I agree with the general theme, that Williams should step down on his own and that no network should ever again make him be a news anchor. But for me it is less about some sort of aggrandizing nature as the idea that journalism should be about scrupulous attention to the truth, not selling a good story. So, the point of it all has nothing to do with how close Brian Williams was to actual dangers or dead people, it has to do with a commitment to the idea that the facts are the facts, regardless of how pure or ambivalent are the responses of the listeners. While I also agree somewhat with that the notion that fiction can be more accurate than fact, there are nonetheless two different jobs: reporting and interpreting. I actually find Fox News to be pretty OK at reporting, they just completely pave that over with their corporate-scripted opinion: in both cases (FOX and BW) that's a line that shouldn't be crossed.posted @ Monday, February 16, 2015 - 12:52
@butterflyink21: I agree only to the extent that the victim was completely improperly shot, and that there are other cases that really stretch the idea that the police are effectively providing for the public safety. In this case, however, the reports are reasonably convincing that a tragic accident has taken place, and that the policeman involved is guilty of failing to follow procedures, with deadly and direct consequence.
What DOES tie this case to the others is the extreme prevalence of guns in our communities, which is one of the main reasons the police are forced into the shoot first, ask questions later mentality.posted @ Thursday, February 12, 2015 - 13:09
Well, all in favor of making sure people like that can have a gun, raise your hand. Course, now he's an outlaw, and won't be able to, right?posted @ Thursday, February 12, 2015 - 12:37
@AbidingDude: Well, I don't agree with you on this one. I always had a distaste for earmarks, but am open to these guys' arguments: maybe the system did work better when they existed.posted @ Thursday, February 12, 2015 - 11:44
@AbidingDude: Good question, although there's lots more to it than 'if the government hadn't spent that money in direct services to those poor people, would the taxpayers who initially made that money have helped those people in their own way?'posted @ Thursday, February 12, 2015 - 10:23
@1hutch: Not sure what your point is
But this is kinda stupid: are you thinking that ISIS notified the White House, saying 'mention this to the family', then had to send a message directly to the family after an uncomfortably long wait...Seems much more likely that they would have sent multiple messages, separated by however long it takes between two emails.
And when you spend your time just heaping pointless, antagonistic comments against one side or party, people just sort of tune you outposted @ Wednesday, February 11, 2015 - 09:22
@grove600: Just for my curiosity, can you cite a single example of Al Sharpton condoning someone killing a cop?posted @ Tuesday, February 10, 2015 - 11:17
And if there were more good guys with guns around, surely fewer people would have been shot, right? Make the same level of sense as all the other drivel the gun crowd spits out.posted @ Monday, February 9, 2015 - 14:00
@OconeeJoe: Methinks he doth protest to muchposted @ Saturday, February 7, 2015 - 14:33
[quote][b]snarkydude[/b] - One wonders why?[/quote]
Because you evidently listen to Fox news, YOU wonder why. Everyone else has heard about the ISIS coalition, the many other statements and actions taken about terrorism. See:
Willful self-deception by the right: when is it going to end? Symbolic malarkey (like shutting down the government, voting 56 times to repeal ObamaCare when the bill doesn't have a chance in the senate, not to mention overcoming veto). When is anyone on that side going to do something meaningful?posted @ Thursday, February 5, 2015 - 17:29
Actually, the more I think about this article, the more ludicrous it appears. He seems to be conceding that the right-leaning media goes apeshoot whenever they can about what their 'opponents' say. I have no idea whether the left-leaning media, like MSNBC, Rachel Maddow, etc act so fired up about stuff because I never watch that stuff. I guess some do, but it is no where near as prevalent as Fox-watching on the right. I end up listening to NPR a good bit (which NEVER has that silly mini-cobra style so common on Fox) and if I see anything on TV, its Stewart or formerly Colbert, who combine churn the goofiness of their opponents into really funny comedy. Does anybody on the right know how to have fun or be light???posted @ Thursday, February 5, 2015 - 13:33
@dahreese: Personally, I find that reading the news is much more empowering that the visual media: not only does the latter explicitly amplify emotional response by pictures, colorful and animated graphics, background music and sounds (the whole panoply of things that make modern movies often be much higher in effects than in character or story) but even more importantly because it gives them much more control. If 'they' show a three second clip of the speaker they are downplaying (looking unsavory, even better), then a thirty second rebuttal, you are left with a very powerful surge towards the perspective 'they' want to emphasize. If on the other hand you READ an account of the same thing, then when it gets down to the claims the second person made about the first one, you can simply go back up the page and decide for yourself whether they were taken out of context or not. I am not claiming that the print media is angelic, but we have greater opportunity to probe and validate what we are reading, right then.posted @ Thursday, February 5, 2015 - 11:37
I find it a little ironic that Reagan starts his article with quotes from liberal critics and then says:
Why do we conservatives give two cents about what these lefties and liberals say about “American Sniper” — or anything else?
Do as I say, not as I do, I guess...
But he is correct in recognizing the tone so prevalent in today's news/entertainment industry, and is conceding that it is certainly not less strident on the right. He just missed another opportunity to start a new trendposted @ Thursday, February 5, 2015 - 10:18
@dahreese: Although I generally agree with the opinions you express here, I am not so sure on this one. As Sen. Cowsert actually does no follow up on this goal, as he did for the preceding four, I am not prepared to assume anything about what he meant by it. Specifically, I detest, and often call out, in this forum the tendency of some to out words in their ideological opponents mouths, then try to disparage them for what they didn't actually say.
So exactly what is meant by the 'founding principles of our constitutional republic'? Clearly, one could find examples of both the noble and the despicable in both the men who built the constitution and the product of their work: they chose specifically to acquiesce to slavery, had no intention of treating women as equal members of society, and generally envisioned the states as being much more independent in their powers than what we have evolved to today. But they also eschewed oligarchy generally (in their free men only way) and invented a system of checks and balances that survives today as the longest constitutional domain in history...so I agree with you that it takes a lot of selectivity to come up with principles that unarguably make sense today. I just prefer hear a little more about what they actually intend to do about this.
@OCCountry: Hmmmm: well your sarcasm was invisible, and imply that I was just to dense to get it...well maybe so, but you seemed to have fooled about everyone:
OC: "I can come up with a plan to reduce it quickly. Bring in a few one way buses. Issue resolved."
You give no credit to government, but fliply claim you have a solution that gets the 'Issue Resolved". Then when challenged, you completely misrepresent the truths (which I cited) and made like this was a Democrat == bad guy issue. So, if you want to end on a note of 'I proved your point', go ahead: you sound desperate.posted @ Tuesday, February 3, 2015 - 10:02
@OCCountry: You leave out some facts (easy to see why):
Yeah, San Diego budgeted a one way bus ticket for homeless people...what you left out was that THE VOLUNTARY TICKET WAS TO WHATEVER PLACE THE PERSON SAID THEY KNEW PEOPLE THAT WOULD HELP THEM.
Same idea in NY, except that the city required some reasonable assurance the people at the other end WOULD help them.
However, there have been egregious actions, such as in Nevada, where mentally disabled people were shipped off to California (San Francisco is trying to sue them, but Nevada argues that they have no standing to bring the claim forward). So, this sounds like the dumping strategy you espoused. And remind us all: Nevada res state? blue state?posted @ Tuesday, February 3, 2015 - 09:51
@OCCountry: Kind of beneath yourself, there OC. I often disagree with you, but generally not find your comments to be this thoughtless. So, you volunteering to pay for these buses? And the lawsuits coming from wherever they let'em off? You planning to just ask the folks to volunteer or to just can that ol' due process thing and have the cops round'em up? Or are you just going on record as saying that a problem pushed off your radar is a problem solved?posted @ Monday, February 2, 2015 - 15:17
OK: I am a little out of touch with this one....so, changing requirements for a test that has real consequences can be an issue, if the changes apply to students who have already done their preparations. But this seems to be about the content, in that there is some state resistance to the historic interpretations now being emphasized. 'Revisionist history' is a somewhat compromised term, as I mostly hear it used by people that prefer the whitewashing (pun intended) about historic truths that used to get official and cultural sanction in response to a switch to the real story, even if it tarnishes ancestors we revere. So what's this really about?posted @ Saturday, January 31, 2015 - 10:44
@AbidingDude: No, but it's a legitimate and factual counter to the ridiculous claims of swimdawg.posted @ Friday, January 30, 2015 - 09:36
@swimdawg68: The Democrats are low on talent, and do best when tempered by a responsible opposition to shave off their wackiest ideas. Unfortunately, there hasn't been one for 20 years: the Republicans suffer from not so much diversity in their principles, as incompatibility: they think the government should intrude less in people's lives, but depend on a voter block that wants the Bible to be taught in school and posted all over our official facilities. They talk every election cycle about the 'small business man', but are funded largely by the very corporate world that has eliminated the small business option in most retail and service sectors. They espouse the right to life of every conceived fetus, but block birth control, and evidently think that once born, poor, you can just wither away if you don't have the bucks for health care. They manipulate the voting rules to require ID of in person voting, an issue where fraud is virtually non-existent, but raised the limit an individual can contribute politically from $32,000 to $320,000.
Yep: I love Boehner, McConnell, Cruz, Palin: these folks are assuring that no matter how feeble the Democrats are, they won't have to face an opposition powerful enough to do anything.
Boehner, McConnell, Cruz,posted @ Friday, January 30, 2015 - 09:30
@sweept: So are you intending satire? If so, it's feeble, as no one who understands science and climate would ever tolerate something as stupid as only humans can affect climate...certainly, anyone educated and not opting for willful self-deception knows how orbital eccentricity, volcanic eruptions, comet collisions, surface albedo, continental drift, and solar variations are all significant impacts on short and/or long term climate variations.posted @ Wednesday, January 28, 2015 - 15:19
@TeeWee: Guess you missed the recent announcement about last year being the hottest on record:
"The year 2014 was the warmest year across global land and ocean surfaces since records began in 1880. The annually-averaged temperature was 0.69°C (1.24°F) above the 20th century average of 13.9°C (57.0°F), easily breaking the previous records of 2005 and 2010 by 0.04°C (0.07°F). This also marks the 38th consecutive year (since 1977) that the yearly global temperature was above average. Including 2014, 9 of the 10 warmest years in the 135-year period of record have occurred in the 21st century. 1998 currently ranks as the fourth warmest year on record."
NOTE: this one says it's NOT: "Nominally this ranks 2014 as the joint warmest year in the record, tied with 2010, but the uncertainty ranges mean it’s not possible to definitively say which of several recent years was the warmest"
But there's something more important about all this than your willful self-deception: if you actually think that ambiguity in forecasting models means society should just ignore them, then please explain why there's any reason to implement economic policies: those models are no better at forecasting than the climate ones areposted @ Wednesday, January 28, 2015 - 14:17
Americans give themselves a bye when the time comes to take responsibility for our politicians, as though they were a different species, acting like idiots just because they are politicians. Baloney: they are politicians and act just exactly how they have to to get elected...it's us, collectively, that are extreme, uncompromising, and willing to leave major issues in a permanent spin cycle rather than finding the most effective compromise.
Of course, a major factor is our evil system of campaign financing. When you tolerate the ever expanding freedom of vested interests to pay for political influence, and choose to ignore funding accountability as a factor in your voting choices, you are just ceding your limited power as one-person-one-vote to those few that personally have millions on the table in the next congress' votesposted @ Tuesday, January 27, 2015 - 07:39
Putin seems to be in the Hitler/Stalin sty;e, which means don't attend to anything he says, make all your announcements and decisions based on what he actually DOES.
This could all be an eventual hit in Georgia's (us, our state) economy. I read somewhere that while Georgia is way the biggest producer of chicken, that Russia was way the biggest foreign buyer. Vodka embargo!posted @ Monday, January 26, 2015 - 09:58
A little fuzzy about just what the F-16s were gonna do. So, if the plane blew up, they were going to 'track and kill' the pieces to make sure the big chunks didn't hit something important? If it didn't blow up, they were going to shoot it down if something suspicious happened?
Sounds like the 'increased chatter' effectposted @ Monday, January 26, 2015 - 09:51
Summary: I'm not saying it's lonely to be a movie critic, but we often find ourselves seated alone in an empty theatre when we're watching new stuff. I know people who say they won't go see anything unless they have at least one other person to go with, but I've always enjoyed having the place to myself. I'm not saying it's lonely to be a movie critic, but we often find ourselves seated alone in an empty theatre when we're watching new stuff. I know people who say they won't go see anything unless they have at least one other person to go with, but I've always enjoyed having the place to myself. read more
As you might imagine, the vast majority of the editorial cartoons available these days for publication through the syndicate which supplies cartoons to the Athens Banner-Herald/OnlineAthens are addressing the situation in Ferguson, Mo., where the fatal shooting of a black teen by a white police officer has touched off a number of demonstrations -- some peaceful, but many not at all peaceful, with tear gas fired by police officers and gunshots fired by some protester. read more