Fox News...

[heartsdreamer]

Synonym to: Lies, Misinformation, and Propaganda.

The noise machine for the Christian(?)/ right wing extremists

[Guardian7347]

So says you and the Communist News Network. And yet, they never seem able to demonstrate any lies on the part of Fox news...peculiar, isn't it? On the flip side of the equation, Fox has regularly pointed out lie after lie being vomitted forth from the liberal hand puppets on CNN. Soros has his hand up their collective asses and moves their lips to whatever he wants said, and then parrots like you just repeat it without question. It's kind of disgusting actually.

[Samurai Noodlez]

Soros has his hand up their collective asses and moves their lips to whatever he wants said, and then parrots like you just repeat it without question. It's kind of disgusting actually.

Oh, so just like Glenn Beck and FOX News. Huh, who knew we had something in common?

Here's the difference I noticed between FOX and CNN.

FOX News headline: "Obama is an evil muslim nazi!"

CNN headline: "11-year-old girl donates her Christmas presents to terminally ill children"

See? Huge fuckin' difference. Maybe if FOX actually reported news instead of bitching about politics, I'd give them a little more credit.

[heartsdreamer]

So says you and the Communist News Network. And yet, they never seem able to demonstrate any lies on the part of Fox news...peculiar, isn't it? On the flip side of the equation, Fox has regularly pointed out lie after lie being vomitted forth from the liberal hand puppets on CNN. Soros has his hand up their collective asses and moves their lips to whatever he wants said, and then parrots like you just repeat it without question. It's kind of disgusting actually.

CNN a communist network? Come on Guardian!

Fox doesn't lie? Are you in denial? Fox is a lying demonizing fear-mongering machine. Scaring people is an old tactic to regain power-the status quo. Scaring the uneducated and sheeple.

Sheeple (a portmanteau of "sheep" and "people") is a term of disparagement, in which people are likened to sheep.
It is often used to denote persons who voluntarily acquiesce to a perceived authority or suggestion without sufficient research to understand fully the ramifications involved in that decision, and thus undermine their own human individuality or in other cases give up certain rights.

The implication of sheeple is that as a collective, people believe or do whatever they are told, especially if told so by a perceived authority figure believed to be trustworthy, without critically thinking about it or doing adequate research to be sure that it is an accurate representation of the real world around them.

Fox New is run by authoritarian double-heights

Research an authoritarianism by Altemeyer

According to research by Altemeyer, right-wing authoritarians tend to exhibit cognitive errors and symptoms of faulty reasoning. Specifically, they are more likely to make incorrect inferences from evidence and to hold contradictory ideas that result from compartmentalized thinking.

They are also more likely to uncritically accept insufficient evidence that supports their beliefs, and they are less likely to acknowledge their own limitations. Nevertheless, there is no connection between authoritarianism and either low or high intelligence. In terms of the five factor model of personality, authoritarians generally score lower on openness to experience and slightly higher on conscientiousness.

Altemeyer suggested that authoritarian politicians are more likely to be in the Conservative or Reform party in Canada, or the Republican Party in the United States. They generally have a conservative economic philosophy, are highly nationalistic, oppose abortion, support capital punishment, oppose gun control legislation, and do not value social equality.

The RWA scale reliably correlates with political party affiliation, reactions to Watergate, pro-capitalist attitudes, religious orthodoxy, and acceptance of covert governmental activities such as illegal wiretaps. Although authoritarianism is correlated with conservative political ideology, not all authoritarians are conservative, and not all conservatives are authoritarian. It is also worth noting that many authoritarians have no interest in politics.

Authoritarians are generally more favorable to punishment and control than personal freedom and diversity. For example, they are more willing to suspend constitutional guarantees of liberty such as the Bill of Rights. They are more likely to advocate strict, punitive sentences for criminals, and they report that they obtain personal satisfaction from punishing such people. They tend to be ethnocentric and prejudiced against racial and ethnic minorities, and homosexuals.

In roleplaying situations, authoritarians tend to seek dominance over others by being competitive and destructive instead of cooperative. In a study by Altemeyer, 68 authoritarians played a three hour simulation of the Earth's future entitled the Global change game.

Unlike a comparison game played by individuals with low RWA scores, which resulted in world peace and widespread international cooperation, the simulation by authoritarians became highly militarized and eventually entered the stage of nuclear war.

By the end of the high RWA game, the entire population of the earth was declared dead. The vast majority of research on right-wing authoritarianism has been done in the United States and Canada.

A recent cross-cultural study, however, examined the relation between authoritarianism and individualism-collectivism in samples from Bulgaria, Canada, Germany, Japan, New Zealand, Poland, and the U.S.A. (total N = 1,018).

Both at the individual level and the societal level, authoritarianism was correlated with vertical individualism (or dominance seeking) and vertical or hierarchical collectivism, which is the tendency to submit to the demands of one's ingroup. A study done on both Israeli and Palestinian students in Israel found that RWA scores of right-wing party supporters were significantly higher than those of left-wing party supporters, and scores of secular subjects were lowest.

Right-wing authoritarianism has been found to correlate only slightly with Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). Together they are strong predictors of a variety of prejudices such as sexism, racism, and heterosexism. The two measures can be thought of as two sides of the same coin: RWA provides submissive followers, and SDO provides power-seeking leaders.

***********************************************************************************************************************************************
There have been a number of other attempts to identify "left-wing authoritarians" in the United States and Canada. These would be people who submit to leftist authorities, are highly conventional to liberal viewpoints, and are aggressive to people who oppose left-wing ideology. These attempts have failed because measures of authoritarianism always correlate at least slightly with the right. There are certainly extremists across the political spectrum, but most psychologists now believe that authoritarianism is a predominantly right-wing phenomenon.

Although authoritarians in North America generally support conservative political parties, this finding must be considered in a historical and cultural context. For example, during the Cold War, authoritarians in the United States were usually anti-communist, whereas in the Soviet Union, authoritarians generally supported the Communist Party and were opposed to capitalism.

Thus, authoritarians generally favor the established ways and oppose social and political change. Hence, even politics usually labeled as right or left-wing is not descriptive. While Communism in the Soviet Union is seen as leftist, it still inspired the same responses. This leaves questions over what makes various ideologies left or right open to interpretation.

[heartsdreamer]

Soros has his hand up their collective asses and moves their lips to whatever he wants said, and then parrots like you just repeat it without question. It's kind of disgusting actually.

Oh, so just like Glenn Beck and FOX News. Huh, who knew we had something in common?

Here's the difference I noticed between FOX and CNN.

FOX News headline: "Obama is an evil muslim nazi!"

CNN headline: "11-year-old girl donates her Christmas presents to terminally ill children"

See? Huge fuckin' difference. Maybe if FOX actually reported news instead of bitching about politics, I'd give them a little more credit.

There's a HUGE FUCKING DIFFERENCE! No doubt!

"11-year-old girl donates her Christmas presents to terminally ill children"

Or

Lindsay Lohan Suspected of Stealing $2,500 Necklace

That's one of the signs of authoritarianism -- demonize the opponent repeat, and repeat, and repeat the lies, Machiavelian style until the followers believe it's true.

Just watch the reaction of the authoritarians when Obama came to power.

[Hannahljmr]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/SHOWBIZ/celebri ... tml?hpt=C1

Then I guess CNN just lost its credibility by your account.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/02/0 ... test=gnews

Be a little more open minded guys instead of just attack attack attack.

BTW= they all push and spin their ideology. They do it very cleverly because you'll notice that each show will reinforce something that the prior one may have said. This gives you the false image that everyone is on the same page. MSNBC, CNN, and FOX are all guilty of the same thing. The mainstream media has lost it's credibility, and it's ultimately up to the individual to use their brain and decipher whats true, false, or spun.

Did we already forget what the liberal media did as soon as they heard of the Gabrielle Giffords shooting? They blamed Sarah Palin and the tea party movement until the actual evidence and testimonies of his acquaintances came out. And what happened? The so called sheeple ate every word of it up until they got that bad taste in their mouths that they were wrong.

So that's just a recent example.

I would actually like to issue you guys a challenge. When you know there's something big that happened that will be on all News Stations flip back and forth between FOX, CNN, and MSNBC. Listen to what they all have to say with out using your own bias. That's the most important part.

[Samurai Noodlez]

I, quite frankly, don't care about any of them. FOX is just my least favorite.

[Hannahljmr]

Mind me asking why?

[Samurai Noodlez]

I hate the personalities, particularly Mr. Beck and it appears their sole purpose is to do little more than slander the President. It really doesn't matter who our president is, nothing is going to change. Everyone will bitch about something. Everyone bitched about Bush, now that he's gone, everyone's pissed because our president is black and they think he's a Muslim.

Really, I'm just tired of hearing people piss and moan about nothing. So I just quit watching the news. This is a rare case of me choosing to be blissfully ignorant.

[Hannahljmr]

I can see the Glenn Beck thing, he has said things that made him lose his credibility. However, he actually does bring up good points to the table (not concerning the president).

everyone's pissed because our president is black and they think he's a Muslim.

If you really believe that every Republican or anyone who doesn't agree with the president is racist - then that really just seems like you are only letting bias ideology get in the way. Who told you that everyone's pissed because the president is black and muslim? Probably MSNBC or CNN. I guarantee you that if you ask someone that isn't a radical republican, they could give you a logical answer as to why they aren't on the same page with Obama. Sometimes you have to actually use logic and question... "ok that is obviously just smearing a group of people, what is the real reason that people aren't in agreement with the president?" Finding the answer to that question will take a lot of research, and you would have to read into the real responses from Republicans (not radical racists) as to why they're upset. However, you really seem to be the type that doesn't really give a shit and will just go along for the ride as long as you get to take a couple of shots at a group of people that are easy to target.

Sorry if that came out rude, but I saw what you said as offensive. Just because I don't agree with everything the president does, doesn't make me a racist. This stereotype really just makes me sick.

[Samurai Noodlez]

It was a frustrated exaggeration, based on personal experience. Relax.

[Hannahljmr]

Relax.

Lol easy for you to say. Everywhere I go I get slammed with the "well you're just mad because he's black and muslim" bit. I realize you weren't applying that phrase to me specifically, but even still I do consider myself to lean more to Conservatism and it's a little offensive don't you think? After hearing it way too many times it starts to eat away your nerves lol. So sorry, I did apologize for sounding rude! But you stepped on my toes a little bit there.

[Samurai Noodlez]

No worries. I do apologize as it was not my intention to offend you. I, admittedly have a very dry, bitter and often offensive sense of humor. I tend to talk out of my ass when I'm irritated, which has been an issue all week. However, that's a more personal matter. Again, I apologize.

Really, all I see in the news is mindless bickering with little attempt to change anything. A year ago, I would have claimed that a civil or holy war was imminent. I was in Afghanistan at the time and honestly didn't want to come back. When a soldier doesn't want to come home to his own country, something is wrong.

[Hannahljmr]

Really, all I see in the news is mindless bickering with little attempt to change anything. A year ago, I would have claimed that a civil or holy war was imminent. I was in Afghanistan at the time and honestly didn't want to come back. When a soldier doesn't want to come home to his own country, something is wrong.

Well, I agree a lot with you there. Except Fox or Glenn Beck, has been encouraging people to do their own research and draw their own ideas from it. Which I like. Obviously when he does his lessons with the chalk board you have to figure there's an agenda behind it all, but it's actually got some good info. Many people have started reading American History, The Federalist and Anti Federalist papers, the Constitution and to me- I think that's taking a step in the right direction. But like I said before, he has been known to say some radical statements, and I can understand how he has lost credibility with some people. With watching any news station though, I've learned there are some things you just tune out and ignore and then there are others that you can use for your benefit.

And as for the apology, it's accepted... I'm really passionate about politics (not to mention I'm a woman) and I do get sensitive lol. (Edit) Oh and Thank you for your service to our country

[heartsdreamer]

The point is that there's no liberal media. They gave a free ride to Bush, right? WMDs?

They gave a free ride to those demonizing Obama care, remember what happened last summer? Easy to forget? Journalists are scared of telling us the truth. They're afraid of their bosses--the corporate owners.

It's okay the for the insurance companies to run death panels to deny insurance for Americans with pre-existing conditions but if Obama care wants to stop that -- people goes ballistic.
Why do Americans always vote against their own interests? Bizarre!

What we have now is "corporate stream media." Research who owns the media and see for yourself.

[heartsdreamer]

Really, all I see in the news is mindless bickering with little attempt to change anything. A year ago, I would have claimed that a civil or holy war was imminent. I was in Afghanistan at the time and honestly didn't want to come back. When a soldier doesn't want to come home to his own country, something is wrong.

Well, I agree a lot with you there. Except Fox or Glenn Beck, has been encouraging people to do their own research and draw their own ideas from it. Which I like. Obviously when he does his lessons with the chalk board you have to figure there's an agenda behind it all, but it's actually got some good info. Many people have started reading American History, The Federalist and Anti Federalist papers, the Constitution and to me- I think that's taking a step in the right direction. But like I said before, he has been known to say some radical statements, and I can understand how he has lost credibility with some people. With watching any news station though, I've learned there are some things you just tune out and ignore and then there are others that you can use for your benefit.

And as for the apology, it's accepted... I'm really passionate about politics (not to mention I'm a woman) and I do get sensitive lol. (Edit) Oh and Thank you for your service to our country

What about the Patriotic Act? That's against the constitution!

I'm really passionate about politics (not to mention I'm a woman) and I do get sensitive lol.

Aww women--you have to love them

[RockPillow®]

[Hannahljmr]

The point is that there's no liberal media.

It's okay the for the insurance companies to run death panels to deny insurance for Americans with pre-existing conditions but if Obama care wants to stop that -- people goes ballistic.
Why do Americans always vote against their own interests? Bizarre!

There is a liberal media and their is a conservative media... that's why both point fingers at each other and MSNBC disrespectfully refers to tea partiers as "tea baggers." And also why Everyone on CNN believed that Michele Bachmann should not have been acknowledged at the State of the Union Address. Fox is obviously a Conservative station, that goes with out saying because you have picked it as an opponent with your ideology.

"It's okay the for the insurance companies to run death panels to deny insurance for Americans with pre-existing conditions but if Obama care wants to stop that -- people goes ballistic.
Why do Americans always vote against their own interests? Bizarre!"

Conservatives don't think that that is ok. They want to reform, and they've been saying this! No one wants to go back to the same old system, and this is most definitely one of the subjects they agree on. The people voting against Healthcare Reform are voting against it because it's too expensive for something that no one knows is going to work. We don't even know what's in the 2000 pg bill! We have to go by people's words, which is hard. There are many ideas that have been put on the table and we need to spend a little more time looking at these ideas to find the best one. This isn't exactly the sort of thing you want to jump in bed with. It's for a good cause, but I just want to know that it's going to work! Unfortunately it seems the only way we can find out is to implement the bill and find out, but with this specific bill I find it perhaps a bit too risky to just "run with it."

They gave a free ride to those demonizing Obama care, remember what happened last summer? Easy to forget? Journalists are scared of telling us the truth. They're afraid of their bosses--the corporate owners.

Who was demonizing health reform? I'm a little confused... what exactly are you referencing?

What we have now is "corporate stream media." Research who owns the media and see for yourself.

I already did... hence me saying that all 3 of the stations lie and spin. Which is why I don't trust much of anything they say.

[SamZee]

Hahah, what the... Is that screenshot recent?

[RockPillow®]

I think so. Not sure. All I know is that what I posted there is the real un-photoshopped and unedited picture in all its gloriousness.

[SamZee]

If it is recent, I have to wonder if it was actually intentional.

[Hannahljmr]

::slaps forehead:: I'm sure it was an error lol

[SamZee]

I wonder if it was intentional because, obviously the country labeled as Egypt is Iraq. And I'm wondering if the message is being sent that, we should have let Iraq come up with their own democracy without sticking our military noses in their business. Not something a conservative news station would agree with, which makes me wonder if there's someone at FOX who's actually not an ignorant butt. :p

[RockPillow®]

Or somebody made a slip up. XD

Who knows?

[ilveekmjk]

Except Fox or Glenn Beck, has been encouraging people to do their own research and draw their own ideas from it.

The problem is that they tell people to research it and draw their own ideas AFTER they have filled their minds with twisted/half truths and put the fear of God into them. The power of suggestion if VERY VERY strong.

[heartsdreamer]

[SamZee]

The problem is that they tell people to research it and draw their own ideas AFTER they have filled their minds with twisted/half truths and put the fear of God into them. The power of suggestion if VERY VERY strong.

Ah yes, very keen. What happens is, these sources deliver the end result of their perception. And since you can't force someone to believe anything, it's a passive means of instilling others with your perceptions. So the viewers endeavor upon learning about this stuff on their own with the punchline already imprinted upon them. Therefore, information that opposes the original thought is more likely to be ignored. And so whatever they learn, it only serves to strengthen the imprinted perception. This is how minds are conditioned.

[Hannahljmr]

Guys, doesn't it sound a bit biased to point fingers at only Fox and Republicans? I mean if everyone really believes that Republicans are so evil that they are trying to brainwash people, then perhaps we should consider dividing the country in half. It's offensive to refer to anyone who is a Republican as incapable of thinking for themselves. Not many people can put bias aside (republican and democrat) but to suggest that democrats are superior to "conditioning" as if they don't eat up everything the media tells them is BS. People on both sides do, that's what party politics are all about! It's up to each individual to do their own research, and find out where their values and principles stand. But it sounds like you guys mean to tell me my research is invalid because I'm a conservative and I've been "conditioned" by Beck. Have you guys ever considered that there are people out there who are intelligent friendly conservatives who aren't out to eat your babies or whatever it is you guys are afraid of?

[SamZee]

Oh heavens! I do apologize. I never intended to single out republicans. I was talking about the media in general. My post was inspired by what ilveekmjk said, and their post was linked to what you said, but my post wasn't supposed to be linked to yours. Again, please know I was just talking about the media in general.

[SamZee]

Did I mention you should really consider my correction? :p I got the bad feeling that your perspective of me changed drastically over that misunderstanding, which was my fault.

[Hannahljmr]

We're cool No worries, I'm not that sensitive. I also don't judge people based on one post. I've been guilty of not saying what I mean correctly from time to time, sometimes I get a little to caught up in writing. I won't hold it against you

Edit: I thought I mentioned that there was an agenda behind it.

Obviously when he does his lessons with the chalk board you have to figure there's an agenda behind it all, but it's actually got some good info. Many people have started reading American History, The Federalist and Anti Federalist papers, the Constitution and to me- I think that's taking a step in the right direction. But like I said before, he has been known to say some radical statements, and I can understand how he has lost credibility with some people. With watching any news station though, I've learned there are some things you just tune out and ignore and then there are others that you can use for your benefit.

[SamZee]

[Theory]

Ok. Where to even start on this one. People label everything, it is how they rationalize the world around them, the slap a label on a person and that helps them justify slandering, grouping, even murdering entire groups (Jews... Cough). I see something seriously wrong here, I’m not a left wing, right wing, conservative, and so on and so forth, i am a human. We all are human so why must we divide our world into groups of countries, religions or political beliefs. We divide so we can be conquered. Humans are a product of there environment, so the fact that America is the highest murder capital of the world speaks volumes. Now on the topic of news.

All my own opinion. Most of the major news branches are owned by 5 people. Five people that control everything you hear see. Is that not wrong, do you not see something that is amiss. How have we become so naive. I will quote my brotha immortal technique to make my point. "Turn of the TV and read nigga; read!"

We live in the information age, filled many resources, so rather than believe what you told on the news, do you own research.

Think for yourself! You have a brain USE IT!
Just my 2 cents. I like to stir the pot.
Theory

[SamZee]

You bring up some excellent points. Perhaps one of the most threatening truths is that most everything is owned by relatively small groups of "the elite" or, corporations. I heard some crazy statistic that pretty much all the products in any one grocery store come from one of five different companies. Rather unsettling. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not opposing anyone's political orientation. Just cooking up some food for thought!

[Hannahljmr]

I see something seriously wrong here, I’m not a left wing, right wing, conservative, and so on and so forth, i am a human. We all are human so why must we divide our world into groups of countries, religions or political beliefs. We divide so we can be conquered.

First of all, it's important to understand why we have political parties. Political parties in America started because there were two main view points on how the country should be governed after the revolution. Our first two party system were the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans. The federalists believed in a strong national government and were pro industrialization, while the democratic republicans were for a stronger state government and were pro agrarian interests. Our founding fathers warned us against them, however there was no denying that they served an important purpose which is to voice a groups concerns in numbers, so that the government could and would represent them.

The whole thing with political parties is that people will often resort to slandering the opposition party to gain more supporters and possibly detract any of the opposition's followers. It's been part of our history since the 1790's. The only way to really change it and continue having a democratic republic is for everyone who is affiliated with a party to lead by example and STOP slandering a group of people simply because they do not share the same beliefs or concerns. HD and I have talked about this though in another thread and we both agreed that the parties need a reform or that we would need 4 or more parties to represent everyone.

We all are human so why must we divide our world into groups of countries, religions or political beliefs. We divide so we can be conquered.

Theory we do not divide to be conquered, we divide because we don't agree or see eye to eye on everything. Not to mention the centuries of history in each individual country that laid that tile work long before people of our generation could make that call. Naturally people turn to others who agree with them, and they form a group. Jihads want nothing to do with accepting we're all human regardless of religion, just as many countries do not want to give up their land so that we can be part of one large Utopian world. Really you just entered a whole new topic with that statement. Let's say the UN was to decide we should give up our countries, religions, and political beliefs for the reason you said. It's not something that is so simple that we would all be getting along like peanut butter and jelly after a week. I don't know... it would be nice, but that would involve people throwing out history, culture, religion, their governments and their benefits etc. It would make more sense for people to just understand that we all come from different places and have different situations, experiences, and beliefs that make each of us a unique individual and that we all have a right to these things, so long as they do not involve murder and the such.

We live in the information age, filled many resources, so rather than believe what you told on the news, do you own research.

Think for yourself! You have a brain USE IT!
Just my 2 cents. I like to stir the pot.

I agreed with this

[SamZee]

Well done Hannah. I always enjoy reading your very intelligent posts. =]

As you may know, I do not involve myself in politics. I understand your words very well and I think you make a good case. It makes good sense and is quite a valid argument. I respect that. Thing is, in a way I can't debate politics because I consider myself removed from it and therefore I haven't the place to debate it. Part of the reason I ignore it all is because I see the two-party system as two sides of the same corroded coin, and I think that perhaps Theory perceives it the same way. I think that's part of what he's trying to convey.

If you're politically active as you are, that's great. Seriously. Too many people complain about the government or whatever, and do nothing about it. So, I very much respect that you're highly informed and intelligent in this field. Now, I do agree that to erase the national boarders would be to unjustly reconcile everyone's culture and differences. I couldn't begin to come up with the words to express myself on that topic. The truth is that our planet is far too diverse to integrate like that to such an extent. I'm all for unity, but I can't ask for that yet. In order to have unity, there must be harmony. Problem is, the cultures of the world are just too different to be completely united with every other culture, and I think that's okay. We're all experiencing different lives for different reasons so that should be preserved and harmony promoted.

What do ya think? =]

[heartsdreamer]

You bring up some excellent points. Perhaps one of the most threatening truths is that most everything is owned by relatively small groups of "the elite" or, corporations. I heard some crazy statistic that pretty much all the products in any one grocery store come from one of five different companies. Rather unsettling. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not opposing anyone's political orientation. Just cooking up some food for thought!

Perhaps one of the most threatening truths is that most everything is owned by relatively small groups of "the elite" or, corporations.

Exactly! And when corporations own politicians it turns into fascism--we're closed to it now.

We don't produce NADA anymore here.

[SamZee]

Heh, precisely. And I couldn't agree more. I'm going out on a very brittle limb by saying this but, I think it's been a very long time since America has been a democracy... if it ever really was. I feel that we are greatly misled into thinking that it's a representative democracy. I feel that they cut as many corners as they possibly can to meet the bare minimum requirements of creating the illusion that the people have power. When it comes to the unbelievable power of the corporations and the influence they have, the word fascism inevitably comes up, and rightfully so I think. But you know. That's just me! =]

[Hannahljmr]

Well done Hannah. I always enjoy reading your very intelligent posts. =]

As you may know, I do not involve myself in politics. I understand your words very well and I think you make a good case. It makes good sense and is quite a valid argument. I respect that. Thing is, in a way I can't debate politics because I consider myself removed from it and therefore I haven't the place to debate it. Part of the reason I ignore it all is because I see the two-party system as two sides of the same corroded coin, and I think that perhaps Theory perceives it the same way. I think that's part of what he's trying to convey.

Thanks Sam, I'm glad you found it a good read.

I once ignored politics too. I felt it was all corrupt and there was nothing that I could do about it anyway. But I realized that if I wasn't happy with how the government was handling things then ignoring it would never solve the problem. "To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the crocodile, hoping he will eat you last - but eat you he will. "- Ronald Reagan.

I have two kids and it's them I fight for everyday. My interest in changing things has lead me to learn about American history and our political system. If you feel our political system is not representing you properly then it is up to you to find the best candidate and vote.

I think it's been a very long time since America has been a democracy... if it ever really was. I feel that we are greatly misled into thinking that it's a representative democracy. I feel that they cut as many corners as they possibly can to meet the bare minimum requirements of creating the illusion that the people have power.

I agree with this statement, but I would also like to assure you that our country was and is still a democratic-republic. "There have really been five party systems, each embedded in an era of national crisis or turmoil. A change in party systems always begins with a party realignment, in which events or crises cause a shift in fundamental party identification and loyalty. A new party system is characterized by a difference in party influence, allegiance, and control." Our system is just in much need of a reform to keep us current. It's time for a change.
Read this link it's great
http://wps.prenhall.com/hss_berman_demo ... index.html

[Hannahljmr]

The truth is that our planet is far too diverse to integrate like that to such an extent. I'm all for unity, but I can't ask for that yet. In order to have unity, there must be harmony. Problem is, the cultures of the world are just too different to be completely united with every other culture, and I think that's okay. We're all experiencing different lives for different reasons so that should be preserved and harmony promoted.

What do ya think? =]

I completely agree . All we can do is try and teach others that it's ok to be different, in hopes that people may tolerate others of different religions, races, political affiliations etc. I certainly hope that a majority of people (most likely decades from now unfortunately) will embrace that harmony.

[Guardian7347]

Humans are a product of there environment, so the fact that America is the highest murder capital of the world speaks volumes.

Unless I'm mis-construing this statement in some way, this is a terrible lie! We are actually much, much further down the list of countries that are willing to share that data.

[Hannahljmr]

I was going to say the same thing Guardian. There are many factors that would actually play into that if we really were. Like the size of our country compared to others (more population), the fact that we actually count our murders (where some countries don't or it can easily go undetected).

[Guardian7347]

I actually googled it, and by several lists, we come in somewhere around the mid-twenties. Of course, N. Korea and China are conspicously missing from the list, as is several countries with notoriously spotty human rights records.

[Hannahljmr]

I think N. Korea and China are just a given! Who was #1?

[Theory]

Well done Hannah. I always enjoy reading your very intelligent posts. =]

As you may know, I do not involve myself in politics. I understand your words very well and I think you make a good case. It makes good sense and is quite a valid argument. I respect that. Thing is, in a way I can't debate politics because I consider myself removed from it and therefore I haven't the place to debate it. Part of the reason I ignore it all is because I see the two-party system as two sides of the same corroded coin, and I think that perhaps Theory perceives it the same way. I think that's part of what he's trying to convey.

If you're politically active as you are, that's great. Seriously. Too many people complain about the government or whatever, and do nothing about it. So, I very much respect that you're highly informed and intelligent in this field. Now, I do agree that to erase the national boarders would be to unjustly reconcile everyone's culture and differences. I couldn't begin to come up with the words to express myself on that topic. The truth is that our planet is far too diverse to integrate like that to such an extent. I'm all for unity, but I can't ask for that yet. In order to have unity, there must be harmony. Problem is, the cultures of the world are just too different to be completely united with every other culture, and I think that's okay. We're all experiencing different lives for different reasons so that should be preserved and harmony promoted.

What do ya think? =]

Couldent have said it better my self thanks

[Theory]

Humans are a product of there environment, so the fact that America is the highest murder capital of the world speaks volumes.

Unless I'm mis-construing this statement in some way, this is a terrible lie! We are actually much, much further down the list of countries that are willing to share that data.

you are correct

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_m ... per-capita

My mistake thanks for the correction, i was just trying make a point.

[RockPillow®]

I actually googled it, and by several lists, we come in somewhere around the mid-twenties. Of course, N. Korea and China are conspicously missing from the list, as is several countries with notoriously spotty human rights records.

Just because countries are denying people's rights doesn't mean that they're killing them.

[Tal]

North America > United States > Crime

AMERICAN CRIME STATS:

Assault victims 1.2% [11th of 20]
Car thefts 1,246,096 [1st of 46]
Drug offences 560.1 per 100,000 people [4th of 46]
Executions 42 executions [5th of 22]
Gun violence > Homicides > % homicides with firearms 39.5604 [7th of 32]
Illicit drugs
world's largest consumer of cocaine (shipped from Colombia through Mexico and the Caribbean), Colombian heroin, and Mexican heroin and marijuana; major consumer of ecstasy and Mexican methamphetamine; minor consumer of high-quality Southeast Asian heroin; illicit producer of cannabis, marijuana, depressants, stimulants, hallucinogens, and methamphetamine; money-laundering center
Murders 16,204 [2nd of 49]
Murders with firearms 9,369 [1st of 36]
Perception of safety > Walking in dark 82% [2nd of 15]
Police 941,139 [1st of 47]
Prisoners 2,019,234 prisoners [1st of 168]
Prisoners > Per capita 715 per 100,000 people [1st of 164]
Rape victims 0.4% [13th of 20]
Rapes 95,136 [1st of 50]
Robberies 420,637 [2nd of 47]
Software piracy rate 20% [107th of 107]
Suicide rates in ages 15-24 13.7 per 100,000 people [7th of 17]
Suicide rates in ages 25-34 15.3 per 100,000 people [10th of 17]
Total crime victims 21.1% [15th of 20]
Total crimes 11,877,218 [1st of 50]

... View all Crime stats
SOURCES: UNICRI (United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute). 2002. Correspondence on data on crime victims. March. Turin; The Eighth United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (2002) (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Centre for International Crime Prevention); Amnesty International; Wikipedia: Gun violence ; All CIA World Factbooks 18 December 2003 to 18 December 2008; UN International Crime Victims' Survey; The Eighth United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (2002) (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Centre for International Crime Prevention); International Centre for Prison Studies - World Prison Brief; Fifth Annual BSA and IDC Global Software Piracy Study; GECD Society at a Glance 2001, Statistical Annex Table D3
ALTERNATIVE NAMES: United States, United States of America, usa, America, The United States, u.s.
Interesting facts on American Crime

* Russia has almost twice as many judges and magistrates as the United States. Meanwhile, the United States has 8 times as much crime.
* The United States puts 0.7 % of its population in Prison - a vastly higher percentage than any other nation.

[heartsdreamer]

You got it Tal.

Prisons are for profits here. The same goes for health care. Go figure. Privatization is destroying this country and the world.

[heartsdreamer]

From Huffington Post

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.President, Waterkeeper Alliance; Professor, Pace University
Posted: February 28, 2011 09:54 PM

Regulators Reject Proposal That Would Bring Fox-Style News to Canada

As America's middle class battles for its survival on the Wisconsin barricades -- against various Koch Oil surrogates and the corporate toadies at Fox News -- fans of enlightenment, democracy and justice can take comfort from a significant victory north of Wisconsin border. Fox News will not be moving into Canada after all! The reason: Canada regulators announced last week they would reject efforts by Canada's right wing Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, to repeal a law that forbids lying on broadcast news.

Canada's Radio Act requires that "a licenser may not broadcast....any false or misleading news." The provision has kept Fox News and right wing talk radio out of Canada and helped make Canada a model for liberal democracy and freedom. As a result of that law, Canadians enjoy high quality news coverage including the kind of foreign affairs and investigative journalism that flourished in this country before Ronald Reagan abolished the "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987. Political dialogue in Canada is marked by civility, modesty, honesty, collegiality, and idealism that have pretty much disappeared on the U.S. airwaves. When Stephen Harper moved to abolish anti-lying provision of the Radio Act, Canadians rose up to oppose him fearing that their tradition of honest non partisan news would be replaced by the toxic, overtly partisan, biased and dishonest news coverage familiar to American citizens who listen to Fox News and talk radio. Harper's proposal was timed to facilitate the launch of a new right wing network, "Sun TV News" which Canadians call "Fox News North."

Harper, often referred to as "George W. Bush's Mini Me," is known for having mounted a Bush like war on government scientists, data collectors, transparency, and enlightenment in general. He is a wizard of all the familiar tools of demagoguery; false patriotism, bigotry, fear, selfishness and belligerent religiosity.

Harper's attempts to make lying legal on Canadian television is a stark admission that right wing political ideology can only dominate national debate through dishonest propaganda. Since corporate profit-taking is not an attractive vessel for populism, a political party or broadcast network that makes itself the tool of corporate and financial elites must lie to make its agenda popular with the public. In the Unites States, Fox News and talk radio, the sock puppets of billionaires and corporate robber barons have become the masters of propaganda and distortion on the public airwaves. Fox News's notoriously biased and dishonest coverage of the Wisconsin's protests is a prime example of the brand of news coverage Canada has smartly avoided.
****************************************************************************************************************************************
I'm proud of you Canadians for keeping these lying focks out of your great country