World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[MrPopo]

[Even though the connotations of the past, President Trump procalmation of "America First" of course does mean ALL Americans. The Liberals know that, yet spin the statement as something evil.

All those other times were horrible, but THIS time it's good, because this time I'm supporting the guy saying it and I wouldn't support something bad.

When I was talking with other Greek people about how stupid nationalism is, I liked to tell them to think how this behaviour would look if it was about an individual:

ME FIRST BABY.

I'm the greatest person in the world.

Everybody is raping me. Everybody is there to take advantage of me.

I'm the best man to do any job for you.

Why are you transcribing Trump speeches?

[BogusMeatFactory]

[dsheinem]

Hooooooo boy.

Anyway, before I go cold turkey on this thread again, as far as I can tell, that chart of media bias is basically just an image that was put up on imgur. In other words, it holds no value or authority, other than perhaps to confirm ones own biases.

Here's the reasoning, which is generally very sound and solid: http://www.allgeneralizationsarefalse.com/?p=65

Read the whole thing (it may take a while) and I think you'd agree that the categorizations of certain media in certain places is fair.

Here is an even better (in some ways) study, again from someone who studies this stuff professionally: https://docs.google.com/document/d/10eA ... tM/preview

[jp1]

When I was talking with other Greek people about how stupid nationalism is, I liked to tell them to think how this behaviour would look if it was about an individual:

ME FIRST BABY.

I'm the greatest person in the world.

Everybody is raping me. Everybody is there to take advantage of me.

I'm the best man to do any job for you.


Now if you heard a person speak about himself like that, you would think he's a total asshole. And that obviously he is wrong. But make this discussion about ANY group (city, state, family, country, members of a club, race, religion, whatever) and suddenly, they think it's appropriate and that it makes sense.

The funny thing is that there is a higher chance that those statements are actually true about at least one man and woman in the entire planet, than any said group. Because groups are made of individuals, so their good and bad points are made up of the sum of their parts. And it's statistically impossible for those statements to be true of ANY group, except perhaps the Justice Leauge.

Come on! Stop making sense. You are spoiling the fun.

"OBVI" we are the best, it's like, have you seen our President?!? OMG. He totally puts the working man first, like, even before himself...ohhhh mah gawd, it's beautiful. He already did away with all those horrible terrorist Muslims and Mexican rapists. He showed the Chinese who's boss, and has put a stop to all those mooching losers who use my taxes up. *Squeak!* It's like, the best...OMG!!! ~100

[Sarge]

Some of it is solid. Some of it is questionable. I think there's an argument to be had here, but I appreciate the link to some reasoning behind the chart. I do question whether it is valid to heavily weight bias toward the mainstream via whether a source is available in print/TV/radio, or its longevity. I'll delve more into the link when I have some time to do so.

[alienjesus]

Some of it is solid. Some of it is questionable. I think there's an argument to be had here, but I appreciate the link to some reasoning behind the chart. I do question whether it is valid to heavily weight bias toward the mainstream via whether a source is available in print/TV/radio, or its longevity. I'll delve more into the link when I have some time to do so.

This kind of post is why I can respect your opinions, despite them differing from my own. They come from a position of being willing to engage, understand and discuss both your own viewpoint and others.

It's a shame CRT can't see what the difference is between the way you represent your views and the way he represents 'his'.

[Blu]

Some of it is solid. Some of it is questionable. I think there's an argument to be had here, but I appreciate the link to some reasoning behind the chart. I do question whether it is valid to heavily weight bias toward the mainstream via whether a source is available in print/TV/radio, or its longevity. I'll delve more into the link when I have some time to do so.

I think that's truly the difficulty in discerning bias from written/spoken word. It's truly hard, amidst a narrative that is accusing media on both sides as being fake news. The middle ground for reputable news sources, even those who have a slant, is completely different than what is regarded as fake news. This is why dsheinem is so pressing of CRT on the question of how to discern fact from opinion.

My experience, I have a hard time just finding something objective that's telling me what's going on. Truth be told, I find NPR to at least objectively report what is happening. NPR, the Guardian, and BBC haven't led me astray yet. My gripe is often I'd like to read, and not watch the news, or particular stories. Reading can at least let me ascertain what's being reported in a story, rather than heavily edited pieces of footage.

[Ack]

CRT, if you don't mind, would you please go back through that list of executive actions you posted and give your thoughts on each one? There are some I agree with, some I am neutral about, and some I vehemently oppose. I would appreciate knowing your thoughts on them.

I'm more curious to know which of them you agree with or are neutral on and why. At least then a discussion can be had.

I think it is safe to assume CRT agrees with them all.

For the sake of conversation, I'm happy to share some thoughts. Sorry for taking so long, jp1.

Here are the executive orders I don't take issue with(at least not in theory). Please note, these are not in any order:

1) Reorganizing the military - I have no issue with taking a full evaluation of our military preparedness and organization across all branches, including the relatively new cyberspace. Developing a more long-term defense plan seems like a sound plan, and while the review of our nation's ballistic and nuclear missiles may leave many wary, the truth is our missiles are quite out of date...though our missile defense systems are not.

On an unrelated note, I wholly disapprove of Steve Bannon having anything to do with the Joint Chiefs of Staff. George W. Bush made it a point to keep Karl Rove from having any involvement with the JCS to intentionally depoliticize their meetings. Bannon adds that element; I think he is best avoided.

2) American steel in pipelines - Using American workers, materials, and resources to construct or rebuild infrastructure "wherever possible" seems like a good move to me. I have a bigger question about why this needed to be an executive order in the first place. Note that there is also a loophole about feasibility.

3) Federal hiring freeze - I should note, I agree with this with deeply held reservations. I approve of it only as a short term measure while the new cabinet officials are installed and are brought up to speed with their new organizations. Once finished, I believe this should be rescinded so that divisions of the government can operate with required personnel. As it is, certain sections of the government are severely understaffed.

4) Regulation freeze - Again, giving new cabinet officials time to learn their positions and about what was in the pipeline regarding their organizations seems like an ok move to me. Please note, I believe it is possible that the agencies reviewing these regulations will still be able to approve them in due time. That said, I also realize this is more than likely intentionally aimed at specific environmental regulations President Obama was attempting to rush through, for which purpose I do not approve of this freeze. I'd rather executive orders be used for the benefit of government, not over political squabbles.

5) Reviewing manufacturing regulations - I'm ok with taking periodic reviews of regulations; it's a good idea to maintain up-to-date standards in any workplace, be it manufacturing, offices, military, academic, etc. I am concerned that this will result in safety being sacrificed to speed up commerce, but I take no issue with a review.

As for the other 9, I do have deep reservations regarding them. Even in the five I specifically pointed out, I point out some things I find problematic, though from a purely theoretical standpoint I don't have an issue(nor do I think would most...from a purely theoretical standpoint). In truth, my support depends on how these executive orders are carried out. If these are being used purely as political maneuvers, then no, I can't say I give them my approval.

Banning international and domestic funds for abortion, combating sanctuary cities, travel bans, the end of TPP...these all worry me due to the potential fallout on international relations. I don't believe in isolationism; in fact, I vehemently oppose it. Even while I may not agree with the policies in question put in place by the Obama administration, I still worry about the consequences of executing these orders and how the rest of the world views them.

The border wall is a waste of resources in my opinion. It could be better spent on beefing up technology and manpower for border patrol enforcement and revamping our systems for immigration and emigration.

Speeding up environmental reviews of priority infrastructure...I dislike that the individual who will make these decisions has yet to be named. This feels like a power concentration that I'm not willing to support.

As for the two pipelines in question, I believe the Army Corp of Engineers has offered up a plan for the Dakota Access pipeline which would completely circumvent Native lands. I would prefer this plan be followed if at all possible and am annoyed that it seems to be largely ignored. I don't really have an opinion either way about the Keystone XL.

And then there is the ACA rollback... Look, there was a lot about how the Affordable Care Act was developed and handled that I detest, there are problems with how it operates, it still doesn't fully provide all American citizens coverage, and it did in fact lead to some insurance companies giving up markets and some individuals losing coverage or being forced to take lesser plans. That said...it also did provide insurance to many people who did not have it, and there are some provisions in it that have worked quite well. Above all else however is my biggest complaint with the Republican response to the ACA: there is no plan. Ever since the ACA's first announcement, the Republicans have been in opposition, which is fine. The biggest problem is that we keep hearing that the ACA will be replaced with a better plan, yet none have been announced. This is an infuriating position to me, because I want the American people to either see this new, "better" plan, or for us to move on to the numerous other pressing issues we are facing both domestically and abroad.

I hope this helps illuminate my opinions, my friends. I realize that I don't have all the facts regarding these, so please consider all of my views tentative based on new information I may uncover or on how each order is carried out. It is also with some rueful irony that I note one of the criticisms the Republicans had regarding Obama's terms in office was his number of executive orders. While I still want my country to do well and for the president to succeed in building a better nation, the more days go by, the more I find myself taking issue with moves the Trump White House has made.

[jp1]

CRT, if you don't mind, would you please go back through that list of executive actions you posted and give your thoughts on each one? There are some I agree with, some I am neutral about, and some I vehemently oppose. I would appreciate knowing your thoughts on them.

I'm more curious to know which of them you agree with or are neutral on and why. At least then a discussion can be had.

I think it is safe to assume CRT agrees with them all.

For the sake of conversation, I'm happy to share some thoughts. Sorry for taking so long, jp1.

Here are the executive orders I don't take issue with(at least not in theory). Please note, these are not in any order:

1) Reorganizing the military - I have no issue with taking a full evaluation of our military preparedness and organization across all branches, including the relatively new cyberspace. Developing a more long-term defense plan seems like a sound plan, and while the review of our nation's ballistic and nuclear missiles may leave many wary, the truth is our missiles are quite out of date...though our missile defense systems are not.

On an unrelated note, I wholly disapprove of Steve Bannon having anything to do with the Joint Chiefs of Staff. George W. Bush made it a point to keep Karl Rove from having any involvement with the JCS to intentionally depoliticize their meetings. Bannon adds that element; I think he is best avoided.

2) American steel in pipelines - Using American workers, materials, and resources to construct or rebuild infrastructure "wherever possible" seems like a good move to me. I have a bigger question about why this needed to be an executive order in the first place. Note that there is also a loophole about feasibility.

3) Federal hiring freeze - I should note, I agree with this with deeply held reservations. I approve of it only as a short term measure while the new cabinet officials are installed and are brought up to speed with their new organizations. Once finished, I believe this should be rescinded so that divisions of the government can operate with required personnel. As it is, certain sections of the government are severely understaffed.

4) Regulation freeze - Again, giving new cabinet officials time to learn their positions and about what was in the pipeline regarding their organizations seems like an ok move to me. Please note, I believe it is possible that the agencies reviewing these regulations will still be able to approve them in due time. That said, I also realize this is more than likely intentionally aimed at specific environmental regulations President Obama was attempting to rush through, for which purpose I do not approve of this freeze. I'd rather executive orders be used for the benefit of government, not over political squabbles.

5) Reviewing manufacturing regulations - I'm ok with taking periodic reviews of regulations; it's a good idea to maintain up-to-date standards in any workplace, be it manufacturing, offices, military, academic, etc. I am concerned that this will result in safety being sacrificed to speed up commerce, but I take no issue with a review.

As for the other 9, I do have deep reservations regarding them. Even in the five I specifically pointed out, I point out some things I find problematic, though from a purely theoretical standpoint I don't have an issue(nor do I think would most...from a purely theoretical standpoint). In truth, my support depends on how these executive orders are carried out. If these are being used purely as political maneuvers, then no, I can't say I give them my approval.

Banning international and domestic funds for abortion, combating sanctuary cities, travel bans, the end of TPP...these all worry me due to the potential fallout on international relations. I don't believe in isolationism; in fact, I vehemently oppose it. Even while I may not agree with the policies in question put in place by the Obama administration, I still worry about the consequences of executing these orders and how the rest of the world views them.

The border wall is a waste of resources in my opinion. It could be better spent on beefing up technology and manpower for border patrol enforcement and revamping our systems for immigration and emigration.

Speeding up environmental reviews of priority infrastructure...I dislike that the individual who will make these decisions has yet to be named. This feels like a power concentration that I'm not willing to support.

As for the two pipelines in question, I believe the Army Corp of Engineers has offered up a plan for the Dakota Access pipeline which would completely circumvent Native lands. I would prefer this plan be followed if at all possible and am annoyed that it seems to be largely ignored. I don't really have an opinion either way about the Keystone XL.

And then there is the ACA rollback... Look, there was a lot about how the Affordable Care Act was developed and handled that I detest, there are problems with how it operates, it still doesn't fully provide all American citizens coverage, and it did in fact lead to some insurance companies giving up markets and some individuals losing coverage or being forced to take lesser plans. That said...it also did provide insurance to many people who did not have it, and there are some provisions in it that have worked quite well. Above all else however is my biggest complaint with the Republican response to the ACA: there is no plan. Ever since the ACA's first announcement, the Republicans have been in opposition, which is fine. The biggest problem is that we keep hearing that the ACA will be replaced with a better plan, yet none have been announced. This is an infuriating position to me, because I want the American people to either see this new, "better" plan, or for us to move on to the numerous other pressing issues we are facing both domestically and abroad.

I hope this helps illuminate my opinions, my friends. I realize that I don't have all the facts regarding these, so please consider all of my views tentative based on new information I may uncover or on how each order is carried out. It is also with some rueful irony that I note one of the criticisms the Republicans had regarding Obama's terms in office was his number of executive orders. While I still want my country to do well and for the president to succeed in building a better nation, the more days go by, the more I find myself taking issue with moves the Trump White House has made.

Thank you Ack, what a great response. I'll try to work up something appropriate, but in the meantime let me just say that those all seem like reasonable and thoughtful stances on the issues at hand.

On issues 4 and 5, you have a lot more faith in the current administration than I do. For me they seem like a simple power play to push environmental regulations aside (as you also at least are suspicious of), and a quick way to kill OSHA safety requirements and boost profits for himself and his buddies at the expense of worker safety. This will likely get praised as "creating jobs", but the cost is on the American worker in that case.

I have some things to add about the other issues, but haven't the time or mindset to do so right now. I do wish more of the Right could engage in the same manner as you Ack, without a doubt your posts are easier for my liberal mind to relate with. There is logic and reasoning that is hard to argue with. I really appreciate the effort, it eases my frustrations a great deal.

[dsheinem]

I do question whether it is valid to heavily weight bias toward the mainstream via whether a source is available in print/TV/radio, or its longevity. I'll delve more into the link when I have some time to do so.

I don't know that this is a measure that they are using to determine validity/merit, or at least I am not sure what you mean by this characterization of their methodology. Can you clarify?