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

[Ideologue]

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.

It does not require serious scientific credentials to evaluate creationism and come to the conclusion it's rubbish, S.

The extent of anthropogenic climate change probably does, but you don't need to know a great of science to understand what increased CO2 levels do.

[Josquius]

Although the US Constitution requires the oath of office to be taken by noon on 20 January, that falls on a Sunday so the public inauguration will take place on Monday.

OMFG! SEE WHAT THEY'RE DOING! OBAMA-HITLER ISN'T HELD ACCOUNTABLE BY THE CONSTITUTION! JUST YOU WATCH!

[sbr]

He was sworn in on Sunday, they are doing a second public ceremony today.

[Eddie Teach]

Does anybody call Hannity an entertainer? Cause his show's more skewed than any of the liberal comedians mentioned, and it's supposedly "serious" news.

[derspiess]

Does anybody call Hannity an entertainer? Cause his show's more skewed than any of the liberal comedians mentioned, and it's supposedly "serious" news.

I do.  I call Rush an entertainer as well.  I'll listen to both, but if neither are particularly entertaining I'll switch to something else.

[CountDeMoney]

Reverend Manning said to boycott the illegal inauguration of the Usurper in Chief.

[Sheilbh]

Does anybody call Hannity an entertainer? Cause his show's more skewed than any of the liberal comedians mentioned, and it's supposedly "serious" news.

I hope not. He's just a soul dead party hack

[The Minsky Moment]

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.

Don't know what you are watching or who you are listening to.

Exhibit A in the false equivalency argument is that right after Stiglitz published his piece, Paul Krugman criticized it in his blog.  So on one of the biggest economic issues in terms of political valence, the two leading liberal pundits are disgareeing and advancing reasoned arguments.

It helps that the two leading left-wing economic pundits are at the very top of their profession.  The comparison to the fatuous clowns and talentless hacks paraded forth on Fox or CNBC could not be more glaring.  Of course there do exist conservative economists that are at the Stiglitz/Krugman level but tend to be marginalized unless they play to the fantasists gallery.  So Arthur Laffer still gets more air time than Greg Mankiw because the latter betrayed the True Faith by advocating for a carbon tax.

[CountDeMoney]

Medgar Evers' widow, Chuck Shumer, and the Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir singing "Battle Hymn of the Republic."

What a Star-Spangled Fuck You to the South.

[Sheilbh]

That choir was superb.

Also what the fuck is Scalia wearing

[derspiess]

Mark Steyn is filling in for Rush Limbaugh today.  That dude is flippin' hilarious.

[derspiess]

Medgar Evers' widow, Chuck Shumer, and the Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir singing "Battle Hymn of the Republic."

What a Star-Spangled Fuck You to the South.

Damn, missed that.  I'm sure Chuckie has a wonderful singing voice

[OttoVonBismarck]

On this whole stupid versus stupid discussion I thought two posts from my facebook feed I read:

Corporate "personhood," as it pertains to elections, is a plutocratic theft of democracy.

Capitalism itself is a failed experiment, amoral and sociopathic, bound always and inexorably to lead to oligarchic exploitation of labor with more and more of the pie being appropriated by an ever shrinking, parasitic overclass. Marx was right. The Bolshies were wrong to try to force it, but capitalism, at least unbounded capitalism, will have to end.

Napoleon said that religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich. I think we need to eradicate the completely false axiom that people have some kind of unlimited right to acquisition without responsibility because religion is starting to crack.

And then:

Probably shouldn't post this on Facebook, but I think my concern/paranoia, has reached a new level. A military helicopter just circled my apt complex. Found it odd, and it has thrown me into a cleaning, sharpening, and loading frenzy.

Now, the second post is quite crazy, but I think both are good examples of the point I want to make. The vast majority of the people on the left or right are stupid and have no critical thinking ability. They slavishly support policies out of clannish love of what they see as "their team."

Now, one step up from that you have the professional pundits whose job it is to comment on our society. On the left, the vast majority twist every situation to make it look like conservatives are being unreasonable and frame everything as though they have a monopoly on the right answers and that conservatives are stupid to think otherwise. Just as an example over 70% of Americans were recently shown in a poll to want a reduction in government spending, but the Democrats have portrayed any attempts by the Republicans to get any spending cuts negatively and have dismissed the Republicans as having any legitimate mandate to reduce spending.

On the conservative side, it's basically the same thing. Liberal ideas are not presented fairly but in a very one sided manner. These two disparate punditry groups are not writing to persuade, they are writing to reinforce what the two idiot groups exemplified by my facebook posts represent, which is most people on the left and most people on the right. Morons who just want to read stuff that reinforces what they've already been lead to believe based on what their "team" supports.

A very small sliver on both sides are sane, reasonable people who discuss both sides of the issue. At the politician-level and pundit level I'll say this, right now the Republicans have a smaller sliver of "reasonable" representation in the public eye than the Democrats, but we're arguing about the thin slivers of both sides. The truth is 99% of Americans are idiots who don't understand even a single issue they have an opinion on.

[jimmy olsen]

Who the hell is this rambling douche?

Bring back the hottie who sang My Country Tis of Thee

[derspiess]

Now, the second post is quite crazy, but I think both are good examples of the point I want to make. The vast majority of the people on the left or right are stupid and have no critical thinking ability. They slavishly support policies out of clannish love of what they see as "their team."

Thank you for not using the word "tribe"