must be joking. In any part of the world other than the US, the US mainstream media is seen as extremely right wing. In the US, the only media accepted as "right wing" would be Fox News (except for those that consider it "fair and balanced"), with uncritical acceptance of a military and corporate agenda. In the rest of the world, both the Republican and Democratic parties would be considered right wing. Both have a corporate agenda, with only a modicum of difference between them.
The whole concept of a "left wing media" is a figment of the imagination of the extreme right, who consider any criticism of their agenda and hypocricy as some kind of commie plot against them.
Jon Stewart is the only credible news source in the USA IMHO.
All of the big networks have the agenda that their corporations dictate.
Only one other, PBS will take on government whether or not it is a popular thing to do. They also do it equally too.
Having worked in the USA, having worked with contractors and manufacturers of the US DoD I know what people from Red states think and bottom line is they are not very tolerant of other people's views. Seeing grey areas as a way to agree upon a controversial subject is not part of their makeup.
All of the big networks have the agenda that their corporations dictate.
Only one other, PBS will take on government whether or not it is a popular thing to do. They also do it equally too.
Having worked in the USA, having worked with contractors and manufacturers of the US DoD I know what people from Red states think and bottom line is they are not very tolerant of other people's views. Seeing grey areas as a way to agree upon a controversial subject is not part of their makeup.
My point was during the Bush administration PBS would report the uncomfortable news (Iraq or Afghanistan) that big networks wouldn't. Same with their reporting of Obama and his handling of medicare or financial collapse. They didn't pull any punches on shows like Frontline.
Another good source of news is BBC World.
IMHO CBC, CTV, Global pander too much to left of centre views. It seems like it is politically incorrect to call a spade a f**kin shovel in Canada.
Grossly left wing? Almost every time I pick up a newspaper or catch the news on tv, I'm bombarded with heavily right wing (hard right liberal, or conservative) bias. A few independant magazines and/or newspapers swing the other way. It is true, however, that alot of tv news shows are more left oriented. (perhaps, this is just from being in "show biz").
Canada is, by it's very nature, a center-right country (politically speaking) with a few socialist tendancies (health care, social services). These leftist tendencies are often under fire from opponents, and are always vulnerable to funding cuts.
Canada is, by it's very nature, a center-right country (politically speaking) with a few socialist tendancies (health care, social services). These leftist tendencies are often under fire from opponents, and are always vulnerable to funding cuts.
Some strange people on the far left might call that a cut. However, I'm more referring to slashing funding that was already in place... this has been known to happen. Honestly, most people can tell the difference between restraint in spending and slashing budgets.
By the by, are you of the mind that people can't speak up and demand better pay and treatment? I don't much care whether it's a public sector union, a normal union, or a non union company... I think workers have the right to negotiate for better pay and benefits.
Now, if you want to discuss excess fat... well, there's alot of private and public companies that are top heavy with over paid, empty suits Also, I do admit that I've seen certain public companies keeping far too many people on staff, it seems, for the workload that they have. Pay the people well, but don't float so many paper pushers
By the by, are you of the mind that people can't speak up and demand better pay and treatment? I don't much care whether it's a public sector union, a normal union, or a non union company... I think workers have the right to negotiate for better pay and benefits.
Now, if you want to discuss excess fat... well, there's alot of private and public companies that are top heavy with over paid, empty suits
Also, I do admit that I've seen certain public companies keeping far too many people on staff, it seems, for the workload that they have. Pay the people well, but don't float so many paper pushers Where I have a problem with it, is when it's tax payers money, meaning mine and yours, and the workers are receiving significantly more than the private sector for the same amount of work. And if they don't get what they want, they effective hold us, the taxpayers hostage to their demands.
That's when I have a huge problem with it.
It's also interesting to note, that having read about 10-12 mafia books over the years, the unions were the most effective way for the mafia to impose their so called mafia tax.
That's when I have a huge problem with it.
It's also interesting to note, that having read about 10-12 mafia books over the years, the unions were the most effective way for the mafia to impose their so called mafia tax.
Some strange people on the far left might call that a cut. However, I'm more referring to slashing funding that was already in place... this has been known to happen. Honestly, most people can tell the difference between restraint in spending and slashing budgets.
By the by, are you of the mind that people can't speak up and demand better pay and treatment? I don't much care whether it's a public sector union, a normal union, or a non union company... I think workers have the right to negotiate for better pay and benefits.
Now, if you want to discuss excess fat... well, there's alot of private and public companies that are top heavy with over paid, empty suits
^ Perhaps the Conservatives have been quietly dealing in good faith, rather than stonewalling to make a point? The Conservatives, atm, have to be very catious about courting voters, given their precarious position as a government. The Liberals, at the time, figured they had a god given right to govern...what with their continuous majority governments since time began
as for the "mafia tax", I can't speak to that as it seems more heresay than anything else. I have no doubt that some unions had (or still have!) mafia/underworld connections. However, I'd be very leery about branding all of them with that train of thought. There's alot of misinformation out there regarding unions, how they work, and what they do. Some unions also suffer from over zealous whack jobs, just as there are non union companies that have to deal with the same thing.
The ideal union is one that works with the employer to maximize profits, while ensuring fair compensation and proper treatment of the emplyees. It's actually not that hard to get a bad emplyee fired in a union... even booted out entirely... but proper paper work must be done, and the paper trail must be in order. It does prevent on the spot firing on whim & limits (to some extent) the abuse that can be hurled on an employee, which many power hungry managers/bosses yearn for. Even then, if we were to look at trade unions, there are many ways of getting rid of troublesome/unwanted employees. Certain government unions, well, that might be a differnet story... I'm not privvy to their contract agreements.
Is the public truly held hostage to the demands of the government employees? Not really. We're inconvenienced, yes.... but held hostage? The mail? I can take care of every bill online & most people contact me through email. The garbage? I can get off my ass and take my own stuff to the dump (which is run by private contractors).
The port unions? Not public. I don't care. Them being off doesn't particularily affect me, as most of the food I eat is brought in by truck anyways. Port traffic being down hurts alot of other folks though.
As far as public sector wages are concerned, I'll agree with you that the federal payscale is rather good. However, the provincial payscales are often "competative". I put this in brackets only because "competative payscale" means 2 different things, depending on whether the government is talking about pay for its employees or pay for itself
as for the "mafia tax", I can't speak to that as it seems more heresay than anything else. I have no doubt that some unions had (or still have!) mafia/underworld connections. However, I'd be very leery about branding all of them with that train of thought. There's alot of misinformation out there regarding unions, how they work, and what they do. Some unions also suffer from over zealous whack jobs, just as there are non union companies that have to deal with the same thing.
The ideal union is one that works with the employer to maximize profits, while ensuring fair compensation and proper treatment of the emplyees. It's actually not that hard to get a bad emplyee fired in a union... even booted out entirely... but proper paper work must be done, and the paper trail must be in order. It does prevent on the spot firing on whim & limits (to some extent) the abuse that can be hurled on an employee, which many power hungry managers/bosses yearn for. Even then, if we were to look at trade unions, there are many ways of getting rid of troublesome/unwanted employees. Certain government unions, well, that might be a differnet story... I'm not privvy to their contract agreements.
Is the public truly held hostage to the demands of the government employees? Not really. We're inconvenienced, yes.... but held hostage? The mail? I can take care of every bill online & most people contact me through email. The garbage? I can get off my ass and take my own stuff to the dump (which is run by private contractors).
The port unions? Not public. I don't care. Them being off doesn't particularily affect me, as most of the food I eat is brought in by truck anyways. Port traffic being down hurts alot of other folks though.
As far as public sector wages are concerned, I'll agree with you that the federal payscale is rather good. However, the provincial payscales are often "competative". I put this in brackets only because "competative payscale" means 2 different things, depending on whether the government is talking about pay for its employees or pay for itself
In terms of part affiliations or being labelled a conservative or a liberal, I consider myself neither. I'm a pragmatist, plain and simple. And on that vein of thinking, I personally think the whole mail system should be privatised. Is there a particular reason why in this day and age the government should be delivering mail?
