Fox lets Glenn Beck show Scariest chart ever?!

[Danke]

Frank Luntz, Fair and Balanced:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrpES1Lk7X4

"Reader Mike G. leaves this helpful comment:

As someone who worked in market research for four years, I can tell you that it is viable to use the same group. This is what's known as a longitudinal method. However, Frank Luntz should have been up front about this at the beginning of the segment. The entire segment was presented like these voters had not been interviewed previously. This is intellectually dishonest and, in polling, such intellectual dishonesty has no place."

Penn and Teller and Frank:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If9EWDB_zK4

 

[teacherone]

The Constitution does not "grant" freedoms, it enumerates them. Those freedoms are inherent in every human being. The Constitution exists so that those in power don't try to take away those freedoms through force of arms, which would only lead to bloody conflict. The Constitution could be changed so much as to be unrecognizable and evil, but all of those freedoms would still exist.

George Carlin... YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWiBt-pqp0E

 

[tmosley]

Of course you can blame the Germans for the rise of Hitler-- there was no Vulcan Mind-Meld placed over them--no mass hypnosis either. They followed their primary instincts-- fear and greed (or Eros and Thenatos if you wanna get Freudian) and allowed an atrocity to take place.

That's exactly what the American people did for the last eight years. Neither you or me are any better. We could be leading a subersive campaign to topple the emporor, but we are having a useless internet forum discussion in the comfort of our own living rooms instead.

Ever hear of the power of suggestion? It exists. If you define the terms of a debate such that whichever side wins, you get more power, then you have won before the debate even started. This is what has happened in our political system. It's a false duality. In the case of Hitler, it was National Socialism, or Communism. You're either with me or against me. There will be a small subset of people who will notice the problem, but the truncheon is enough to silence those guys. In the current case, Ron Paul and his supporters were the ones speaking out against the false duality.

Every single person who voted or campaigned for Ron Paul was and is a subversive.

 

[silverlinkx2]

They wouldn't want to buy a politician, because if we had a government that was properly restricted from interfering in the private lives and finances of its citizens, it wouldn't have enough power to benefit these companies.

What entity restricts government growth? Who exactly is going to make sure government doesn't overstep its bounds? How do you know it doesn't have enough power to benefit companies?

They hire the lobbyists because government runs our economy, picking winners and losers. You're not going to fix that problem by getting the very politicians who are on the take to pass laws about what money they can recieve.

So how do you fix it?

They'll find a way to buy the votes, above board or below it. The only way to fix the problem is to take tyrannical power away from the government in the first place. That way, the corporations will have nothing to buy.

Take it back how?

Corporatism requires government assistance. We haven't had a free market in years --

Agreed.

we have corporatism and political cronyism. We need freedom, not more power to the foxes who "guard" the henhouse.

So lay out your plan for us to follow to attain more freedom.

I just can't believe the sheer volume of stupidity in this thread. And I'm not talking about silverlinkx2. I'm talking about all of you who have responded to him. I'm very disappointed.

You guys need to learn how to take constructive criticism. Did it even occur to you that he might have a point? Maybe running through the streets screaming explitives at Sean Hannity was not the best way to achieve success in politics. I'm not asking you to agree with everything Hannity says. I sure don't. But screaming insults at him accomplishes nothing.

Likewise, typing insults at silverlinkx2 accomplishes nothing. If you seriously want to reform America, you need to learn how to make friends, not enemies. If all you want to do is get your nuts off as a keyboard jockey, then that's all you'll ever do.

Thank you.

Of course you can blame the Germans for the rise of Hitler-- there was no Vulcan Mind-Meld placed over them--no mass hypnosis either. They followed their primary instincts-- fear and greed (or Eros and Thenatos if you wanna get Freudian) and allowed an atrocity to take place.

That's exactly what the American people did for the last eight years. Neither you or me are any better. We could be leading a subersive campaign to topple the emporor, but we are having a useless internet forum discussion in the comfort of our own living rooms instead.

Thank you as well.

Those freedoms are inherent in every human being.

Says who?

The Constitution exists so that those in power don't try to take away those freedoms through force of arms, which would only lead to bloody conflict. The Constitution could be changed so much as to be unrecognizable and evil, but all of those freedoms would still exist.

I reiterate my first question.

Right, so stop telling people that they don't get to bitch about the content of television because they are free market people.

I'll tell them all I please. If you're brainwashed or misinformed this day and age, it's your own fault. Welcome to the digital age. It's the information revolution.

Modern society can only exist due to segregation of labor. If we all had to spend time defending our freedoms, we'd all be living like militias out in the woods.

So who else is going to defend them for you?

The answer to your question is simply this: Don't allow the politician any power, except over a few defined subjects.

You mean like a "Representative?"

Limited government is the answer to corruption for exactly that reason.

You mean like a "Constitutional Republic?"

Trying to bribe a public official would be like trying to bribe a police officer to overlook your expired license plates when they aren't required.

I'm sure that's heinously difficult to accomplish.

 

[silverlinkx2]

Frank Lutz, Fair and Balanced:

They used the same focus group for the entire length of the primaries...that was the point...

 

[ihsv]

 

[tmosley]

Says who?

Says every human being who has ever killed to defend those rights.

Natural rights. Look them up.

My God, where is TruthWarrior when you need him?

 

[tremendoustie]

What entity restricts government growth? Who exactly is going to make sure government doesn't overstep its bounds? How do you know it doesn't have enough power to benefit companies?


So how do you fix it?


Take it back how?


Agreed.


So lay out your plan for us to follow to attain more freedom.

We repeal government laws that provide them inordinate control over people's lives, in violation of the constiution. We elect people who will repeal these laws, by working to convince and remind the voting public of these principles. Through our representatives, we appoint judges who will also defend our rights as recognized in the constitution.

Another valid approach is civil disobedience. We can protest trannical government action by peacefully refusing to comply.

Ultimately, it is the people who must stand up for their rights. If we want to restore the liberties that were once protected by our government, we must work to restore a populace who is educated and willing to defend these rights.

 

[silverlinkx2]

Natural rights? Where are those? Who says we have them? Where are they written down? Who is enforcing them?

I saw a video of a cop shooting a kid in the train station in Oakland on video. Who was there to enforce his "natural rights"?

 

[silverlinkx2]

We repeal government laws that provide them inordinate control over people's lives, in violation of the constiution. We elect people who will repeal these laws, by working to convince and remind the voting public of these principles. Through our representatives, we appoint judges who will also defend our rights as recognized in the constitution.

Another valid approach is civil disobedience. We can protest trannical government action by peacefully refusing to comply.

Ultimately, it is the people who must stand up for their rights. If we want to restore the liberties that were once protected by our government, we must work to restore a populace who is educated and willing to defend these rights.

It bothers me that we had to get 9 pages into this thread before someone gave this answer.

 

[boethius27]

Natural rights? Where are those? Who says we have them? Where are they written down? Who is enforcing them?

I saw a video of a cop shooting a kid in the train station in Oakland on video. Who was there to enforce his "natural rights"?

Smokey the Bear wonders why ya'll have to flame in the liberty forest? C'mon, don't cause a forest fire.

 

[tmosley]

Natural rights? Where are those? Who says we have them? Where are they written down? Who is enforcing them?

I saw a video of a cop shooting a kid in the train station in Oakland on video. Who was there to enforce his "natural rights"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rights <--the Answers to your questions are in here.

Violation of natural rights ends in violence. That incident ended in violence. Remember the riots? The rioters were enforcing his natural rights. If they had found the cop who killed the boy, he would have been torn limb from limb.

 

[tmosley]

It bothers me that we had to get 9 pages into this thread before someone gave this answer.

Maybe you shouldn't have been posting flamebait at 90 miles and hour, then.

 

[teacherone]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rights <--the Answers to your questions are in here.

Violation of natural rights ends in violence. That incident ended in violence. Remember the riots? The rioters were enforcing his natural rights. If they had found the cop who killed the boy, he would have been torn limb from limb.

If I have to go to wikipedia to find my natural rights I'm in big trouble.
The fact of the matter is, there exist no rights.

There does exist philosophy however...

 

[silverlinkx2]

If I have to go to wikipedia to find my natural rights I'm in big trouble.
The fact of the matter is, there exist no rights.

There does exist philosophy however...

Ding Ding Ding.

Natural rights exist as much as unicorns or leprechauns. As in, they don't. The people collectively determine that they want certain freedoms and are willing to fight to obtain them.

In our case, a group of well-educated, idealistic, and determined land owners 300 years ago decided they were going to no longer be subjected to tyranny. And lo and behold, a very bloody revolution later, we had the good ol' stars and stripes.

Note here that I am completely suggesting that in most cases violence is necessary to ensure your freedom as sad as that may sound.

 

[tmosley]

Natural rights exist, just not in words. We have to define them in a reasonable fashion. Did you expect to find that they were tattooed by God on the inside of your ass or something?

That's like saying that there are no natural laws of the universe, just because they are written down somewhere by man.

You can find what natural rights exist by violating them and seeing how often the result is violence. If it happens one out of ten times, it's probably a natural right, if it happens one out of a million times, it probably isn't. If it happens only among those of a specific culture (like wiping your ass with the pages of the Koran on the streets of Mecca), then it is probably a violation of a social contract or a legal right.

 

[tremendoustie]

Ding Ding Ding.

Natural rights exist as much as unicorns or leprechauns. As in, they don't. The people collectively determine that they want certain freedoms and are willing to fight to obtain them.

Or, for most of us who, like the founders, are not moral relativists, our unalienable rights are endowed to us by our creator, or by natural law.

 

[teacherone]

Natural rights exist, just not in words. We have to define them in a reasonable fashion. Did you expect to find that they were tattooed by God on the inside of your ass or something?

That's like saying that there are no natural laws of the universe, just because they are written down somewhere by man.

Did natural rights exist before their discovery? Or were they brought into existance through the act of being named?

 

[tmosley]

Did natural rights exist before their discovery? Or were they brought into existance through the act of being named?

Did humans exist before they gave names to themselves?

Of course. Natural rights extend to animals as well. Walk into a boar's territory and see what happens. Territory is a boar's natural right, one which he will fight to defend. Humans are the same way, but our natural rights aren't as simple as those of animals.

 

[teacherone]

Did humans exist before they gave names to themselves?

Of course. Natural rights extend to animals as well. Walk into a boar's territory and see what happens. Territory is a boar's natural right, one which he will fight to defend. Humans are the same way, but our natural rights aren't as simple as those of animals.

Well...I know humans exist, and I know boars exist.
It's their "rights" I'm not so sure about.
We have perceived rights which we are willing to defend through violence.
Whether or not those are "natural" is cause for debate.