Freeway Slowdowns - Modern Protest Movement Or A Way To Really Tick People Off?

Colbert is a hoot.

Colbert’s program is indicative of the power of the Plutocracy, jt. His “court jester” criticism of the powerful is far more insightful than the bona fide network reporter’s timid meandering. O’Reilly and Hannety have more fear of the Comedy Channel than CNN or MSNBC. And, of course, ABC. CBS and NBC have become relegated to “Weekly Reader” status.

When someone “blames” or puts others at risk who had nothing to do with his plight, I would say he is possibly mentally ill. A speeder may lack empathy but a demonstrator using a car should have it taken away.

Rod Knox, Colbert has license to pick on anyone he chooses to. He is not presenting news, but using current events as a vehicle for his comedy. Real news programs, like Public TV, CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS can’t do that. They try to present unbiased news as best they can. Fox News and MSNBC are not news outlets, but opinion outlets and seem more mean spirited because of that. I can’t take more than a few minutes of MSNBC or Fox News.

In the 1990s, Miami Cubans organized highway slowdown protests over the handling of Elián González. In case you don’t remember what that was all about, here’s a link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elián_González_affair

But JT, there are millions who let Fox and friends be their guiding star. I often listen to each of the hard core right wind radio programs of Hannity, Limbaugh and Levine and hear the nut cases who call in foaming at the mouth like third graders trying to impress the teacher. They quote the program hosts own remarks and then try to explain them to the listeners who might not grasp such complicated intellectual statements as " That man in the White House won’t show us his birth certificate." Or “that socialist tax and spend liberal should be impeached.” Those World Wrestling Federation fans are certain that Barrack Obama is leading this country to the Appocolypse. And they are making Colt, Smith&Wesson and Glock wealthy with their imbecilic paranoia.

Lonesome Rhodes was more prophetic than Nostradamus.

O'Reilly and Hannety have more fear of the Comedy Channel than CNN or MSNBC.

They should…Did you see the debate between O’Reilly and John Stewart??

Political pundits or ANY so called expert in any field would be best served by never getting into a debate with a comedian. Pundits want to be right, comedians want to be funny.

“…there are millions who let Fox and friends be their guiding star.”

There have always been legions of people that want their personal opinions confirmed more than they want objective presentations of current events. They just have new outlets.

Folks, I have to be honest, implying that those who disagree with one’s opinions are brainwashed by a particular media outlet is IMHO shallow and disrespectful. I believe most people who venture into economic and/or political debates listen to and watch a variety of different informational venues and come to conclusions based on a diet of varying opinions. I’ve often said that two individuals with the same education, background, and input can draw diametrically opposite conclusions, and I truely believe that. Since we’re all of varying backgrounds and experiences, the interpretations can vary even more wildly. Besides, we learn for more by assuming that our opponent in the debate is interpretting the data differently and trying to understand that than we do by simply assuming our opponent has limited input. Perhaps our opponent has a stream of data that we don’t, or experiences that we don’t, and that is forming his/her opinion.

No offense intended, but I do get a bit jaded at reading that those aho disagree do so out of limiting themselves to a single source of input. I find it demeaning and counterproductive.

Many years ago when I was young engineer in the DOD industry I worked on a classified program behind a cypher locked door with a monitor (gofer) seated behind the door. The company hired a very nice old gentleman who came to work every day smartly dressed and spoke with a heavy accent. I assumed that he was an elderly man of limited means who needed the small income. I noticed after a while that he read the Wall Street Journal evey mealbreak. I got to know him and found out he had owned a successful NYC retaurant chain, sold the business for millions, and retired to NH. When his wife passed away he became bored and took the job just to get out among people every day. He was reading the Journal to check his stock values. The point is, it’s easy to make assumptions about others that they’re of lesser knowledge, but far more rewarding to assume that they’re not.

We are suffering from the decline in civility that was, in my observation, brought on and heavily pushed by the Fox network, tsm. Fox throws out a constant barrage of vulgar, derisive rhetoric that is meant to stir their fans to mob fanaticism. That network denigrates and demonizes the unfortunate regardless of the cause of their condition and deifies the prosperous regardless of the source of their prosperity. Fox, Limbaugh, Beck, et al, have drug political discourse down to Jerry Springer level.

Rod, there is definitely a decline in civility. On both sides of the isle and by the media in general. What passes today as comedy is mostly pathetic. Every single current situation comedy show I can think of relies largely on people insulting one another and doing nasty things to one another to get laughs. There are no more Carol Burnett shows, no more Laughins, no more Dick Van Dukes, no more shows that rely on harmless humor, slapstick comedy, and jokes for laughs. Maybe that’s a big part of the problem. I just try not to be a part of the problem.

What passes today as comedy is mostly pathetic.

Have you watched “Big Bang Theory”. By far one of the funniest shows in the past 20 years.

I must agree, tsm. We have allowed ourselves to become accustomed to the cheapest and trashiest level of entertainment. I bought one of the “Best of Carol Burnett” CDs and was reminded that for a time there were some great writers and great performers on television. Today the producers are in a race to the bottom.

I occasionally watch the Big Bang Theory. But it’s again largely based on negativity of the characters toward one another for its comedy. The old time greats; Carol Burnett, Harvey Korman, Red Skelton, Tim Conway, and the mutitudes of others, could bring the audience to hysterics without every uttering a single negative comment against anybody. Laugh In never had a negative line that I can remember. That level of genius has disappeared.

Folks, I have to be honest, implying that those who disagree with one's opinions are brainwashed by a particular media outlet is IMHO shallow and disrespectful.

I agree 100%…and I’ll admit I’ve been one of them. You are obviously well informed and while we disagree on a few political issues I firmly believe that we want the same goals…just that our approach to reach them are different.

As for Fox news…I do know several people who watch NOTHING but Fox News…WHY you ask…is because Fox told them that all other news sources don’t cover the news…they all lie and Fox is the only station that is reporting the real news. John Stewart did a GREAT funny episode on this a couple months ago. First he’d show a clip with someone on Fox telling their audience that this new piece is ONLY AVAILABLE on Fox. Then they’d show the clip. Then John Stewart would show the news clip that was reported on OTHER stations like (ABC, NBC …etc) the day before…He did this over and over and over again. There are obviously a LOT of people who don’t/won’t listen to other news agencies because they are brainwashed Fox into thinking no other news organization has the right news. Either people are really NOT watching other news stations…OR they give Fox a big pass on those obvious lies.

And then there’s things like the Tea Party. A couple of people I know who watch/listen to nothing but Fox news had no idea (and at least one still doesn’t believe it because) about how the Tea Party formed. That the billionaire Koch brothers started and funded (and still are funding) the Tea Party. Fox tells their dedicated followers that they are the ONLY true source and that other stations won’t report certain news…yet here they are doing the EXACT same thing they claim others are doing.

And if there is anything on any other news station that contradicts what Fox is reporting…then those other news stations are LYING. In almost EVERY case I saw…it was Fox news that was lying…or just stretching the truth.

I’m not always a gentleman either. But I’m trying to get better.

You make a good point that there are people who limit their sources of information. And it is unfortunate, especially in this age when we have more different perspectives readily available than ever before in the history of the world.

I had lunch yesterday with a coworker and friend from Isreal. We were discussing peoples of North Korea and some areas of the Middle East and how limited (and in North Korea controlled) their information is. North Korea knows only what their government tells them. And in other parts of the world people don’t have access to sources of information. We don’t appreciate how lucky we are to have this wealth of information available. But we have to use it to debate responsibly. We cannot fall into the habit of using it to belittle one another. That shuts discussion down.

Rod, there is definitely a decline in civility.

I AGREE 100%…and I have to say…if you go back 20 years you’ll find that it was very very one sided. The liberal/democrat news stations didn’t have someone like Rush Limbaugh. And then Ann Coulter has taken Rush’s style to a whole new level. I firmly believe I can prove it with past news reports that the civility was very one sided. Now both sides are doing it…but there isn’t one person on other side of Ann and Rush that are even close to being as vile.

Now both sides are just being far more uncivil then what I want like. It takes away from the real news.

Just a couple of months ago…MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow called Ann Coulter out on some outlandish remark she made about Obama (what else is new). Rachel didn’t call Ann a liar…but said that she got her information WRONG and she should check her facts. Rachel was very civil…but did give new a few digs.

Ann comes back on Fox the following day and called Rachel a c*nt… Not ONCE did she get into the issue. The ONLY thing she did was call Rachel names. Kind of hard to be civil when you have one side being so uncivil and downright vile.

Fox has an agenda to promote, Only the truth that supports their agenda is mentioned and even then it is twisted and distorted (spun) to suit their purposes.

Is this Rush Limbaugh?

lining up his next gig? The conversation in the ring is on a par with Limbaugh and his right wing cohorts on radio and television.

Well written Mike. When any of these characters comes on I imediately change he channel.

There’s so much real news that we miss by stations wasting time with this stuff. There are serious problems in Syria, North Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq, South African nations, and serious economoc problems in Europe. Now that Hugo Chavez has passed away we have a real vested interest in who will run Argentina and how that might affect oil supplies. We have a serious vested interest in how the sequester will affect our military’s ability to carry out its mission. And what do we see when we turn on the news? Ann Coulter and Rachel Maddow feuding, and Lindsey Lohan telling her lawyer to stop talking.