And Lampshade's sarcasm about MSNBC is rich. I mean, at least MSNBC has some conservative and middle-of-the-road voices on the air. Fox's idea of balance is making sure that they have enough moderate conservatives to balance out the batshit insanity of Hannity and Beck.
I think it's funny that he believes that anyone here feels strongly about the quality of MSNBC. It's the near-unanimous opinion on this board that cable news in general is stupid and irrelevant. I get the impression that he (and to a lesser extent Chanus) argue with what they think liberals believe, and don't really engage with what the liberal posters here actually argue.
It's so much easier to debate a caricature than a real person. Hence the popularity of ad homs and strawmen in virtually every arena of discourse.
I think it's funny that he believes that anyone here feels strongly about the quality of MSNBC. It's the near-unanimous opinion on this board that cable news in general is stupid and irrelevant. I get the impression that he (and to a lesser extent Chanus) argue with what they think liberals believe, and don't really engage with what the liberal posters here actually argue.
I don't intend to argue against preconceived notions, though I'm not going to say I never do... I am hu-mon after all.
I feel there are people here who make assumptions about what I believe as well... so I guess we're even.
Chanus on
Allegedly a voice of reason.
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
I think it's funny that he believes that anyone here feels strongly about the quality of MSNBC. It's the near-unanimous opinion on this board that cable news in general is stupid and irrelevant. I get the impression that he (and to a lesser extent Chanus) argue with what they think liberals believe, and don't really engage with what the liberal posters here actually argue.
I don't intend to argue against preconceived notions, though I'm not going to say I never do... I am hu-mon after all.
I feel there are people here who make assumptions about what I believe as well... so I guess we're even.
I just think you've been arguing against what the media narratives want Franken to be, instead of who he actually is. Which is reasonable. I'd probably feel the same way you do if the only thing I knew about Franken was the O'Reilly-baiting he's infamous for. I'll admit he's not really as civil I'd normally like legislators to be, but the Democratic party is so timid right now that I think the Senate will benefit from an obnoxious, brazen liberal voice.
Hachface on
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
I just think you've been arguing against what the media narratives want Franken to be, instead of who he actually is. Which is reasonable. I'd probably feel the same way you do if the only thing I knew about Franken was the O'Reilly-baiting he's infamous for. I'll admit he's not really as civil I'd normally like legislators to be, but the Democratic party is so timid right now that I think the Senate will benefit from an obnoxious, brazen liberal voice.
I do get the impression I could use a bit of homework on his behalf. It may or may not change the way I feel, but I've really only ever known him (politically) as a jackass who likes shoving sticks in hornets' nests. I never got the opportunity to listen to him on Air America or anything like that (it wasn't available here).
I just think you've been arguing against what the media narratives want Franken to be, instead of who he actually is. Which is reasonable. I'd probably feel the same way you do if the only thing I knew about Franken was the O'Reilly-baiting he's infamous for. I'll admit he's not really as civil I'd normally like legislators to be, but the Democratic party is so timid right now that I think the Senate will benefit from an obnoxious, brazen liberal voice.
I do get the impression I could use a bit of homework on his behalf. It may or may not change the way I feel, but I've really only ever known him (politically) as a jackass who likes shoving sticks in hornets' nests. I never got the opportunity to listen to him on Air America or anything like that (it wasn't available here).
He really wasn't that interesting on Air America. I think its reasonable to think he doesn't have the gravitas one would prefer in a statesman, but I also think the horse is well out of the barn for that and that it'd be nice if someone showed some guts in the Senate.
I just think you've been arguing against what the media narratives want Franken to be, instead of who he actually is. Which is reasonable. I'd probably feel the same way you do if the only thing I knew about Franken was the O'Reilly-baiting he's infamous for. I'll admit he's not really as civil I'd normally like legislators to be, but the Democratic party is so timid right now that I think the Senate will benefit from an obnoxious, brazen liberal voice.
I do get the impression I could use a bit of homework on his behalf. It may or may not change the way I feel, but I've really only ever known him (politically) as a jackass who likes shoving sticks in hornets' nests. I never got the opportunity to listen to him on Air America or anything like that (it wasn't available here).
He really wasn't that interesting on Air America. I think its reasonable to think he doesn't have the gravitas one would prefer in a statesman, but I also think the horse is well out of the barn for that and that it'd be nice if someone showed some guts in the Senate.
I think Franken is going to be the progressive wing's favorite pugilist.
I just think you've been arguing against what the media narratives want Franken to be, instead of who he actually is. Which is reasonable. I'd probably feel the same way you do if the only thing I knew about Franken was the O'Reilly-baiting he's infamous for. I'll admit he's not really as civil I'd normally like legislators to be, but the Democratic party is so timid right now that I think the Senate will benefit from an obnoxious, brazen liberal voice.
I do get the impression I could use a bit of homework on his behalf. It may or may not change the way I feel, but I've really only ever known him (politically) as a jackass who likes shoving sticks in hornets' nests. I never got the opportunity to listen to him on Air America or anything like that (it wasn't available here).
He really wasn't that interesting on Air America. I think its reasonable to think he doesn't have the gravitas one would prefer in a statesman, but I also think the horse is well out of the barn for that and that it'd be nice if someone showed some guts in the Senate.
I think Franken is going to be the progressive wing's favorite pugilist.
More like only pugilist. The only two I can think of are Al Franken and Bill Maher. And only one of them is a senator. Although I would vote for Bill Maher in a heart beat
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
0
Options
Zen VulgarityWhat a lovely day for teaSecret British ThreadRegistered Userregular
edited July 2009
Now New York is the biggest senatorial laughing stock.
I just think you've been arguing against what the media narratives want Franken to be, instead of who he actually is. Which is reasonable. I'd probably feel the same way you do if the only thing I knew about Franken was the O'Reilly-baiting he's infamous for. I'll admit he's not really as civil I'd normally like legislators to be, but the Democratic party is so timid right now that I think the Senate will benefit from an obnoxious, brazen liberal voice.
I do get the impression I could use a bit of homework on his behalf. It may or may not change the way I feel, but I've really only ever known him (politically) as a jackass who likes shoving sticks in hornets' nests. I never got the opportunity to listen to him on Air America or anything like that (it wasn't available here).
He really wasn't that interesting on Air America. I think its reasonable to think he doesn't have the gravitas one would prefer in a statesman, but I also think the horse is well out of the barn for that and that it'd be nice if someone showed some guts in the Senate.
I think Franken is going to be the progressive wing's favorite pugilist.
More like only pugilist. The only two I can think of are Al Franken and Bill Maher. And only one of them is a senator. Although I would vote for Bill Maher in a heart beat
Jon Stewart would probably do a pretty good job, too.
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
Jon Stewart would probably do a pretty good job, too.
I don't know that Jon Stewart is a true-to-form Progressive, or even all that far left. (Not just based on the Daily Show, his commencement speech at William and Mary a couple years ago was pretty informative... my sister's graduating class, so I was actually there... for what that's worth).
He seems quite moderate to me... maybe with some Progressive tendencies, but certainly not die-hard.
I think Franken is going to be the progressive wing's favorite pugilist.
More like only pugilist. The only two I can think of are Al Franken and Bill Maher.
Barney Frank? Not adverse to taking a swing or two.
The guy who said, "I think it's time we try a little Keynesianism" after decades of deficit spending?
Keynesian economics isn't defined by constant deficit spending. The way the government budget has been handled for the last 40 years is anything but Keynesian.
Edit; with the obvious exception of the Clinton-era boom/surplus.
I think Franken is going to be the progressive wing's favorite pugilist.
More like only pugilist. The only two I can think of are Al Franken and Bill Maher.
Barney Frank? Not adverse to taking a swing or two.
The guy who said, "I think it's time we try a little Keynesianism" after decades of deficit spending?
Keynesian economics isn't defined by constant deficit spending. The way the government budget has been handled for the last 40 years is anything but Keynesian.
Edit; with the obvious exception of the Clinton-era boom/surplus.
Interest rates dropped from over 18% during the Reagan administration. Bush had the fed dump the fund rate to basically 0%. Both those presidents believed in government investment in infrastructure. It was military spending but that still plays. Dropping interest rates + government spending in infrastructure are right out of Keynes playbook.
I think Franken is going to be the progressive wing's favorite pugilist.
More like only pugilist. The only two I can think of are Al Franken and Bill Maher.
Barney Frank? Not adverse to taking a swing or two.
The guy who said, "I think it's time we try a little Keynesianism" after decades of deficit spending?
Keynesian economics isn't defined by constant deficit spending. The way the government budget has been handled for the last 40 years is anything but Keynesian.
Edit; with the obvious exception of the Clinton-era boom/surplus.
Interest rates dropped from over 18% during the Reagan administration. Bush had the fed dump the fund rate to basically 0%. Both those presidents believed in government investment in infrastructure. It was military spending but that still plays. Dropping interest rates + government spending in infrastructure are right out of Keynes playbook.
Your bias is ridiculous.
Keynes calls for reduced government spending during salad days and increased spending to push out of recessions and depressions.
Neither Reagan nor Bush took the opportunity to actually cut spending and build a surplus, instead opting for tax cuts. Their approach was definitionally non-Keynesian.
Posts
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
I don't intend to argue against preconceived notions, though I'm not going to say I never do... I am hu-mon after all.
I feel there are people here who make assumptions about what I believe as well... so I guess we're even.
I just think you've been arguing against what the media narratives want Franken to be, instead of who he actually is. Which is reasonable. I'd probably feel the same way you do if the only thing I knew about Franken was the O'Reilly-baiting he's infamous for. I'll admit he's not really as civil I'd normally like legislators to be, but the Democratic party is so timid right now that I think the Senate will benefit from an obnoxious, brazen liberal voice.
I do get the impression I could use a bit of homework on his behalf. It may or may not change the way I feel, but I've really only ever known him (politically) as a jackass who likes shoving sticks in hornets' nests. I never got the opportunity to listen to him on Air America or anything like that (it wasn't available here).
He really wasn't that interesting on Air America. I think its reasonable to think he doesn't have the gravitas one would prefer in a statesman, but I also think the horse is well out of the barn for that and that it'd be nice if someone showed some guts in the Senate.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
I think Franken is going to be the progressive wing's favorite pugilist.
More like only pugilist. The only two I can think of are Al Franken and Bill Maher. And only one of them is a senator. Although I would vote for Bill Maher in a heart beat
Jon Stewart would probably do a pretty good job, too.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
I don't know that Jon Stewart is a true-to-form Progressive, or even all that far left. (Not just based on the Daily Show, his commencement speech at William and Mary a couple years ago was pretty informative... my sister's graduating class, so I was actually there... for what that's worth).
He seems quite moderate to me... maybe with some Progressive tendencies, but certainly not die-hard.
Edit: Well, other than being honest.
No, but he'd be damn good at holding people's feet to the fire.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Barney Frank? Not adverse to taking a swing or two.
The guy who said, "I think it's time we try a little Keynesianism" after decades of deficit spending?
Edit; with the obvious exception of the Clinton-era boom/surplus.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Republicans actually think their guy won here
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
yeah... his interpretation/opinion of Keynesian economics doesn't have much to do with him being aggressive.
The best part is how his voice is so ill-suited to smack-downs, so the substance of what he is saying comes through.
Interest rates dropped from over 18% during the Reagan administration. Bush had the fed dump the fund rate to basically 0%. Both those presidents believed in government investment in infrastructure. It was military spending but that still plays. Dropping interest rates + government spending in infrastructure are right out of Keynes playbook.
Your bias is ridiculous.
Neither Reagan nor Bush took the opportunity to actually cut spending and build a surplus, instead opting for tax cuts. Their approach was definitionally non-Keynesian.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.