"I did it" - Obama Sworn In For 2nd Term As US President.

[CountDeMoney]

The truth of the matter is that conservatives are so much more responsible for the breakdown of political dialogue that it's not even remotely close.

It wasn't the conservatives who were attacking Nixon at every turn.

[Sheilbh]

Exhibit A of what? I've been moaning about this for ages because I normally agree with them and I get annoyed at American liberal writers

My view of many liberal writers and hosts is that they don't want to persuade, they want to enjoy being right - it's a problem with some lefty campaigners in this country too. The impression I get is that they view conservatives as if they're always operating in bad faith, they're being conned by Fox News and talk radio, or they're deluded. There's not really much respect or tolerance for a different perspective - they're just wrong, and laughably so. They don't make arguments, they make inside jokes.

As I say I think this was most clear during the healthcare debate.

[Admiral Yi]

Let's look at the quote what started it all in this thread in the first place:  "Speaking of the NYT, this week has an essay by Joseph Stiglitz on the economic arguments against income inequality.  Personally I think he did just about as well as a human can in advancing the argument.  In other words not at all well."  That's some open and beautiful mind right there.

  You haven't even read the fucking article pinhead.

[DGuller]

Exhibit A of what?

"Both sides are to blame" fallacy.  I'm sure there are liberals who are less open-minded than others, you get a lot of variance among tens of millions of people.  It's also the case that one side's extremism radicalizes the other side, it's a law of nature.  However, to equate the close-mindedness of movements as a whole is just nutty.

[DGuller]

Let's look at the quote what started it all in this thread in the first place:  "Speaking of the NYT, this week has an essay by Joseph Stiglitz on the economic arguments against income inequality.  Personally I think he did just about as well as a human can in advancing the argument.  In other words not at all well."  That's some open and beautiful mind right there.

  You haven't even read the fucking article pinhead.

I didn't need to.  In the last part of the quote, you ruled out the possibility of that argument having merit outright.

[Razgovory]

I see no reason to think that, except for wishful thinking.

"No reason" as in zero reason, or no reason analogous to Seedy's "total lack?"

I don't know.

[Razgovory]

Give me a break, Shelf.  American conservatives these days are the most intellectually and morally regressive political force US has seen in many decades, and it's the Comedy Central audience that's unreasonable?  Get a grip.

I think there's a sneering, arrogant, self-righteous tone and unwillingness to consider another perspective in Sorkin-infused liberalism that's as much a problem as Limbaugh and the rest. I don't think Stewart or Colbert's that bad though, the blogs seem worse.

I think it's a mistake to consider Stewart or Colbert as primarily liberal political activists or equivalents of Limbaugh.  People tune into Comedy Central to laugh at things.  People tune into the bloc of talk radio to have their opinions reaffirmed.

[Sheilbh]

But isn't that exactly what conservatives say about Limbaugh and most other talk radio hosts? Primarily they're entertainers and they're funny so they're excluded. Though as I say I don't think Stewart and Colbert are that bad - I think Sorkin's programs, as Yi says, Maher and other writers and hosts are more of a problem.

I agree with not blaming both sides for the sake of it, but on the issue of tone I think both sides are to blame.

[DGuller]

Give me a break, Shelf.  American conservatives these days are the most intellectually and morally regressive political force US has seen in many decades, and it's the Comedy Central audience that's unreasonable?  Get a grip.

I think there's a sneering, arrogant, self-righteous tone and unwillingness to consider another perspective in Sorkin-infused liberalism that's as much a problem as Limbaugh and the rest. I don't think Stewart or Colbert's that bad though, the blogs seem worse.

I think it's a mistake to consider Stewart or Colbert as primarily liberal political activists or equivalents of Limbaugh.  People tune into Comedy Central to laugh at things.  People tune into the bloc of talk radio to have their opinions reaffirmed.

I disagree.  It's a fig leaf they use, but both of them are very much political commentators.  The difference between Stewart/Colbert and Limbaugh is that humor acts as an escape valve, while ceaseless propaganda acts like a radicalizing force.  This is where lack of sense of humor is serving conservatives well.

[Razgovory]

But isn't that exactly what conservatives say about Limbaugh and most other talk radio hosts? Primarily they're entertainers and they're funny so they're excluded. Though as I say I don't think Stewart and Colbert are that bad - I think Sorkin's programs, as Yi says, Maher and other writers and hosts are more of a problem.

I agree with not blaming both sides for the sake of it, but on the issue of tone I think both sides are to blame.

They say that when they want to discourage people from thinking they have much influence on Republicans, or when those guys say something other republicans want to publicly distance themselves from, but lets be honest.  They aren't listening to three hours of Glen Beck, or Rush Limbaugh raving because it's funny.  Talk radio has been around for a long time, though it never originated out of comedy.  It's much closer to commentary or opinion columns in the paper.  They might have funny bits in it, but on the whole they are talk about what they feel are serious issues and they do so earnestly.  When the GOP took the House back in 1994 politicians were publicly thanking him and made him an honorary member of Congress.  I don't recall them making Jon Stewart an honorary member of Congress.

[Admiral Yi]

I didn't need to.  In the last part of the quote, you ruled out the possibility of that argument having merit outright.

That's a retarded line of reasoning.  At some point you have to evaluate the arguments provided and come to a conclusion.  Are you still waiting for "possible" arguments before you make up your mind about Creationism or the Great Global Warming Hoax?

You're also off on your strawman of "both are equally bad."  I never said the Jon Stewart phenomenon makes Democrats just as bad as Republicans and neither did Shelf.  I'm starting with the premise that public discourse is best served when choices are argued on the merits, and anything that undermines that is a negative outcome.

[derspiess]

He's also in the Hall of Great Missourians or whatever it's called. That must toast your marshmallows.

[Sheilbh]

That's a retarded line of reasoning.  At some point you have to evaluate the arguments provided and come to a conclusion.  Are you still waiting for "possible" arguments before you make up your mind about Creationism or the Great Global Warming Hoax?

Interesting examples, because for me those two are nothing to do with evaluating arguments. I don't have anywhere near the knowledge of science to do that in either case. I just believe an overwhelming, credible scientific consensus.

[Razgovory]

He's also in the Hall of Great Missourians or whatever it's called. That must toast your marshmallows.

I think he has a bust at the capital.  Sterling Price as well, and he was a traitor.

[Sheilbh]

Personally I think the pros and cons of amnesty (which is what most people mean when they say reform) got swamped out during the election by the political arguments (we can't win without more hispanic votes), and formally tabling it would create more pushback than you seem to be suggesting.  For example when Obama first proposed Citizenship for Bachelor of Arts the response was generally underwhelming.

Most people who want reform agree broadly on what it should look like - which helps. Obama's proposals from last term were very similar to what W proposed. They're also very similar to what Rubio's currently going around proposing, which Obama's welcomed.