Last Night's Debate

[Tigers]

So, I guess we can call the public stupid for not being economics experts, but to me that's pretty fucking arrogant.

The American public is stupid. They are also lazy as hell. It has nothing to do with needing to be an "expert" in a field and everything to do with taking the time to actually understand what is going on around you.

This economic crash wasn't created by the America president. The Democratic party is just spewing that line in order to get Obama elected.

This crash started because you had way more investor money than you've ever had in the history of the world, chasing the highest return it could get, without considering the consequences of the investments they were purchasing or the trickle down affect that had on the financial products that were being created to appease that investor greed.

As you said, this crisis is way more complex than most would take the time to understand, which is why it is so easy for the Democrats to publicaly throw blame on the current administration in order to get their man elected. But that's politics today.....create the best story you can to rally the masses against the opposition so that you can get elected.

Politics today doesn't appear to be about solving problems. It is all about placing blame for the current problems on the other guy so you can get elected. It is really distasteful to watch anymore.

[Yankees]

Totally on Ropers side here - especially given the fact that the trust in the President and the Congress have reached record lows. Then I'd call Americans stupid for trusting the people they say they don't trust.

[Tigers]

The single mom with three kids and two jobs is supposed to find some time to research and figure out the economic crisis on her own? No one is saying that people think politicians are 100% honest, but yes, you do have to be able to pick the ones you're going to trust and then listen to what they have to say. Thats just the way it has to work.

No, it just means she will end up believing whatever she is told whether it is correct or not. That is one of the big reason's why the American public is stupid. They believe whatever they hear/see/listen to from the media.

This is a large part of what will get Obama elected next month. Most everyone hates Bush these days, so the Dems tell everyone Bush is the cause of their current crisis situation. Vote for us we'll change things, despite the fact that the Dems have controled Congress for the past however many years. Course, they don't go advertising that on the campaign trail.

I understand you have sold your soul to the Obama campaign and that's fine. I can't blame anyone for wanting change in the White House. Bush has been a catastrophy as a president. American does need to go in the different direction, but then both of the two candidates represent a different direction from the current bumpus, regardless of what the Dems say.

[DBacks]

Hahaha. You two just can't pass up an opportunity to call other people stupid, can you? Its like ever since Bren decided to chill out there's been a contest to see who can be more arrogant?

Anyway, according to you, they shouldn't listen to politicians and they shouldn't listen to the media...so who do they listen to? Please, since you are so convinced the average american public, which you apparently are not a part of, is so stupid, explain to me what they are supposed to do. They shouldn't listen to what the elected officials say about the crisis...and they shouldn't listen to what the media reports about the crisis...so what do they do? Say, "Well, I'm fucked" and do nothing? Because that is truly stupid.

But, whatever, go ahead. You two enjoy your superiority. Are politicians perfect? No. Far from it. So you find the one you trust the most and you listen to what they have to say. I guess thats stupid. But its the only way people have any clue what to think or what to do about the things going on in our country. I guess they're just not as amazing as you guys.

And how did I sell my soul? Is that smart people code for "not agreeing with you?" I'm not gonna be ashamed or apologize for being involved in the political process or a particular campaign. I found the guy who I think is gonna do the best job and I supported him. But I guess thats stupid too. Never once did I claim he was perfect. In fact, not more than week ago I posted my frustration with him, but I still think hes the best man for the job, and I'll vote for him. I guess thats some serious soul selling. How dare I?

Anyway. This is dumb to fight about. Have it your way. You guys are smart, everyone else is dumb. Have fun with that.

[Yankees]

Ok, to clear this up. In no way would I ever contend to not look at the media. Everyday I read the BBC, CNN, FOX News, MSNBC, CBS News, The Huffington Post, and Slate.com. The American public needs to balance what they hear from their politicians with the realities that the media pushes out. The more information you take in, the easier to decide what to support.

I think it's a massive mistake for the American public to vote blindly with their party. The reality is that it is lazy - and I was part of that problem for the first 27 years of my life. I get it, it's easy to not inform yourself - and I'm not saying that as a blanket negative, because I'd like to think I'd been generally productive over those 27 years. The problem is that it ends up causing decisions like, "I'm voting for Bush because he believes in God," or "I'm not voting for Kerry because he want to kill babies," or "I'm not voting for McCain because George Bush screwed up the economy." While voting that way is certainly the right of every American, they are also the types of votes that are counterproductive to the big picture, and the topics that reach EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN - education, economy, health care, foreign relations, etc.

[Tigers]

I guess thats stupid. But its the only way people have any clue what to think or what to do about the things going on in our country.

No, they don't have to be a little lemming and follow along and believe everything they are told, as you say they should. They can actually go and do research. Find independent sources that aren't driven by exterior motives. And for gods sakes, use some common sense.

They should be checking with other sources to see if the politician they've chosen to get behind is telling them the truth. Don't take every word they say as gospel and have the common sense to realize that politicians, just like the media, have motives and those motives will influence what they say and how they say it.

[Giants]

Remember that Gabe is the guy who said that the best place to get unbiased information about Barack Obama was from Barack Obama's website. Z, you put it exactly as to how people need to get their information. Every media outlet has its own agenda, and you need to get your information from multiple sources rather than trusting just one. I think what Ropers is reacting to is the disgustingly lowest common denominator approach of the Obama campaign, which doesn't represent any real change at all, simply the machine politics that continue to fuck up our inner cities. As I've said before, we really had an opportunity in this election to raise the level of political discourse, and both candidates chose not to do that. Obama's decision to do so is even more despicable since he presented himself as a candidate who was above all of this mess in the first place. By the way Gabe, way back in (I think it was) the Vice President Palin? thread I challenged you to name a single significant legislative accomplishment of Obama's. We're all still waiting.

[DBacks]

You know, you can say what you want about me, but at least I don't make shit up about you guys.

I dare you to find where I said the information on Barack's website was unbiased. I dare you. Seriously. Find it.

And, ropers, please, tell me where I said they should take politician's words as gospel. I'd love it.

But go ahead, the only way for any of you to make a point is to flat out make stuff up. So have fun with that. The problem with you is you're so eager to fight someone you dont take the time to understand what you're fighting about.

I never once said the info on Barack's site was unbiased. I said you should go there and check it out if you hadn't heard about him. Why? Because in that site you will find everything Barack would say on the campaign trail about any particular issue. I also encouraged people to check out other candidates websites if they were for that candidate, like Hilary, because its a great way to get involved.

Again, not once did I claim it was unbiased. Not once. Why? Because its not. You don't have to be a genius to figure that out. But, congrats on winning an argument that only you were having. Way to go Jake. I'm proud of you.

And Ropers, again, not once did I say people shoud take politician's word as gospel. My argument is this - people dont have time to research, so they have to listen to the news and listen to the politicians they trust and form their opinion from that. You think that makes them stupid and that you are somehow better than the "average american." I do not think thats stupid.

I would also love for you to point out where I implied or said that the media and politicians dont have motives. Also point out where I said, and I quote your post, that a person should be "a little leming and follow along and believe everything they are told."

PLEASE. I'm begging you. Please show me where I said those things. Either of you.

See how I actually respond to the things you say? And see how you just make up stuff that I say? It's because you just want to fight, and don't really care about what I've written.

As far as Obama goes, you can check out Obama-Lugar and also his work on govt transparency and ethics reform.

But please, we'll argure Obama later. Find where I said those things. Good luck to you both. And congrats on winning arguments that you made up in your head. You must both be so proud. But honestly, if the avg American is stupid, and you're somehow smarter than the average american, then we're in some deep, deep shit.

[Tigers]

So, I guess we can call the public stupid for not being economics experts, but to me that's pretty fucking arrogant. People don't always have the time to invest in researching and learning on their own, and whether or not you believe its stupid, they have to trust the people in charge to give them the information they need. Thats the only way it works. So, of course people blame George Bush, rightly or wrongly. It's not stupidity, it's common sense.

Alright, maybe you didn't intend it to sound like this, but that sure sounds to me like you are saying people should just trust what the person in charge tells them because they don't have the time to go check if it is really true or not. Is that not what your statement is saying?

Which is what I believe most of mainstream America does.

[Tigers]

See how I actually respond to the things you say?

Are you somehow thinking we aren't "responding" to you in this thread?

And see how you just make up stuff that I say? It's because you just want to fight, and don't really care about what I've written.

No, I quoted you above where you said people just need to "trust what the people in charge tell them". You didn't say, they need to listen to what they say and then check to see if it is true and you didn't say, they need to listen to what they say and then decide for themselves whether it make sense or not. You stated flat out, that people have to trust what the people in charge tell them.

So no, I didn't make it up Gabe.

[Giants]

From the "Change the World" thread:

I think you are kind of twisting what I did, Z. I'm not sending you to a website that says "Vote for Barack because he's cool." This is his official website that outlines his positions and views on major political issues. It's the perfect tool for people who want to know what Barack is all about. Every major candidate has one and they are a valuable tool for the common citizen whose trying to get know a bunch of names and faces. I think they are accurate portrayals of what the candidates stand for. How else do you come to support a candidate? You see if his ideals match yours and you go from there

If you believe that a candidate's website is the "perfect tool for people who want to know what Barack is all about" then you must believe that the information on that website is unbiased, because if its biased then its certainly not a perfect tool. If the websites are "accurate portrayals of what the candidates stand for" then they must be unbiased, because otherwise the information isn't accurate.

As for Lugar-Obama, it wasn't even a bill or an accomplishment, it was an appropriation that was a moderate update of Nunn-Lugar from 1991. I'm definitely glad that you got the only mentions off of Obama's now admittedly biased website for the two things he's done in his career. Gabe, I'm not trying to be disrespectful to your intelligence, I'm just expressing my frustration with a campaign process that is full of bullshit and lies, especially from a candidate who made his entire platform the concept of not being full of bullshit and lies. The good news to me is that Barack Obama will prove a catalyst for change, it's just that it's going to be the Republican Party that he changes. Whether it goes the good way or the bad way remains to be seen, but at this point all that potential has turned into politics and usual and too many of his supporters aren't willing to acknowledge it.

[DBacks]

that sure sounds to me like you are saying people should just trust what the person in charge tells them because they don't have the time to go check if it is really true or not. Is that not what your statement is saying?

Which is what I believe most of mainstream America does.

Well, essentially, we agree. The difference is I don't think its what they "should" do, I just think it is what they do. You think its stupid, and I don't, and thats pretty much the end of it. I only say its not stupid because I believe there are Americans out there, who like you said, dont have time to research, and are therefore doing the best they can to get informed by watching to news ans listening to what they're leaders are telling them. And if they're trying, if they are attempting to understand, then no, I don't think they're stupid.

As for Barack, not once did I say it was unbiased. In fact, I stated specifically that it was biased, and would contain no negative information. My point, which I stated specifically, is that the site would contain everything Barack would say about any particular issue on the campaign trail. If that catches your interest, then investigate him further. Which I also said specifically in that thread.

[Tigers]

Well, essentially, we agree. The difference is I don't think its what they "should" do, I just think it is what they do. You think its stupid, and I don't, and thats pretty much the end of it. I only say its not stupid because I believe there are Americans out there, who like you said, dont have time to research, and are therefore doing the best they can to get informed by watching to news ans listening to what they're leaders are telling them. And if they're trying, if they are attempting to understand, then no, I don't think they're stupid.

You are morphing your position a bit there, from just trusting what your candidate/leader tells you, to now listening to what your leader says in addition to looking for other media outlets. Which is a little better than just solely listening to what your leader is telling you, which is what you said earlier and what I quoted from you above.

The difference still is, I think most American's are just listening to what "their" candidate is telling them and not bothering to check if what they are saying makes any sense or is accurate. You believe that's fine, that's just the reality of the situation today and thus you give them a "bye" for following along like a lemming, while I call it being stupid and lazy.

So, you are right, in that we disagree. I don't think the American public deserves a "bye" just because they don't have to time to form their own opinion and prefer to be lazy and just repeat what their candidate is telling them is true.

[BlueJays]

You guys sound as lame as the politicians, campaigns, and politics you're arguing over. Spare us, please. You're going around in circles about known truths of the dirty game of politics. Its all bullshit
. It almost assuredly always has been on some level. Its your job to wade through the bullshit as best as possible, then make the best decision possible. That's it, the end. Get over yourselves.

[Yankees]

Nate - then just skip this posting group. I think it's important conversation, especially in an election year, especially in an election this important. I'm scared shitless to look at my 401k.

[Nationals]

I'm scared shitless to look at my 401k.

You're young--it'll be fine in 30 years when you want to retire. It's the people who are planning on needing the money they have/had in the market within the next 10 years who should worry.

[Yankees]

Oh, I know. I just meant right now.

Also, good for John McCain. You can say whatever you want about his campaign and Palin fanning these flames, but good for McCain. One of the biggest concerns I had was the anger that I was starting to see at his and Palin's speeches and meetings - and it's good to see McCain cutting it off before it became dangerous.

This also goes directly to the point we were discussing above, though. These people are only listening to their party's candidates. And they are telling them he's a terrorist. So they're angry. It doesn't take 5 seconds of research to find out Obama's not a terrorist.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/1 ... 33710.html

[BlueJays]

Nate - then just skip this posting group. I think it's important conversation, especially in an election year, especially in an election this important. I'm scared shitless to look at my 401k.

Sure, I could buy into that, if this thread even had an ounce of the "important conversation" you refer too. Instead, it doesn't even come close. Its derailed into the very same BS that you're complaining about in regards to the candidates themselves.

We had an opportunity to continue the progression of this thread by offering solid, forward-thinking solutions while remaining above the petty jabs and tactics that the politicians are throwing around. Instead, its been no better than them.

Just a sad, sad thread for the IBC....

[Royals]

I think America would more accurately be described as a two party Republic.

Since we don't actually live in a Democracy but, in fact, a Republic, that would be an astute observation.

Royals wrote:
I'm scared shitless to look at my 401k.

You should be. I'd be scared shitless too if I was leaving my 'retirement' to what is essentially the world's largest casino. But I prefer to keep my money under my control, not some hotshot high roller in an office who doesn't really answer to anyone who gives a shit about my money.

[Yankees]

Sure, I could buy into that, if this thread even had an ounce of the "important conversation" you refer too. Instead, it doesn't even come close. Its derailed into the very same BS that you're complaining about in regards to the candidates themselves.

We had an opportunity to continue the progression of this thread by offering solid, forward-thinking solutions while remaining above the petty jabs and tactics that the politicians are throwing around. Instead, its been no better than them.

Just a sad, sad thread for the IBC....

My responses, by paragraph:
1) Then, as previously mentioned, stop reading this thread...

2) Then, as previously mentioned, stop reading this thread...

3) It's a post. On a sub-thread of a forum. On a website. For a simulated fantasy baseball league. That's read by, at most, 30 people(unless Josh Morgan is still creeping around - hey Josh!). Inhale. Exhale. Stop reading the thread.

[BlueJays]

Fantastic responses Brett. You sound just like the politicians you so vehemently abhore. I parodied your own quote in post 1 of this thread, asking you to rise above the mess of this thread offering insightful and enlightened commentary to a thread that quickly has gone downhill.. to inject something worthwhile to read, because - like the general election and the rest of the public, i want to be involved but its difficult to do when politics can't even be discussed with an ounce of civility. And then to top it off you come at me with a McCain style attack.

Whats next? You call me a terrorist for supposedly highjacking this thread? I guess I'm not "maverick" enough to read or post in your thread and I should just dismiss myself as if I was part of the liberterian and/or independent party. I should stop reading this thread instead of challenging you to make it into what you called for in your original post. No no, I'm sorry.. I'll just stop, excuse me members of the IBC and Mr. Josh Morgan. Excuse me for stepping in and asking for better from our members.

[Yankees]

Fantastic responses Brett. You sound just like the politicians you so vehemently abhore. I parodied your own quote in post 1 of this thread, asking you to rise above the mess of this thread offering insightful and enlightened commentary to a thread that quickly has gone downhill.. to inject something worthwhile to read, because - like the general election and the rest of the public, i want to be involved but its difficult to do when politics can't even be discussed with an ounce of civility. And then to top it off you come at me with a McCain style attack.

Whats next? You call me a terrorist for supposedly highjacking this thread? I guess I'm not "maverick" enough to read or post in your thread and I should just dismiss myself as if I was part of the liberterian and/or independent party. I should stop reading this thread instead of challenging you to make it into what you called for in your original post. No no, I'm sorry.. I'll just stop, excuse me members of the IBC and Mr. Josh Morgan. Excuse me for stepping in and asking for better from our members.

I attacked you with a McCain style attack to...stop reading this thread? Literally, that's all I said. How did I attack you? You called us 'lame.' I said stop reading the thread. You say we're full of shit. I said stop reading the thread. You say I'm attacking you by asking you to stop reading the thread. I'm going to say - 'Stop reading the thread.'

You can post to your heart's content. In fact I would love if you raised the level of discourse in the thread - I agree it's been getting worse.

But instead of raising the level, you've gotten worked up about how full of shit we are. In an effort to relieve you of being so worked up, my advice was 'stop reading the thread.' If you keep getting more worked up, my advice isn't going to change.

If you want to raise the level of conversation, then I'd be all for it.

[Royals]

Y'know, the funny thing is, this IS more intelligent than most internet political discussion.

[Yankees]

Regardless of who you think wins this debate, I think without question the line of the night was Obama pulling out "cavalier activity" instead of "premarital sex." Where he pulled that from, I will forever wish to know...

[Royals]

Sounds like something someone's grandmother would say, wouldn't be shocked if that's where he got it.