• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama bemoans 'diversions' of IPod, Xbox era

j-mac said:
I am not in total disagreement with you, or Catz, or Obama for that matter. My questioning of it is purely in who controls the method of discerning the information. We must take into account that this Progressive lurch to the left in today's politic was instituted decades ago by the very same "hippy" class of far leftists that realized that violence was not the way, then proceeded to take over the education system. Take a look, Ayers sits on the board that decides ciriculum [sic] for the nations high schools for God's sake!


j-mac
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone "controls" it. We have to learn to interact with it in an educated and intelligent manner. We have to take the responsibility to research our options, to understand the system being discussed, to servo it ourselves through our votes and through our pressure on the system and through our insistence that it obey our rights and liberties. A free Republic won't keep itself up, it takes continual work to keep it running. Continual input, continual control. By allowing ourselves to be swept away by the misinformation, to buy into the spin and partisan hackery, we work against the goal of preserving the Republic.
 
ipads and emails are one thing

but when oblivious obama takes on playstation, he's unwittingly going after these kids' very lifestyles

the operative word is "unwittingly"

he's THAT tone deaf

HE's the guy who gave the QUEEN an ipod

Obama Gives Queen Elizabeth An iPod

he musta forgot

typical

just like his entire state of the union: what became of the spending freeze, the bank tax, the debt commission, the doubling of exports, don't ask don't tell...
 
Ikari said:
I don't think anyone "controls" it. We have to learn to interact with it in an educated and intelligent manner. We have to take the responsibility to research our options, to understand the system being discussed, to servo it ourselves through our votes and through our pressure on the system and through our insistence that it obey our rights and liberties. A free Republic won't keep itself up, it takes continual work to keep it running. Continual input, continual control. By allowing ourselves to be swept away by the misinformation, to buy into the spin and partisan hackery, we work against the goal of preserving the Republic.
Click to expand...

Furthermore, I don't believe anyone SHOULD control the spread of information. The key is to teach people to scrutinize sources, go back and fact-check evidence, and exercise a healthy skepticism.

I do this with my kids by asking them to critically evaluate commercials we see on television, and television programs we watch.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Furthermore, I don't believe anyone SHOULD control the spread of information. The key is to teach people to scrutinize sources, go back and fact-check evidence, and exercise a healthy skepticism.

I do this with my kids by asking them to critically evaluate commercials we see on television, and television programs we watch.
Click to expand...


Ok, then maybe I am missing something. Explain to me like I am a 4th grader, what is "Critical thinking" to you?


j-mac
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Furthermore, I don't believe anyone SHOULD control the spread of information. The key is to teach people to scrutinize sources, go back and fact-check evidence, and exercise a healthy skepticism.

I do this with my kids by asking them to critically evaluate commercials we see on television, and television programs we watch.
Click to expand...

And that's exactly what needs to be done. Great job, you're well ahead of the curve. I'm not saying things like Ann Coulter go away, somehow forced that way by the government. No, she can stay. But when she runs off at her mouth about her outlandish claims that people instead say "I wonder if that's true, I'll have to look that up", something along those lines. Don't take it at face value. What we have up for stake is well to precious and valuable to take things at face value. Learn to question, learn to research, learn to make up your own mind and work with conviction and intelligence for your ideologies.
 
Last edited:
Ikari said:
And that's exactly what needs to be done. Great job, you're well ahead of the curve. I'm not saying things like Ann Coulter go away, somehow forced that way by the government. No, she can stay. But when she runs off at her mouth about her outlandish claims that people instead say "I wonder if that's true, I'll have to look that up", something along those lines. Don't take it at face value. What we have up for stake is well to precious and valuable to take things at face value. Learn to question, learn to research, learn to make up your own mind and work with conviction and intelligence for your ideologies.
Click to expand...


Funny you should pick Ann Coulter, and not Keith Olberman, or Bill Mahr...Hmmm....so whom might we check Ms. Coulter's rhetoric with? Media Matters?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Funny you should pick Ann Coulter, and not Keith Olberman, or Bill Mahr...Hmmm....so whom might we check Ms. Coulter's rhetoric with? Media Matters?


j-mac
Click to expand...

I have to ask because he has probably explained his position around 5 times : ARE YOU READING ANYTHING HE IS WRITING? OR ARE YOU JUST LOOKING AT IT AND CONNECTING DOTS WITH CIRCLES IN ANY WAY YOU CAN?
 
j-mac said:
Ok, then maybe I am missing something. Explain to me like I am a 4th grader, what is "Critical thinking" to you?


j-mac
Click to expand...

:doh

  1. Healthy skepticism about all sources.
  2. Fact-checking quotes and statistics.
  3. Identifying source bias.

This is easily the 3rd or 4th time I've posted this information.

Also, what Ikari said, which I'm QFT:

Don't take it [information] at face value. ...Learn to question, learn to research, learn to make up your own mind and work with conviction and intelligence for your ideologies
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
Funny you should pick Ann Coulter, and not Keith Olberman, or Bill Mahr...Hmmm....so whom might we check Ms. Coulter's rhetoric with? Media Matters?


j-mac
Click to expand...

I mean, I'm not going to list every single one. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure it all out. I can't sit here and give you all the answers.

I mean, this is a prime example though of the problem. You immediately when partisan with your argument. Immediately. It wasn't a "oh, he just thew one thing out there and that was it; or previously he brought up both Fox News and MSNBC". It was immediately "oh...what about the left, blah blah blah". No one was exempt from my criticism. Not the left, not the right, not the independents. We need to stop, the partisan bandwangon is old and annoying; it's time that we stop and we think before we blurt out things on nothing more than reflex. It's time to stop, seriously.
 
Hatuey said:
I have to ask because he has probably explained his position around 5 times : ARE YOU READING ANYTHING HE IS WRITING? OR ARE YOU JUST LOOKING AT IT AND CONNECTING DOTS WITH CIRCLES IN ANY WAY YOU CAN?
Click to expand...


No, I am asking questions....Now get out of the way.


j-mac
 
Catz Part Deux said:
:doh

  1. Healthy skepticism about all sources.
  2. Fact-checking quotes and statistics.
  3. Identifying source bias.

This is easily the 3rd or 4th time I've posted this information.

Also, what Ikari said, which I'm QFT:
Click to expand...


Ok, and what sources should one use to "fact check"?

How should one go about identifying "source bias"?


j-mac
 
Catz Part Deux said:
:doh

  1. Healthy skepticism about all sources.
  2. Fact-checking quotes and statistics.
  3. Identifying source bias.

This is easily the 3rd or 4th time I've posted this information.

Also, what Ikari said, which I'm QFT:
Click to expand...

I think something unmentioned here is reasonableness. Even though it is an indeterminate word, the point is that any of the items on this list can be taken too far in either direction. You can be too gullible or too suspicious.
 
j-mac said:
No, I am asking questions....Now get out of the way.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Why don't you try reading what Ikari is saying instead of asking so many questions? Cause I am sure he's answered them already. READ FFS. READ.
 
Ikari said:
As it concerns the government, it is best to be too suspicious than it is to be too gullible.
Click to expand...

This brings to light the problems of the indeterminate nature of the word reasonable. From a certain perspective, you are absolutely correct.
 
j-mac said:
Ok, and what sources should one use to "fact check"?

How should one go about identifying "source bias"?

j-mac
Click to expand...

Didn't you learn this stuff in school?

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bias]Bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact_checker]Fact checker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]


Fact-checking involves researching original sources when possible to determine that the material was used accurately and presented in context. In publishing terms, it means verifying quotes with sources. In user terms, it means reading multiple sources of data and checking footnotes/endnotes listed in the article.

Source bias means determining how data was collected, whether the methodology was scientific, and whether the data is presented accurately, without being tainted by an individual's opinions.

These days, most American newspapers don't employ fact-checkers anymore, which means users need to exercise caution.
 
Last edited:
Catz Part Deux said:
Didn't you learn this stuff in school?

Bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fact checker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Fact-checking involves researching original sources when possible to determine that the material was used accurately and presented in context. In publishing terms, it means verifying quotes with sources. In user terms, it means reading multiple sources of data and checking footnotes/endnotes listed in the article.

Source bias means determining how data was collected, whether the methodology was scientific, and whether the data is presented accurately, without being tainted by an individual's opinions.

These days, most American newspapers don't employ fact-checkers anymore, which means users need to exercise caution.
Click to expand...


I agree, and although in this day and age, it may be prudent to check everything springing forth for accuracy, the amount, and sheer volume of things being done that effect your life on a daily basis, one would need to quit their job, and employ a team of fact checkers, and be privy to all source materiel. Is that how you discern your information?


j-mac
 
this is the president, bear in mind, who once told americans who disagree with him, essentially, to shut up

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jifjRVLVjzA"]YouTube- Obama: I don't want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking[/nomedia]


the same arrogant, tone deaf president a couple months prior asked americans to rat out their neighbors for expressing fishy thoughts

Are you fishy? The White House wants to know.

he probably forgot
 
j-mac said:
I agree, and although in this day and age, it may be prudent to check everything springing forth for accuracy, the amount, and sheer volume of things being done that effect your life on a daily basis, one would need to quit their job, and employ a team of fact checkers, and be privy to all source materiel. Is that how you discern your information?


j-mac
Click to expand...

Who doesn't do a bit of research for major decisions? When you buy a car, do you go to the dealership and say "sell me a car!"? Or do you look into it first? Do you look at your finances and what you can afford and the type of car that you want? Research new and used car prices, find out what's fair before you walk into that dealership? When you buy a house, do you just sign the contract if offered? No, you read, you understand the terms, you make an educated decision. Why should your vote be any different? It's just as, if not more of, important a decision as buying a car or a house. Yes, it will take time, you may have to cut down on TV; but it's well worth the effort.
 
Ikari said:
Who doesn't do a bit of research for major decisions? When you buy a car, do you go to the dealership and say "sell me a car!"? Or do you look into it first? Do you look at your finances and what you can afford and the type of car that you want? Research new and used car prices, find out what's fair before you walk into that dealership? When you buy a house, do you just sign the contract if offered? No, you read, you understand the terms, you make an educated decision. Why should your vote be any different? It's just as, if not more of, important a decision as buying a car or a house. Yes, it will take time, you may have to cut down on TV; but it's well worth the effort.
Click to expand...


Let's not devolve into condescension shall we? Let me ask, how much information have we been barraged with on a daily basis from this administration? How many crisis'? Seems like daily no?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Let's not devolve into condescension shall we? Let me ask, how much information have we been barraged with on a daily basis from this administration? How many crisis'? Seems like daily no?


j-mac
Click to expand...

Again, with the deflect into partisan territory. How much was I told to fear by Bush Co? How much crap was gonna come and get me? It's the same with any administration. The government seeks to expand its power, the branches of government seek to horde power. It's not just Obama, it's been Bush and Clinton and Reagan, etc. At some point this deflect to partisan hackery has got to end if we want to truly control the government.

What's your goal? Controlled government, or Republican run government? Because they aren't the same things. As for the condescension, there was none. Any that was there was perceived by you but not there in reality.
 
Ikari said:
It's the same with any administration. The government seeks to expand its power, the branches of government seek to horde power. It's not just Obama
Click to expand...

that's decidedly NOT what he told the KIDS

on THEIR day

At some point this deflect to partisan hackery has got to end
Click to expand...

tell it to the president, tell it to the KIDS
 
Ikari said:
Again, with the deflect into partisan territory. How much was I told to fear by Bush Co? How much crap was gonna come and get me? It's the same with any administration. The government seeks to expand its power, the branches of government seek to horde power. It's not just Obama, it's been Bush and Clinton and Reagan, etc. At some point this deflect to partisan hackery has got to end if we want to truly control the government.

What's your goal? Controlled government, or Republican run government? Because they aren't the same things. As for the condescension, there was none. Any that was there was perceived by you but not there in reality.
Click to expand...


Ok, If I perceived it wrongly, I apologize. However, the fact that others have done this sort of thing as well is of no consequence. The others are not in power anymore, and this one is. If I read you right, you are saying that just because other Presidents have started down a road, then it's ok for this one to step on the gas. Do you really believe that?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Ok, If I perceived it wrongly, I apologize. However, the fact that others have done this sort of thing as well is of no consequence. The others are not in power anymore, and this one is. If I read you right, you are saying that just because other Presidents have started down a road, then it's ok for this one to step on the gas. Do you really believe that?


j-mac
Click to expand...

You read incorrect. I cannot make this any clearer, I seriously don't know what your problem is. It was not ok for any of them to do so. If we keep getting lost on the path of hyperpartisanship we'll only bitch when the other guy is in charge. How the Republicans howled when Clinton was in charge (for good reason), but that howling stopped when Bush was in charge even though he was doing the same if not worse things. The howling started up again when Obama got in charge. But where did that howling lead us? Nowhere better. We're still worse off. We've been blinded by the "other guy" for so long that we don't see that "our guy" is just as bad. You have to think, you have to look at the whole picture. If you don't then there's no point to even trying.

The information we are fed is full of spin, hyperbole, and entertainment. It's up to the viewer to disseminate all that and withdraw the information. To compare it to other information, to objectively analyze the actions of the government, to intelligently learn about the various branches and tools of government. We have to stop thinking of this as R v D and understand that it is The People, our freedom, our liberty, our rights v the Government. That is a serious responsibility and duty. Now enough of this hyperpartisan BS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom