Disqus - Latest Comments for mlhradio

Re: Nothing Stops Political Demonization In America

mlhradio — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:30:36 -0000

Some people will stop at *nothing* to try and play politics with something as devastating as this. I flip on over to Memeorandum, and the top story of the moment is how some republicans are trying their hardest to bash Obama over the tragedy (http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics/A-Disco...).

Srlsy? At this time of national tragedy, instead of supporting our troops the republicans decide to weakly score political points? At the expense of many mourning military families? I am *disgusted* that some republicans would stoop so low. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Re: Owens Wins

mlhradio — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 11:28:40 -0000

>The victory was won when conservatives sent a strong message to the stooges in the national party who tried to pass off an extreme liberal as a Republican.

Hard to argue with with the delusional. Extreme liberal? Nope, only someone who is trying to purposely spread disinformation would consider that - she's pretty much dead-center on the conservative/liberal scale, with a "common space" score of 0.02, and actually more conservative than the average "New England Republican". (http://bshor.wordpress.com/2009/10/21/scozzafav...)

"...Scozzafava’s score puts her in the 58th percentile of her party, which makes her slightly more conservative than the average Republican legislator in Albany, so she’s a conservative in her party. For example, she’s more conservative than James Tedisco, who lost a special election to succeed Kirsten Gillenbrand in the 20th District (score: -.22 and in the most liberal fifth of the party). In the legislature as a whole, she’s in the 83rd percentile, which makes her a conservative in Albany in general..."

Honestly - if you're going to spread disinformation, at least be a mildly creative about it - such easily disprovable lies are just plain weak sauce.

Re: Owens Wins

mlhradio — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:22:19 -0000

My very, very quick reaction to the three "big" races tonight (NJ,VA,NY-23) is this: Despite major attempts to inject national politics into the races, it appears that local issues and concerns were more prominent. The old adage, "All politics is local" still rings true. Again, it's just a quick reaction, but I would be very leery about trying to read any national implications into anything from tonight - for *all* sides involved. (Even though the spin-doctors on the blogs and cable networks will do so endlessly, I'm sure).

Re: Political Compass

mlhradio — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 02:22:33 -0000

>(Insert standard disclaimer about how the questions are biased and/or annoyingly flawed in some other way here)

Well, yes...but the individual numbers are not so meaningful by themselves, what is more important is how those numbers are in *relation* to others. That helps wash out any biases in the questions themselves.

For me, my score is -2.12/-3.74, which means I have remained steady on the libertarian scale over the years, but have slowly drifted to the left economically over the past couple of times I've taken the test.

Re: Nobel Prize: Weight Around Obama’s Neck?

mlhradio — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 10:14:34 -0000

A very interesting point - with very few exceptions, the frothy-mouthed idiots that are deriding and decrying Obama's Nobel prize are the republican commentators and noisemakers -- (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/are-...) -- NOT the republican elected officials.

I noticed the same was true with the Olympics nonsense - the republicans expressing hatred of America and glee over America's failure were almost entirely the republican talk show hosts and bloggers - the silence from the elected officials (with the exception of Cantor) was almost deafening.

Looks to me like there is a definite and growing disconnect between the talk show screechers and "hate-triots" (new word I learned last week!) and the republicans in office - and I'm relieved to see that the elected republicans at least have a minimal sense of self-preservation not to put their lot in with the anti-America crowd.

Re: Dancing With The Stars Will No Longer Feature The Dancing Feet of Tom DeLay

mlhradio — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 23:26:32 -0000

I am so glad I came to this wonderful website to read such thoughtful, important political commentary. It's hard-hitting news stories such as this that make The Moderate Voice a must-read among political blogs.

Re: Follow the Meme

mlhradio — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 01:25:07 -0000

The whole "Obama the Narcissist" or "Obama is full of himself" (or however you want to phrase it) is not a new meme -- it has been a popular topic among the extremist right wing for a while now - these are the same people who like to belittle Obama by referring to him as "The One" or "The Messiah" or some other such nonsense. This new Olympic twist is just the latest twist on that same theme, nothing new.

I recall a news article on the Fox website a week or two ago where someone actually went through and counted the number of times that Obama said "I" or "me" during all of his speeches since January, using that as a prime example of his extreme narcissism. I don't recall the exact number, but it was several hundred self-references -- and as you might expect the anti-Obama crowd on the Fox website crowed excitedly. Of course, the commentator failed to provide other examples of other speakers (such as past presidents) who gave a similar number of speeches for comparison - hard to tell whether it was more or less than usual if you don't provide anything to compare it to.

The whole "Obama is full of himself" meme has been around since before the election, and has continued to be a popular pissing point on the right, and will undoubtedly continue to be one for the next seven years. Just another example of trying to delegitimize the President, similar to other similar memes on the right that have bobbled around for months. Nothing new here. And still as ineffective as ever.

Re: On Racism: Unconscious & Reverse

mlhradio — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 00:05:50 -0000

I disagree with the very term of "reverse racism" - racism is racism regardless of the person/group doing it, or the person/group it is directed towards. That's one of the terms that gets stuck in my craw.

Re: When Caution Takes Courage (Guest Voice)

mlhradio — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:07:40 -0000

>>With our votes, the people of this country gave him and the Dems carte blanche power. We understood what 60 seats in the Senate meant or was at least supposed to mean.

60 Democratic seats in the Senate means 60 individual, free-thinking Democrats in the Senate - it does *not* mean 60 automatic votes for anything Obama does. That's the way republicans think - not Democrats.

To think that all 60 Democrats will always go along with everything that Obama asks for, or to automatically fall in line with the Democratic party line is just deluding yourself. When I vote, I do not vote for a single party or party line, I vote for an individual who is able to make intelligent decisions for him/herself. This is not a dictatorship - there is a very good reason for the different branches of power in government. While most republicans are not smart enough to understand this concept, I think most Democrats "get it", and understand the Congress is not under the thumb and control of Obama.

Re: When Caution Takes Courage (Guest Voice)

mlhradio — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 04:09:49 -0000

>>I like the article, but the author seems to forget that Obama has 60 in the Senate and control of the House. Nothing has to stop his domestic or foreign policy agenda.

Except for the fact that 60 Democratic senators does not equal 60 votes in support for anything Obama. While the republicans are generally devoid of individuality and vote as a single bloc, the Democrats rarely ever do. It's like herding cats.

And frankly, I think that's the way it *should* be - I would hate to see any commander-in-chief of any political persuasion have such carte blanche power - we already had one in recent political history, and look how much damage that did to our nation. It heartens me to see that there are Democrats that are willing to stand up to the President on any number of issues and do not vote as some monolithic block. 60 Democrats *never* means 60 clinched votes, and with the independence shown by some of the members of the Senate, I would even question 50 clinched votes on most issues. Herding cats, herding cats...

Re: Conservatives are the real losers in the Olympics race

mlhradio — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 19:18:55 -0000

One very important thing I should point out is that nearly all of the hatred, seething and anti-American fervor on display after America lost the Olympic bid is coming from the non-elected republican *commentators*, and not from the elected officials. Folks like Be(c)k, Limbaugh and Drudge, not folks like Boehner, Cantor or Pence. There was some whining from them before he left, but I haven't heard anything out of the elected leadership on the issue after. (Feel free to correct me, anyone).

Glad to see that, in large part, the elected republicans are smart enough not to joint in the anti-American fervor.

Re: Chicagos loss is Obamas loss is Americas loss

mlhradio — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 12:19:22 -0000

Best comment I saw on another blog:

"No matter how much the right loves their country, they hate Obama even more."

Country First...indeed.

Re: Chicagos loss is Obamas loss is Americas loss

mlhradio — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 11:29:31 -0000

If this is not a classic example of Obama Derangement Syndrome, then I don't know what is. Seriously. I know that "ODS" is a term that is bandied about so much that it has lost meaning, but this is a perfect textbook example. This is very much like the morbid display that occurred on the left suffering from "BDS" when they practically cheered a record number of soldiers getting killed in Iraq as an example of Bush's failure - I see a similar sort of thought process going on here.

I am so ashamed that so many conservatives hate America so much that they are letting their political biases damage the entire nation. I don't know how they can live with themselves.

Re: Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire

mlhradio — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 00:21:46 -0000

I will readily admit that I have a morbid fascination with some of the more outrageous statements coming from the ultra-reactionary fringe right, as evidenced by folks like Bachmann and Be(c)k and Limbaugh. Sort of like comedy relief.

But I think we are all really missing the whole point of the discussion - this is not about whether or not Bachmann is making factually true statements or not - it is all about promoting an *emotional*, subjective view. To those on the far right, logic is meaningless. A couple examples - The whole birther nonsense has been disproven over and over again; the 'death panels' argument is patently false; repeated to references to Obama the Muslim are still bandied about. All of these points have been soundly proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be incorrect under an avalanche of evidence, yet there is still a large percentage of the reactionary right that clings to their beliefs, defying any semblance of logical thought.

For the left, it's all about FACTS and REASON. For the right, it's all about FEELINGS and EMOTION. Y'see, for Bachmann and her ilk, it doesn't matter whether or not what she says is factually true or not - rather, what matters is whether it "feels true" or "could be true" (or "could become true")

There was an excellent Q&A with Jonathan Haidt who spoke at TED (link here: http://blog.ted.com/2009/09/the_healthcare.php) - it was even linked by The Moderate Voice a few days back that touches on this very idea. Worth the read, if you haven't already. A few quotes:

"So people who have a negative intuitive reaction to Obama, or who are fearful about the enormous changes going on, are already inclined to believe rumors against him and his plans. They hear about death panels and forged birth certificates and ask "can I believe it?" The answer is usually yes, particularly if Fox News raises these questions and brings on experts who claim that the propositions are true. Even if Fox News presents both sides, the fact that somebody on TV endorsed a proposition gives viewers permission to believe it, if they want to. Conversely, Democrats can give rebuttals till they're blue in the face, but if people are asking themselves "must I believe it" about the Democrats' claims then the answer they will usually reach is "no." Logic and consistency just aren't very important when it comes to morality..."

"...So when Palin threw out the term "death panels," the term struck a chord that had been played many times in recent years. Liberals were flabbergasted, because it's a blatant lie, but it's false only in a logical sense, not an emotional one. And once again, logic has little to do with morality. If a pro-life social conservative asks himself whether Obama is secretly plotting to create death panels, he is not asking whether this is likely to be true, he is asking only "can I believe it," and the answer is usually yes."

Kathy, the point is that you can point to outrageous statements from the reactionary right all you want, and point out their lies and misstatements and delusions all you want. But it's all meaningless - people on the left, the center and the intelligent right have been doing just that for the past several months and yet the lies of the right remain as persistent as ever. Attacking them with logic and facts is never going to work, because their arguments are not based on logic or facts. Unless you can find a way to counter them on a more emotional (or even moral) level, you're never going to have an impact and start changing opinions. Until then, you're just preaching to the choir with blog posts like these.

Re: Trent Franks Calls Obama “An Enemy of Humanity”

mlhradio — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:05:35 -0000

Actually, we meet in the clearings of the woods at midnight and dance around giant bonfires, naked, chanting pagan rituals.

Or, so I've heard...

Re: The Ghouls Surrounding Bill Sparkman

mlhradio — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:34:48 -0000

Fully understandable that in this uber-politicized environment where everything is viewed through a right-wing/left-wing lens, that the explanations and theories as to what happened involve one political party or another. Anti-government sentiment is definitely not the exclusive parlance of the right-wing - there are people on the left (as well as people of no particular party affiliation) that have a hatred of the government, too. I kinda doubt that the person or people that did this were thinking of the effects on national political discourse when they did the dirty deed - more likely nothing more complicated than "I hate anything involving the government, so I'll scrawl Fed on his chest" and that's it.

Of course, it's all speculation at this point (about the only thing that has been ruled out for sure is that this was not a suicide), and unless the murder(ers) are caught, we may never know for sure.

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the anti-American commentators (e.g. those even more venomous and hate-filled than Glenn Be(c)k or Limbaugh or Levin) start suggesting that this was a "plant" by some left-wing group to try and make those on the right look bad. Or maybe they're already suggesting it, I dunno.

Re: Eric Cantor and Republican “Compassion”

mlhradio — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 22:09:20 -0000

I always find it amusing when someone who disagrees with a message decides to ignore dealing with the message itself, and instead attack the messenger. That seems to be the modus operandi of the 'loyal opposition' these days - all whining about who is saying what, rather than dealing with the actual problem being discussed.

For the very small handful of complainers who whimper and wheedle on about how "The Moderate View is not moderate", perhaps they should stop grousing how "everyone is wrong except for me", and wonder *why* their views are so far out of the moderate mainstream. It's all a matter of perspective, really. If the political spectrum were a football field, then people on the left would mostly gather around the Liberal's 20-yard-line; moderates would largely be gathering around the Liberal's 40-yard-line; and conservatives these days would be far to the right of the Conservative end zone, somewhere in the bleachers. Of course, viewing mainstream discourse and moderate discussion from that perspective they would be getting an incorrect, warped view that everything leans to the far left.

Right-wing whiners - stop looking to everyone else as the problem, and start looking in the mirror as to why no one agrees with you.

Re: It’s the White House Versus Fox News’ Chris Wallace

mlhradio — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:00:52 -0000

Tons and tons of numbers for everyone to chew on:

http://people-press.org/report/543/

It's the latest (Sept. 13th) Pew Research poll on how the public views the mainstream media in America. In particular it shows how the viewers of the Fox Comedy Channel view America so much differently from mainstream America. Check it out.

Re: It’s the White House Versus Fox News’ Chris Wallace

mlhradio — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 17:32:17 -0000

Fake and Staged: Fox Comedy Channel producer Heidi Noonan cheerleading the crowd at the recent little tempest-in-a-teapot demonstration:

http://mediamatters.org/blog/200909180037

Re: CNN’s Sanchez, ABC’s Trapper and CBS to FOX News: You Lie

mlhradio — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 12:35:44 -0000

Skyfather - don't forget the other major event on the Mall that day - the 24th Annual Black Family Reunion, which generally draws about half a million visitors to the Washington DC area over the weekend (I find that figure hard to swallow myself, but previous annual reunions have definitely been in the six-figure range, albeit low six figures; and not all of them were on the Mall). Makes you wonder how much of the ridership was because of that?

Re: CNN’s Sanchez, ABC’s Trapper and CBS to FOX News: You Lie

mlhradio — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 12:28:17 -0000

>>even if there were 200,000 people there, the teabaggers were still initially exaggerating by *TEN* orders of magnitude.

FYI - ten orders of magnitude would be 10 to the 10th power - or 10 billion. And despite all the teapot-tempest crowd's hyper-exaggerations, I doubt there were trillions or quadrilliions of people at the rally. Methinks you meant *ONE* order of magnitude.

Re: CNN’s Sanchez, ABC’s Trapper and CBS to FOX News: You Lie

mlhradio — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 12:21:29 -0000

>>If you SERIOUSLY BELIEVE that the "turnout was much smaller than expected," then all the big media missed this story... no matter how many reporters were there.

I am having a hard time following your logic - it does not make any sense -- how does "smaller than expected" turnout mean that the Responsible Media missed the story? A does not lead to B.

In any case, *yes*, I really seriously believe that the turnout was much smaller than expected, as I had previously commented on in another discussion thread. Going back to April, enough people turned out to the April 15th teapot-tempest events (300-400K) to give me a bit of a pause - could this be a real movement? But then, after months and months of hyping and non-stop promotion by the Fox Comedy Channel, this supposed-to-be-major event on September 12th by the teapot-tempest crowd turned out to be a let-down. Only 60-70,000 showed up, showing that the anti-government anger is a whole lot smaller sliver of the nation than anyone had expected (it just seems larger because they are so loud and obnoxious). Still as unfocused in their message as before, despite months of having a chance to refine and target their message. Still stuck on pushing ridiculous conspiracy theories and marginalizing through misconceptions, half-truths and outright bald-faced lies.

This was supposed to be their Big Event? This was supposed to be the rally that would Wake Up America? This was supposed to show the anger brewing under the surface by Joe Six-Pack and Suzy Homemaker? Seriously?

A week later no one is talking about the message - people are only taking about how the anti-America crowd on the far right is whining about how they didn't receive any coverage and no one believes them when they try and parrot their inflated attendance figures. Epic fail.

And as I said before, I'm surprised that this little teapot tempest received such massive coverage from the Responsible Media, considering what a dud it ended up being in hindsight. And I do find the whole media-on-media nonsense over who "said the most" to be somewhat amusing. McLuhan must be chuckling in his grave.

Re: CNN’s Sanchez, ABC’s Trapper and CBS to FOX News: You Lie

mlhradio — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 11:25:24 -0000

I dunno, T-Steel - I think every message board needs a Court Jester. I find Wrong-Way Dave's occasional drive-by comments here absolutely *hilarious*!

Let him stay - we all need the comedy relief!

Re: CNN’s Sanchez, ABC’s Trapper and CBS to FOX News: You Lie

mlhradio — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 11:23:33 -0000

Vicb -

No use arguing against the tempest-teapotters with such silly little things as facts. You are wasting your breath (or in this case, keystrokes) - they don't want to hear the facts. They just want to be validated.

Let the 70,000 protester believe whatever they want to believe - if there's one thing this little teapot tempest proved last week, it's that the teapotter movement is a whole lot smaller than anyone could have ever expected. Turnout was much smaller than I would have ever hoped, and their impact was negligible. If anything, they just very publicly demonstrated how insignificant they really are.

So let it go, man, let it go. Let them live in their shrinking echo chamber, while the rest of the nation moves on.

Re: CNN’s Sanchez, ABC’s Trapper and CBS to FOX News: You Lie

mlhradio — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 02:35:15 -0000

I'm kinda surprised that the little tea event got as much coverage as it did. After all, the reputable-reported turnout was much smaller than expected (under a hundred thousand) and by all appearances it was somewhat of a flop of an event. I know the various news media outlets feel they have to have "balanced" coverage, but bending over backwards to spend so much covering such a minor, inconsequential event is going a little too far.