Top 3 myths in Obamas lecture on gas prices.

gimmesometruth27

bennett13 wrote:

That article is your idea of right-wing extremism? Wow. Maybe you should read the article before you draw that conclusion. You also claim to hate "partisan crap" but then go on to say that anything said by anyone in the Republican party is an outright lie! I'm cool with differing opinions, but a LITTLE open-mindedness and/or consistency would be nice.

not this particular single article. but the poster in question and a few others have a tendency to post blogs and opinion pieces passed off as if it were fact.i do interpret the condescending tone of that writer of that article to be a hack though. a "lecture"???? seriously, come on...

maybe not everything said by any prominent republican is a lie, but most of it is half truth.

why should i have to be open minded to the right when the right still to this day is questioning obama's citizenship? a person who was governor of a state for 2 years is questioning the experience of a sitting president who has been president for OVER 2 years? people calling for cuts to all social services, yet let's keep making bombs and shelling out defense contracts, etc..why should i have to be open minded when most of their positions are hypocritical and contrary to my core beliefs? i agree with nothing of their current platform, they are not compromising anytime soon, and i think that my side has conceded way too much without any sort of fight.

mikepegg44

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

bennett13 wrote:

That article is your idea of right-wing extremism? Wow. Maybe you should read the article before you draw that conclusion. You also claim to hate "partisan crap" but then go on to say that anything said by anyone in the Republican party is an outright lie! I'm cool with differing opinions, but a LITTLE open-mindedness and/or consistency would be nice.

not this particular single article. but the poster in question and a few others have a tendency to post blogs and opinion pieces passed off as if it were fact.i do interpret the condescending tone of that writer of that article to be a hack though. a "lecture"???? seriously, come on...

maybe not everything said by any prominent republican is a lie, but most of it is half truth.

why should i have to be open minded to the right when the right still to this day is questioning obama's citizenship? a person who was governor of a state for 2 years is questioning the experience of a sitting president who has been president for OVER 2 years? people calling for cuts to all social services, yet let's keep making bombs and shelling out defense contracts, etc..why should i have to be open minded when most of their positions are hypocritical and contrary to my core beliefs? i agree with nothing of their current platform, they are not compromising anytime soon, and i think that my side has conceded way too much without any sort of fight.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/poll-1-in-5-americans-believe-obama-is-a-cactus,18127/

Unfortunately as partisan politics goes, most truly partisan republicans think Lennon is in charge of the DNC, and most partisan democrats think the vocal minority of the fringe tea-party represent the main stream republican party...
I think the 85 to 90% that fall in the middle of those fringe efforts on both sides should somehow use their majority power to tell the fringe sides to start their own parties.

gimmesometruth27

mikepegg44 wrote:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/poll-1-in-5-americans-believe-obama-is-a-cactus,18127/

Unfortunately as partisan politics goes, most truly partisan republicans think Lennon is in charge of the DNC, and most partisan democrats think the vocal minority of the fringe tea-party represent the main stream republican party...
I think the 85 to 90% that fall in the middle of those fringe efforts on both sides should somehow use their majority power to tell the fringe sides to start their own parties.

if only lennon were in charge of the dnc. one could wish can't he?

i do not think the tea party represents most in the GOP, but the GOP has given the tea party a lot of credence, and perhaps too much influence. a group like that, when engaged and mobilized, can cause a big problem for whatever party they choose to support.

i think if i was any sort of a leader i could start my own party. with social media it is easier than ever to do something like that in this day and age.

mikepegg44

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i think if i was any sort of a leader i could start my own party. with social media it is easier than ever to do something like that in this day and age.

this is what gives me hope for the future actually. Social medias influence in the world will begin to really show itself years and years from now...It is already having an influence and it is relatively new in the whole scheme of things. I don't participate in any of it besides this forum, Facebook and Myspace seem awfully silly to me, but I am glad there are people on there using it to try to inform/change the world. I have always held a belief that as long as people are getting motivated and involved, I really don't care much if they agree with me or not...having more and more people involved in our government can only benefit us all...including the crazy ones!! The more discourse we have the better, eventually I think we will start having real support for outsiders and finally get something done about the status quo

gimmesometruth27

mikepegg44 wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i think if i was any sort of a leader i could start my own party. with social media it is easier than ever to do something like that in this day and age.

this is what gives me hope for the future actually. Social medias influence in the world will begin to really show itself years and years from now...It is already having an influence and it is relatively new in the whole scheme of things. I don't participate in any of it besides this forum, Facebook and Myspace seem awfully silly to me, but I am glad there are people on there using it to try to inform/change the world. I have always held a belief that as long as people are getting motivated and involved, I really don't care much if they agree with me or not...having more and more people involved in our government can only benefit us all...including the crazy ones!! The more discourse we have the better, eventually I think we will start having real support for outsiders and finally get something done about the status quo

i agree with a lot of what you said here. the only thing that gives me pause is that the more people start chiming in, there is way more potential for disinformation, or even outright lies to be spread. in a perfect world i would never have even thought that, but given what i see on a daily basis on the ol' interwebs and on some "news"outlets sometimes i feel that too many people are involved....the problem is that the bigger the lie the more willing people are to believe it, look at the birthers for example. and when you have a certain aspect of the population believing that the man who won a landslide election is not an american, it undermines the whole process and completely dumbs down the discourse. the sad thing is that growing up, even into college, i had always trusted the media, until the media showed me that it was not trustworthy...

maybe one day there will be enough different groups to where the dems and reps lose the grip on power in this 2 party system. let's do like they do in europe where there are enough different little parties that you actually have to unite a clear majority to get something done. i think in that environment it takes more calculation and more willingness to compromise to effect any real change. in the states today one side refuses to compromise and the other rolls over too easily. i want the people to be fought for. the people deserve that much at least. the people do not exist to give government power, the government exists to provide the people with the things that it can not do for itself. and politicians lose sight of this far too often...

mikepegg44

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i think if i was any sort of a leader i could start my own party. with social media it is easier than ever to do something like that in this day and age.

this is what gives me hope for the future actually. Social medias influence in the world will begin to really show itself years and years from now...It is already having an influence and it is relatively new in the whole scheme of things. I don't participate in any of it besides this forum, Facebook and Myspace seem awfully silly to me, but I am glad there are people on there using it to try to inform/change the world. I have always held a belief that as long as people are getting motivated and involved, I really don't care much if they agree with me or not...having more and more people involved in our government can only benefit us all...including the crazy ones!! The more discourse we have the better, eventually I think we will start having real support for outsiders and finally get something done about the status quo

i agree with a lot of what you said here. the only thing that gives me pause is that the more people start chiming in, there is way more potential for disinformation, or even outright lies to be spread. in a perfect world i would never have even thought that, but given what i see on a daily basis on the ol' interwebs and on some "news"outlets sometimes i feel that too many people are involved....the problem is that the bigger the lie the more willing people are to believe it, look at the birthers for example. and when you have a certain aspect of the population believing that the man who won a landslide election is not an american, it undermines the whole process and completely dumbs down the discourse. the sad thing is that growing up, even into college, i had always trusted the media, until the media showed me that it was not trustworthy...

maybe one day there will be enough different groups to where the dems and reps lose the grip on power in this 2 party system. let's do like they do in europe where there are enough different little parties that you actually have to unite a clear majority to get something done. i think in that environment it takes more calculation and more willingness to compromise to effect any real change. in the states today one side refuses to compromise and the other rolls over too easily. i want the people to be fought for. the people deserve that much at least. the people do not exist to give government power, the government exists to provide the people with the things that it can not do for itself. and politicians lose sight of this far too often...

if more people are talking there will be more information that isn't 100% accurate being said...that is a given...but I don't think those lies are as easy to spread if the more people are actually involved in the process and not just getting second hand "facts" from talking heads. My hope would be since the people who actually believe that nonsensical stuff are such a minority on both sides that they would stay in those proportions and there would actually be less people to buy into it and vote on information that is wrong. I guess ultimately what I am saying is that the more people are involved, turn on, and tune in the more they will be inclined to research something instead of taking the second hand reports from a first hand dipshit like Glenn Beck. A guy can dream right?
I still cannot figure out why only two politicians, and I guess sometimes three(very rare though) are aloud to debate the topics on national television. Everyone running for president should be at those debates...every single person, I mean, they conduct multiple person debates when it is primary season, why on earth can that not continue. seriously, libertarian, communist party of the USA, the green party, all of them should be respresented at the presidential debates...they should change it from presidential debates to DNC/RNC debate if they continue on in this present policy of exclusion.

gimmesometruth27

agreed with the "everyone should be able to debate" thing. not just the dem and repub.

if "the rent is too damn high party" can start a party and have a platform, why can't any one of us?