Jon Stewart went for titles-within-titles for his live election coverage on Tuesday night. The Daily Show became Comedy Central’s Indecision 2010, with the subtitle Maybe We Can’t its… subtitle? Its sigh of resignation?
The live studio audience booed some of the Republican winners and cheered some of the Democratic winners. Although when Stewart said, “West Virginia will keep a Democratic seat,” the smattering of applause prompted Stewart to note sarcastically, “Boy, that sounded enthusiastic.”
To analyze what he termed “the ass-whupping that has been delivered to the Democrats,” Stewart brought out his guest, presidential historian Michael Beschloss. He pointed out that Truman, Eisenhower, and Clinton suffered similar losses for their parties in midterm elections and were reelected. Stewart said, So in other words, it’s a great night for Obama. Wry laughs all around.
Stephen Colbert, because his character was riding a wave of Republican victories, seemed less wry than triumphant. He dispensed with his usual opening music in favor of the theme from Hawaii Five-0 and announced, “We’ll be saying ‘Aloha!’ to the Republicans and ‘Aloha!’ to the Democrats.”
Colbert announced, “The Republicans will take the House back, so it is all but certain that John Boehner will be the new Speaker, unless out of pure habit, he blocks his own confirmation.”
Beyond the real-life politics, we were left to wonder: Who’s going to get more, better comedy out of the midterm elections, Stewart or Colbert? As they closed out their live broadcasts, I was giving the edge to Colbert, if only for his description of Alaska (“The Nipple That Can Cut Glass State”) and the question he posed to conservative pundit David Frum: “Now that [the Republicans] have got Congress, do they repeal health care so people like me can keep our tax cuts?”
Twitter: @kentucker
I sure wish we could stop these ‘Democrat vs Republican’ and ‘Conservative vs Liberal’ mindframes here in America. We need to realize that we get nowhere by fighting amongst ourselves. We need to work together.
I really hate all of those labels. I don’t consider myself either Democrat or Republican, even though I do often vote for Democratic or Republican candidates. I guess you could say I’m “liberal” on some issues, and “conservative” on others. But I hate being labeled as one or the other when I state my view on one particular issue.
Thanks to Jon Stewart, I’m keeping my sanity through all of this. Obama will get re-elected in 2012 so that’s something to look forward to! SANITY RULES!
Dave, I could not have typedit better myself. It really is a shame how many people don’t get it when it comes to Politics/Politicians. Most of these pols not only don’t have to worry about the things the average joe does, but many are actually friends and just put on shows in front of the camera. Look at at Stewart/O’reilly.
Until someone takes a good, long look at why hundreds of millions (if not billions) of dollars are spent trying to get these folks into jobs that only pay $200K/year, nothing will ever change in that swampland on the Potomac. This is why the so-called Tea Party is such a joke: it was funded by billionaires, yet their message was “the people need to take back Washington!” Well, now the people have elected a couple of dozen hardcore religious-right conservatives who are beholden to the same corporate shills that brought this country to financial ruin 3 years ago. So we get the best of both worlds: a theocratic social agenda married with fiscally irresponsibility! woohoo America!
Right? It’s supposed to be about our country and we as a people. Not who’s more left or right. It’s not about the politicians…it’s about all of us.
Stop cluttering EW with politics go to CNN if you want to talk about that. I want to talk about Colbert v. Stewart. I think it will be better for Stewart the daily show thrives on political conflict.
Follow D Monet FTW.
Totally agree with Dave and Nicotine’s comments. I hate the fighting and being on ‘sides’ and all that crap. We need to work together.
Well said Nicotine! I wholeheartedly agree
That’s a pretty thought, not completely realistic. We are always going to have different views on some issues. No two ways about it. The groups might change their views as time goes on but there is always going to be the opposition. The most we can do is be more respectful to each other and learn to compromise. For example, I support gay marriage and that will never change. I understand the reasoning of people who strongly oppose it, but I will never agree with them. That’s just one example where it sounds very naive to say let’s work together when we have completely different goals.
The thing is that labels cause people to make a whole list of assumptions about another person because they’ve already decided what label they are.
Agreed. But most issues are not so cut and dry, and these types of issues are such a small part of what Congress does, and yet they only issues the media focuses on.
Anna,
Why isn’t that realistic? This is a country of about 500 million people. Why do we all have to be reduced to only two ways of thinking? There should be 500 million different ideas on how gov’t should work and there should be 1 billion ears listening to everyone of them and deciding which one best suits everyone. That’s what democracy should be.
In this current political system we have, it’s basically a two-sided dictatorship. Either we have to do what the liberals want or we have to do what the conservatives want. There’s no way around it and we have no choice.
Amen, Nicotine. The divisive nature of modern politics is doing far more damage to this country, and the world, than any individual politician is.
Nicotine knows whats goin on.
I agree, but I just have a hunch that instead of moving forward from today, those elected will spend their time repealing everything passed prior to their elections. Its going to be an absolute waste of four years when its all said and done.
(insert the Debbie Downer horn here…)
Term Limits… Cap campaign spending… No special interest groups…
Yes to all three of those things… Citizen’s United is officially the worst thing to crawl out of our government in the last two years. It saddens me that few people care…
I care! I completely agree with you. Thanks John Roberts!!
Elizabeth, hopefully it won’t be that easy–the Dems still have the Senate and the White House, so it will be difficult for the GOP to unravel the previous two years. It will mean, however, that nothing new will be accomplished from here until at least 2012.
I agree with Nicotine. It will be hard to do, though, since the next Speaker of the House has already said that there will be “no compromise with the White House” on any legislation. It’s great that we have open-minded people in Congress, isn’t it? People who remember that it’s their job to represent us, not feather their own nests.
Gwen,
What makes you think that if there is “no compromise with the White House” the People aren’t beinr represented? Did you, by chance, look at the results of the elections last night???
Steve,
The people voted in Obama, and the people as a whole are mostly moderate. The idea that far right politicians should only pass legislation that is even further to the right is laughable. Compromise is the very essence of the two party system…
Hey people it was the democrats and obamas top brass who denied any compromise with republicans and the people of this country so stop acting like the world is upside down because the republicans are returning the favor. There are some things they will compromise on and some they will not. Bush tax cuts and obamacare are top’s on my list and it should be on every Americans list to be repealed.
Steve,
A large quantity of those votes were upper 40%, lower 50% splits. Anybody who claims to speak for “The American People” is either bad at math, or doesn’t understand that “The American People” have a great many viewpoints. I just hope that having “taken back their country,” the republicans have some idea of what to do with it. I kinda doubt it.
Alan,
I’ve worked in healthcare for the last decade, and you can hate on the new health care bill all you want, but if it doesn’t stick around, nobody is going to be able to afford health care in a few years. The bottom line is that you need everyone paying into insurance to cover costs, or insurance companies either go under or drain government resources. The alternative is to refuse medical services to people who can’t pay.
Jess…really? How about hospitals quite charging $12 for an Advil. The reason costs are out of control is because of ridiculous mark-ups like this. And refuse medical services for those who can’t pay. Let’s start with the illegals. Get them out of our schools and hospitals. America can no longer afford to flip the bill for these people. If you think they are not taking over you are mistaken. They are doing it by making love not war….their numbers are growing and the financial burden is too. I’d rather pay a little more for a strawberry.
Tony, you’re absolutely right. In fact, you should take a job as a hospital monitor, so whenever an illegal or someone in poverty comes into a hospital for care, you can turn them away. Especially if they’re suffering from a serious illness — you can watch them die right in front of you! Now, THAT’s entertainment.
Those of you in favor of socialized medicine I’m pretty sure Russia would love to have you. Please feel free to go live in a socialist country where the Government takes care of you. As far as turning people away in need…I didn’t say that. You can donate all of your hard earned money to a fund to take care of society. Me, I’m more interested in taking care of my family. Gee there is a concept, everyone takes care of their own…wow..
Look at Alan telling us what we should or should not be in favor of. Guarantee he can’t even explain what’s in the Health Care overhaul that actually affects him, but what does that matter? He thinks he speaks for America.
“We want change.”
“Let’s change it.”
“We want government to work.”
“Let’s reward the obstructionists.”
“We are worried about the future.”
“We’re worried about ourselves.”
“The corporations run the country. We need government to stand for the little man.”
“We’re not Russia! We need to support our corporations!”
“We need to wake up!”
“We can go back to sleep now.”
Fantastic first comment. I normally do identify myself on one side o the spectrum, but that’s my own perspective, and it’s not to say I can’t tolerate the opposite. I’m not so disappointed that Republicans have taken over the House as I am that it feels like a knee-jerk reaction, and by swinging back and forth, nothing is ever going to get done. :/
Exactly!! Apparently, some Americans thought not enough was getting done, so now, nothing will get done.
How very true. The American people just can’t stick to one thought long enough to accomplish anything. Social ADD.
JIM”How very true. The American people just can’t stick to one thought long enough to accomplish anything. Social ADD.+
Agreed 100% That is
the root of the problem. Nationally , Im very disappointed in all the ‘young’ voters who came out to be part of the winning ‘team’ and helped Obahma win, where where you yesterday!?!?!
The President only has so much power, especially if the whole House is against him.
I heard a pundit say this morning that we have an instant gratification thing that feeds us– with food, information, entertainment, etc. She sort-of equated it with the way voters suddenly swung in the opposite direction this election. We want our change NOW, and if it doesn’t happen immediately, then we freak out and look to another source for what we want. Was an interesting perspective.
Opinions have a lot more value when they are informed – and few of the opinions here have bothered to find out if there are any facts supporting theirs.
America has long been known as a “center right” nation. That means that the majority of us lean conservative.
Google the exit poll info from yesterday (not to mention the innumerable polls that have been done over the past 2 yrs) & you will find that a majority of Americans have been very disturbed by the direction that Obama & the Democrat majority have taken us. A large majority of Americans believe that they were changing TOO much and trying to do TOO much – so no, it was not about the change not happening fast enough, that’s just a line they are pushing & it’s called “political spin”.
The number one concern of American voters has been the economy. A problem to which Obama & the Democrats have failed to give sufficient attention & have made significantly worse with their insane spending sprees & legislation that has the American business world circling the wagons & playing defense (to mix a few metaphors). They have pushed a stagnant economy into a declining one. So not only is the stock market flat-lining, but the jobs market is sinking and these two factors will keep working their way downward until something constructive breaks that vicious cycle. Making businesses, large or small, have to shell out money for legislation they can’t afford is counter-productive.
What is most ironic in all this is that, just as Europe is finally beginning to realize that “democratic socialism” is unsustainable, American liberal elitists are trying to get us to jump in with both feet.
Still, the new House Leader, John Boehner, started out in life as a working class broom-pusher (literally) & actually knows what it’s like to live in the real world & work your way up the ladder. That gives me some hope for something resembling sanity to pull DC back from the precipice they’ve been leading us over…
HA!
John Boehner’s broom-pushing past!
What a joke!
America may self-identify as “center-right,” but America has been dependent on progressivism since the last depression. That’s a fact, jack.
Social Security. Medicare. Civil Rights.
In your lifetime there has been a shallow swing to “center-right” as defined by the media, which, in actual truth, has been a swing away from the far-right conservatism which, while remaining the loudest voice in American politics, has become the smallest group. That America ended when Prohibition did.
The Republicans will accomplish nothing, except to talk about all their accomplishments, and The Democrats will be the beneficiaries of it, in 2012.
Meanwhile, the middle class will continue to shrink. Salaries and standards of living will continue to decrease fro the real majority of Americans. Our smugness will be appeased every couple of years.
Sounds like a plan.
Well, Mike, with persuasive facts like that, how can I possibly disagree? (Though Gallup probably wouldn’t have that problem)
I’m betting you either live in New England, on the Pacific coast, or as part of some large urban island stuck in the middle of what you condescendingly refer to as “flyover country” (and the rest of us call America).
Nicotine- thanks for a great post!
Unfortunately, the system is set up to pit two parties together. Unless that changes, politics won’t.
What gets me is that these are very complicated issues with complex solutions. No one person is completely right or completely wrong. Yet we boil solutions down to “tax cuts” or “bail outs”. This has to stop. Nobody can compromise because in this atmosphere, I cannot agree with even a single part of your idea without someone screaming “Aha! I’m right, you’re wrong.”
“I sure wish we could stop these ‘Democrat vs Republican’ and ‘Conservative vs Liberal’ mindframes here in America. We need to realize that we get nowhere by fighting amongst ourselves. We need to work together.”
I agree, we should all work together to limit the size of the government, lower taxes, impose term limits, pass a Constitutional amendment to make abortion illegal and strictly enforce our immigration laws.
Yes, WE CAN! Change you can believe in, everyone!
Brian: “I agree that we should all agree on what I think is right.”
Fantastic.
Precisely!
Brian,
I don’t agree with your positions (leave your hands off my Constitution) so how do we compromise? That’s the tone of most of the posters here. Are you willing to compromise?
Compromise means giving in to something that you disagree with. I wouldn’t be willing to do that. But I would be willing to cooperate on points of agreement. Where we have differences I’m going to stick to my guns, if I’m determined to prevail on that point.
I would be willing to negotiate the color of wallpaper that should go in the living room or the name of an airport. But I’m not willing to negotiate when it comes to killing babies.
Yes, compromise is giving in, to achieve an equitable bill of law (or see a chick flick with the wife). Not being willing to see there is another side to an issue is the reason why this country is so freaking paralyzed. The partisan rhetoric on both sides is hurting this country. It’s too bad people with your viewpoint (my way is the only way) are currently in power.
BTW, Ken, I will agree to not touch your constitution if you agree that the *U.S.* Constitution provides for an amendment process and that the nation has the right to use that process to serve political ends.
I am willing to see that there is another side to the issue. I’m just not willing to surrender to them. There are only two ways of resolving an intractable impasse, I’m afraid. One side must have the power to force his will to be done or the one side must be willing to surrender. And I’m not willing to surrender. I’ll let the other side do that.
here’s the thing Brian….you say that the gov’t should legislate what a woman does to/with her own body, but the gov’t cannot/should not do other things? It’s hypocrisy! The gov’t should be stopped unless it does what *I* think is right. THAT right there is the problem. “Piddle, twaddle and resolve, not one damn thing do they solve!”
I didn’t say that the government should legislate what a woman does with her body. That’s dishonest spin. I said that the life of the baby should be protected. One of the fundamental roles of the government is to protect the life and the property of the people. It’s hypocrisy to suggest that your life should be protected but not the lives of babies.
It’s not a baby, Brian – it’s a fetus. And making abortion illegal would EXACTLY be the government legislating what a woman does with her body. Frankly, abortion is one of those topics where it is impossible to compromise because both sides view the issue with completely different rules of logic. But for the sake of women dealing with this difficult decision, I certainly hope that it stays legal. Women will continue to have abortions whether it’s legal or not – at least it can be done safely in a doctor’s office now. THAT’s protecting the health and safety of the woman.
Fetus, baby, you are only arguing semantics. It’s a human being just as deserving of life as you and I are. And you are right, abortion is one of the topics where it is impossible to compromise. Either you are in favor of allowing innocents to be killed or you are against it. There is no middle ground on this issue.
And yeah, women will still have abortions. Murderers will still murder people, even though murder is illegal. But we outlaw murder because it is wrong, understanding that people will do it anyway… and we will punish the guilty when we catch them.
Sorry, but to me it’s not murder because it’s not a baby. It’s a growing bundle of cells, at least in the early stages of pregnancy when it’s most common to abort. And that’s not semantics, it’s scientific research. Which I’m guessing you don’t believe in, so this argument is pointless. To be frank, I’m adopted – of all people I should be against abortion. But I’m not, because I know that for many women (ESPECIALLY victims of rape or incest), it’s absolutely the right decision. Look, you’re certainly entitled to your beliefs, but calling a woman a murderer for making an appropriate choice for herself? Not accurate, and not cool. What about the military. Are they all murderers? They’re certainly “murdering” people…
Hank, those growing bundle of cells ARE A HUMAN BEING, just as your bundle of cells is a human being. You know, people frequently compare others to the Nazis but they don’t think about it beforehand. Usually they are trying to get across something like “you are way too strict.” But there have been plenty of groups that are overly strict, or impersonal, etc. There are a couple of things that make the Nazis (National Socialists) stick out as distinctive:
1) They seek to combine nationalism with socialism
2) They are responsible for a nearly successful attempt at genocide of the Jewish people.
Do you know how the Nazis were able to convince the German people to look the other way while they rounded up the Jews, stuck them in cattle cars, and sent them to concentration camps to be put to death by the millions? They started off by dehumanizing their victims. IOW, they convinced other people that the Jews weren’t really human. Your attempt to convince me, and millions of other pro-life Americans, that pre-born babies are not really human *will not prevail*.
I think the nation will start to be on a better path when all Americans realize that they are equal and thusly that their opinions and views are equally as valid as the other person’s opposing opinion or view.
Brian, guess what? I’m a “human being”, too, and if by some miracle I got pregnant (after using every precaution imaginable), I would be signing my own death warrant, because I would not be able to physically carry to term without rupturing my aorta. According to your beliefs, I would not be able to have a termination in order to save my own life. What’s your solution to that dilemma, or should I just make sure my will is up to date and accept my fate?
Easy: don’t get pregnant.
Brian, in case you missed sex ed classes in high school, here’s a newsflash for you: not every contraceptive method is foolproof.
To follow on from your flip, crass latest comment, you didn’t really answer the question (like most politicians). I asked you what if, after taking all precautions possible, I DID get pregnant–what would be your solution? In your black and white mind, is it better to terminate a fetus that will never see the light of day, or let me die attempting to carry to term?
You know, I don’t think that I’m the one making flip, crass comments. One shouldn’t be so ready to take a human life. If pregnancy would really mean a death sentence to you then you should take extraordinary measures to ensure that you don’t get pregnant. Since you are playing the “what if” game, what if your problem was the you had a tendency to fall asleep uncontrollably and unexpectedly while driving? What would you do? Make sure that your will was up to date and accept your fate? Or would you take measures to ensure that you wouldn’t fall asleep at the wheel? It’s the same concept: don’t allow yourself to get into a situation where you have to make very, very, very difficult decisions. Or rather, what *should* be a very, very, very difficult decision.
Which part of “taking all precautions possible” didn’t you understand? I haven’t had sex since I almost died giving birth to my daughter three years ago for that very reason. However, if I was raped on the way home tonight, and in the .0001% chance I conceived, I am thankful that our Constitution’s stance on privacy allows me to make what *would* be a very heartbreaking decision. You should be thankful you don’t have a womb and will never have to make it.
Trust me, no part of this situation is flip or crass to me.
If you took every possible precaution and yet were raped and then by some one in a million chance you got pregnant: you should get on your knees and seek God’s guidance. If you are a Christian you wouldn’t have to worry about the result. If God wanted you to continue the pregnancy then either you live and carry the baby to full term or you die and you get to be with Jesus. Either way it’s a win. If, for some reason that I couldn’t possibly explain, God said that you were to kill your own baby, then you would be right to kill the baby.
Hank Moody,
Your opinion of when life begins is irrelevant – as is mine. If we did not know factually, then clearly, morally, we would need to err on the side of caution until we had a definitive answer.
But science does know. Scientifically speaking, life begins at conception. This life has its own unique DNA & completely meets the scientific definition of a living human being.
We are all clumps of cells. A fetus is simply the stage of life that takes place when a human being is growing in the womb. Similarly, we have names for human beings at other stages. Saying that ‘it is a fetus not a human’ is as absurd as saying ‘it is a toddler, not a human’ or ‘it is a teenager, not a human’.
Why are conservatives so against babies dying in abortion because they’re ‘human beings’, but they’re okay with thousands of men and women dying in war, even though they’re ‘human beings’ too? All of this, every single bit of this, is an argument of hypocrisy and semantics. That’s why in my initial comment, I said we should stop the bickering amongst ourselves. It does neither side any good and makes us all look like jokes.
So tell me Brian – who is going to pay for all of thos eunwanted “babies”? Are you going to foot the bill? Or do you want your “small government” to take care of their costs? But wait, wouldn’t that be “socialism”? Frankly I’ve seen enough magazine covers with teen mothers on them to last a lifetime. This country was not founded on Christianity – in fact, they were fleeing organized religion when the settlers came to the US – so please do us all a favor and keep your religion to yourself. Be glad you live in a country where you can follow whatever cult you want and our government and laws are kept seperate from the “bible” – whatever “bible” you choose to believe in.
Nicotine,
When we start giving baby fetuses an opportunity to choose recruitment or deferment, and recruitment includes training in self defense and the assignment of a weapon so they have both a choice & an opportunity to decide the possibilities of their own fate, then your argument will be a bit more credible.
You are demanding that we care MORE (or actually exclusively) about adults who have voluntarily chosen to serve with knowledge of the risks that they are taking — and at least some ability to protect themselves & influence the outcome of their fate.
Somehow their lives are supposed to concern us, but NOT innocent human babies being dismembered or poisoned in their mother’s wombs thru no fault or choice of their own — and in numbers larger than all of the casualties of all of the American wars put together. Bizarrely selective compassion. I am from a military family. My nephew is shipping out to Afghanistan after Christmas. I am concerned for him. That doesn’t make me any less concerned about the thousands of babies being slaughtered every day. It is possible to care about both.
*Abortion numbers are based on statistics provided by Planned Barrenhood’s Alan Guttmacher Institute so real numbers are likely to be much higher.
Mary Sue,
If the government would get out of the way the Church would support the babies. Gladly!
Nicotine,
Who says that conservatives are OK with our troops dying? I don’t know of anyone that is OK with our troops dying, apart from traitors and the enemy.
MarySue, think about what you’re proposing – the answer to having too many of “the wrong kind” of human beings is to kill them? Wouldn’t it make more sense to do something to stem the teenage pregnancy rate? And do we really teach teens how to deal with their mistakes by trying to get rid of the consequences? (Meanwhile, consider a comparison of the teen pregnancy rates over the years with the implementation of sex ed in schools – the corrolation is uncanny). BTW, should the US not protest a country that is displacing an unwanted population unless it is willing to take in all immigrants? Is it impossible to protest wrong-doing unless one is willing & able to also take care of the problem oneself? Sounds like a muzzle that strangles…
QuoVadisAnima,
If YOU don’t agree with abortion, then don’t have one. But YOU don’t have the authority to tell everybody else how they should feel about it. It’s another one of those conservative hypocrisies… they don’t want government regulating health care – they don’t want illegals and the impoverished to be able to receive life-saving medical treatment – but it’s okay if government regulates abortion and gay marriage. Pick a side and stick with it, will you?
Brian,
I didn’t mean to insinuate that conservatives are okay with troops dying – I would never say that. What I meant was that they are very pro-War and human casualties are an unavoidable consequence of war. Not to mention that we end up killing thousands of people on the other side of the war – who also happen to be somebody’s children.
I’m not against abortion, per se, but I am against unnecessary death in all it’s many forms. Abortion falls under that guise, but since I’m not a woman and can’t get pregnant, I feel I have no say over what anyone decides to do with their own bodies.
Nicotine, my personal ethics on life are very consistent. ALL human beings deserve protection under the law from conception to a natural death. The more helpless & vulnerable a human being is, the more they deserve our protection. I also have not shared my sentiments about the war because that is an entirely different discussion (as I believe I made reasonably plain with my previous post).
Now you have segued from your first non sequitur to a second and a third. If you don’t like murder, don’t commit one?! I guess you are an anarchist then? Personally, I prefer the legislation that protects us from others doing whatever they feel like doing to us without regard to our own feelings on the matter. I think it’s a good thing & I suspect you do, too. Why should some human beings not be granted that same protection?
The baby in the womb is NOT a part of his or her mother’s body, but is simply housed within it. He or she depends on his mother for nourishment, just as he or she will for several years after leaving the womb. So perhaps we cannot tell a woman what to do, or not do, with her own body (though that concept opens up a libertarian-flavored pandora’s box about the limits of personal autonomy & such things as drug use, suicide, etc), but a woman certainly does not have the right to decide what to do with another human being’s body. Which as previously stated, science has definitively proven beyond a doubt at this point that the fetus is a living & distinctly unique human being.
Not being able to get pregnant nullifies your ability to have an opinion on this matter? Then why are you arguing in support? So since you (hopefully) and I do not suffer from a disordered sexual attraction to little children, we have no right to have an opinion there either? Would you refuse to see a doctor for cancer treatment because he never had cancer? What is the logic there?
Nicotine,
I’m not representing conservatives in this part of the discussion as much as I am representing the Christian faith, as I practice and understand it.
From the Christian perspective, NO ONE should be IN FAVOR of war — ever! War is indeed killing and we don’t want to kill anyone! There are times, however, when war SEEMS to be unavoidable. In THOSE CASES, however, before we go off to war we need to ask if the war is justified. I believe that war is justified under these conditions:
1) A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.
2) A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Even just causes cannot be served by actions taken by individuals or groups who do not constitute an authority sanctioned by whatever the society and outsiders to the society deem legitimate.
3) A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause (although the justice of the cause is not sufficient–see point #4). Further, a just war can only be fought with “right” intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury.
4) A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.
5) The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.
6) The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.
7) The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target.
If war were never permitted then a nation would be unable to defend its citizens against an attack upon them. And a nation would be unable to defend the citizens of another nation against tyrants slaughtering them.
I believe that it was just to fight WWII, for example, because it met all of the criteria above and — in particular — because it prevented the Nazis from completing the extermination of the Jewish people. Hitler was wrong, however, to invade Poland, for example, because that action did not meet the criteria above.
Even just wars are horrible and no true Christian should hope for one.
QuoVadisAnima,
You made my point for me in your first sentence: “Nicotine, my personal ethics on life are very consistent.” Those are your ethics. Your ethics are only relevant to you and your family. Why does everybody else have to live life according to your ethics? Who is to say you’re right about everything? Or about anything? What makes your opinions – and make no mistake, they are only opinions – better than anyone else’s? And I do have an opinion on the matter which is that each women has the right to do with their body as they see fit. And since I’m a male, and can’t get pregnant and can’t understand the bond between a fetus and mother, I choose not to have a dog in this fight. Basically, in government today there’s a bunch of old men trying to tell all young women what to do with their bodies. There was time when women called that oppression. Now, that they have their rights and are considered equal to men, they’ve fallen right in line with the rest. Hypocrisy, I tell you. I don’t see how that’s not logical. Since I don’t have children, would you like me to tell you how you should raise yours? I don’t live in your house, but would you like me to tell you how you should live in it? Where is the line between my life and everybody else’s? Because, the way the Christians believe it, in the end when we all have to answer for ourselves before God. You won’t go to hell because of any of my evil deeds, so why do hell do you care so much? I am not in favor of abortion. I’m in favor of everybody minding their own damn business.
Brian,
I was under the opinion that the bible Christians hang their lives on states, “Thou shalt not kill.” I don’t remember seeing an asterisk or a bibliographical reference mark afterward stating, “…unless it’s for your country in matter of war.” But you’re right that all war is horrible, and even though I’m not a Christian, I never hope for one. The truth is all war could be avoided if we, as humans, just allowed people to live the way they want to. Tolerance is the key to every issue.
Nicotine, that was classic! You latched on to one sentence in my response & completely disregarded the rest. I should have known better than to respond to the effort to make it personal – mea culpa.
To repeat in simpler terms: we are not discussing what a woman is doing to her own body, but what a woman is doing to her baby’s body. Do you support the rights of parents to abuse their children? I doubt it, therefore, you don’t actually advocate everyone minding their own damn business – so long as YOU agree to the circumstances.
What you are espousing reeks of relativism & is full of logical inconsistencies.
As for the newly found “freedom” of women, google what Susan B. Anthony & her suffragette peers said about abortion – then look up Dr. Bernard Nathanson & the part that MEN played in making abortion legal so that men could play without having to pay.
Nicotine,
1) The commandment that you refer to was a part of the Old Covenant that God made with ancient Israel. It was a command made TO the ancient Israelites, and modern Christians are under the New Covenant, not the Old Covenant. I can provide the Scriptural if you are not aware of the distinction made in Scripture between the different covenants that God has made with different peoples since creation.
2) The command was actually not to murder. God didn’t forbid ALL killing. In fact, God actually told men, after that command was given, to go to war with the people living in the Promised Land and specifically said not to allow any of them to remain alive after the battle. So war was not only permitted under the OLD covenant, it was actually commanded.
3) Under the New Covenant, the only commands given are love the Lord God with all my heart, mind, soul and strength and to love my neighbor as myself. Of course, that’s really impossible apart from the work of the Holy Spirit in each Christian.
So there is no need for an asterisk or a bibliographical reference mark. The teaching is quite literally in the text.
Tolerance in matters of opinion is essential. Compromise of matters of doctrine is sin.
Well, it’s good to know as long as I call it ‘war’, I can kill anyone I want to and it’s not a sin. That takes a load off. I wonder why everyone else hasn’t clued in on this legal loophole in biblical dogma?
Christians have excuses for everything. It’s almost as if the bible was specifically written to provide the church with pretext for whatever they deem plausible…
Nicotine,
You call it an excuse. I call it a fact. Perhaps you just haven’t read enough Scripture to know the difference. When you read Scripture you can do two different things with it: 1) Try to make it mean what you want (eisegesis) or 2) try to draw the meaning out of the text (exegesis). Exegesis requires a great deal of effort, particularly when the text was written in a language that you don’t know and was written in a different era and a foreign culture. Eisegesis, however, requires only that you have a preconceived idea of what you want to find in the document. Unless you can find some reason why the tens of thousands of biblical scholars have made some great error in their exegesis, I think it’s safe to say that you are taking the eisegesis route.
And, BTW, it’s not when I “call” it a war. It’s when it actually is a war. War is not an exception to a rule, however. War simply has nothing to do with what ancient Israel was forbidden to do (murder). Cain murdered Abel (if you know the narrative found in Genesis chapter 4). But war does not involve murder. The word that is frequently translated as simply “to kill” in Deuteronomy 5:17 is, in Hebrew (transliterated) ratsach in the Qal tense, which means to murder. The command is to not murder. God never commanded anyone to never kill. God actually commanded Israel to go to war and kill every single inhabitant. For example, Deuteronomy 7:1-2 and Deuteronomy 20:16 (the same book of the Bible that you find the command not to murder).
Given this evidence (and many other passages in which war is mentioned) you can either stubbornly insist that God commanded not to kill under any circumstance (when He clearly didn’t). Or you can realize that you were misinterpreting Deut. 5:17 and learn from it. The choice is yours.
The fact is that the Christian is commanded to love his neighbor, and that would normally preclude killing him (obviously). But there are occasions where greater harm would come from not killing. In those cases, if the authorities in charge command that we go to a just war then the Christian is right to participate.
Oh we will, Nicotine. We will. When President-Elect Jeb Bush is in the Oval Office in 2013, he will restore sanity and purity to America. That and he’ll also imprison the now certain One-Termer for his crimes against the Gulf Coast, our troops and our nation.
Yep, the first two Bushes were sooo great for this country, let’s do it again! (Sarcasm people, all sarcasm). PS – no politician will ever be “pure” and this country can’t be “restored” because it has NEVER been “sane & pure” in it’s history. Still the best country in the world, but please take off the blinders.
Jeb Bush? Really?
The Bush dynasty is SOOO done. Who knows who will represent the Republicans in 2012, but it SURE won’t be Jeb Bush. Put down the crack, man.
JeB Bush,
really you’re gonna try to pin the troops on Obama, were’nt they there when he got in office? Imprision the former president, wow, I’m with Brian, you must be smoking crack why typing your comments, JeB Bush, isnt that the drunk one?
Jeb Bush?! I bet the rest of the world thinks that we have lost our minds with all of the foolishness going on here. Jeb Bush???? Is he going to lie and start another war too?
Totally agree, I’ve always considered myself a center type guy. I dont’ judge by “Democrat” or “Republician”, I judge by how good a job they do. Sadly, there’s nuts on both sides as the right has Beck and guys like that while on the left, you have Michael Moore, Olbermann and Rolling Stone magazine (seriously, their articles make the Republicans sound worse than Nazis). I don’t assume that being Republican makes you less intelligent or some sort of greedy racist just as being Democrat doesn’t make you automatically noble. I don’t care who’s in charge, just as long as they honestly care about helping the American people. Hopefully, the new power structure recognizes they can do more salvaging the economy and not turn this into “let’s screw with the President” as that’ll just hurt them in the long road.
Well if you are a Democrat in Texas then you look at yourself and know that the person you voted for didn’t win!! Yay for Rick Perry!!! The only thing Democrats have to cheer for in Texas is that they still have the majority in the Senate, but everything else they lost out on!! Buh-Bye Pelosi!
Rebecca, you realize that Pelosi is still the House, right? So it’s not really “buh-bye” to her.
Nina, I think what Rebecca is referring to is that Pelosi will no longer be Speaker.
Cindy, I didn’t give her the benefit of the doubt. Why say goodbye to Pelosi? She’s still representing her constituents and still has a vote in the House.
i love Nina’s comment!!!
Of course, if the economy doesn’t suddenly improve and the budget gets balanced, we’ll just be voting THESE people out next election cycle. And the process continues……..
We may be voting THESE people out next election cycle, but not because of the state of the economy or the absence of a balanced budget. No, we’ll be voting THESE people out if they refuse to represent us. The losers that were voted out of office yesterday lost their seats mainly because they voted in favor of bigger and more intrusive government. The American people want limited government and we want the government to leave us alone! If the Republicans don’t listen to the message they will be voted out of office, and you can take that to the bank.
Brian: By your own admission previously you want to pass laws that intrude very deeply into the private decisions of women everywhere. How can you reconcile your desire for less government with your belief that a constitutional amendment should be passed to deal with abortion at a federal level?? That is the very definition of MORE government intrusion!
Sarah, I want to protect the lives of innocent babies. No mother has the right to kill her children.
Rich, I couldn’t agree with you more. Obama is doing what he said he was going to do in his election campaign. The PEOPLE of this country elected him and the Democrats into power based on that platform. He inherited the worst economy we’ve seen since the Great Depression and there is no magic wand for getting out of it. However, the American sheeples are angry and confused as to why there is not a turkey in every pot, etc. So, in a fight of righteous indignation, we/they voted in another party that promised even more change (if reverting to the previously tried and failed policies counts as change). Face it, the American people don’t want real change! They want to believe that everything will just be “ok”. Even if deep down they know that there is no magic solutions. Harry Potter for Prez in 2012!
Not true of Russ Feingold. Ron Johnson outspent him almost 3/1.
right, Rich, take a look at history when this has happened, the president was elected to a 2nd term
Um Brian, were you elected to speak for ALL of the people in the U.S.? If so I must have missed it, because you certainly don’t speak for me or 99.9% of the people I know.
Jamie: No, I wasn’t elected to speak for the people. The people spoke for themselves yesterday very clearly. 65+ House seats, 6+ Senate seats and 7+ Governorships speaks *very* loudly.
How can you cheer for the re-election of a man who cut healthcare for BABIES, while having expensive filtered water imported internationally for his ice cubes on the taxpayer dollar? Rick Perry is a miserable governor, and it’s really unfortunate that the only way we’ll ever be rid of his as a state is when he leaves office to run for president. God help us all.
…for BABIES whose parents are either illegal and won’t get insurance or whoa re too lazy to get a real job and actually REPORT their income instead of getting paid under the table so they can’t “afford” insurance.
One day, rebecca, you too will be able to vote. Maybe you already can, but your childish response makes me think you are younger. Or maybe you just went through the dismal education system in Texas, thanks to one Rick Perry.
As a teacher in Texas I get paid better than I would in ANY other state (when you figure in salary vs cost of living). If that’s thanks to Rick Perry then bring it on!! Also, as a teacher in Texas I can tell you that putting more liberal “feel good, aren’t they sooo pathetic and need extra chances because they are poor” government officials in office is going to make the education system even weaker! Bring on the harsher consequences and put more pressure on the parents!!
Great Allie… You get paid more for doing a terrible job.
Allie, how long have you been teaching? My wife has been doing it for almost 10 years with an MBA and I can tell you that she is vastly underpaid! Her students in South Ft. Worth (very poor) all passed the mandatory TAKS test with a 93% passing percentage. She didn’t receive anything but job satisfaction. Harsher consequences for students and parents mean absolutely nothing to people below the poverty line – what more can you do to them? That attitude produces more criminals and menial labor – not what America needs. Perry has done zip for education in this state – ranked 48th out of 50 states. Thanks Rick Perry and George Bush before him. No Child Left Behind is a colossal failure and the current Board of Education is filled with religious right wing nuts that are emulating the Taliban when it comes to teaching our children. Now what?
Good Allie, you are “paid better” than any other teachers in the country, for doing an awful, awful job. Texas ranks at the bottom of most lists as far as SAT scores, expenditures per student, and high school graduation rates. The comptroller’s website states that teacher pay is ranked 33rd in the nation, and that Texas does not keep up with national pay, and has not since 1999. At first I thought you probably weren’t really a teacher, that you were just mouthing off. But, considering the stellar teachers that had when I was in K-12, I realize that you probably are. You should feel shame for the way our system runs in Texas, not pride that you get high pay while districts misappropriate funds, or in the case of Dallas County, outright embezzlement to refurnish the superintendent’s office. You should know better.
It’s sad to think that Allie probably passes on her biased political views to the chidren she teaches.
When I discovered that students who graduated from Georgia had all or majority of their tuition paid by the Georgia’s lottery profits, it makes me wonder where all of Texas’ tax and lottery profits go!? Obviously making education a priority is not on Rick Perry’s agenda.
Rick Perry is the Sarah Palin ( with less balls ) of Texas. I wound’t be bragging about that.
Actually Rebecca, many of the Dems in Texas I voted for did get elected. Eddie Bernice Johnson whooped a** (love her) and is still in the House, Craig Watkins is still my D.A and he’s awesome– the list for my area could go on and on. I’m in Dallas County, we’re pretty blue.
I watch both shows religiously but after a while, I changed the channel and deleted it from my DVR. Couldn’t take it anymore. I am trying to look forward to 2012 but can only think of the damage that we will see before the time comes.
I don’t think I can handle watching straight up news everyday without my head exploding. Without Stewart and Colbert, I’d be miserable and probably misinformed. I hope you change your mind.
You’re an idiot if that crap is your main source of “news.” I really fear for the future of our country if younger people are really as stupid as you and the rest of the Colbert/Stewart viewers.
Sounds like someone could use a touch of sanity, eh Kevin?
My generation trusts men like Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert because pundits on other networks have proven themselves, time and again, to be untrustworthy. I feel disconnected to your generation largely because of your lack of a grasp on things like “facts.”
Just because they are comedy shows doesn’t mean you can’t get real news from them, Kevin. Colbert and Stewart have different formats than most of your traditional news outlets, but I think, and I don’t think I’m alone given their popularity, the way they structure their programs and deliver the news actually helps to clear up the confusing and muddled topic of today’s politics. I wouldn’t worry about people who go to Stewart and Colbert for news, I would worry about the people who watch Fox News for their information; that’s what’s really scary.
Kevin watches Fox News.
BURRRRRRNNNNNNNNNN!
No, really, he does.
Stewart/Colbert for President ’12
Dear Kevin,
I don’t think (or hope) that anyone believes that Jon Stewart should be the only source of news. He does, however, have a different viewpoint from CNN, which has a different viewpoint from MSNBC, which has a different viewpoint from Fox News.
Hey Don…I have something you can grasp:)
Don, Joe: settle down! Stewart/Colbert are entertainers. If you rely on them for actual news, do you rely on Jay Leno for news? They are clearly satire and comedy inspired. Ask them, they will tell you themselves! They are funny and often far-out in their statements but, come on, saying they are “news worthy” is really lacking in credibility. Why all the Fox-bashing anyways? Do you even watch it or just rely on the “other news stations” telling you about Fox? You DO realize that MSNBC and such on TV and NPR on the radio are liberal channels don’t you? Do you complain about them or just Fox? Fox is a good check-and-balance against the other extremes. But, use your own intellegence and research the issues yourself. By ignoring and discounting Fox, however, you are missing the other side of the story. That is not good investigative research in my opinion.
Why can’t the media just report the news? I don’t want FOX’s opinions any more than I want MSNBC’s or NPR’s. I would rather just have the facts. That just isn’t profitable in today’s 24 hour news cycle I guess!
IMHO, it’s the news media (all types of news media) that’s degrading society right now. If you watch FOXnews, they push the conservative agenda. If you watch MSNBC, you get an earful of the liberal agenda. CNN tries its best to be bipartisan, but they really just waver back and forth.
Until we as Americans learn to stop just WATCHING the news media and INTERPRET it, forming our own opinions about what we see and hear, we’re forever going to be swayed by public opinion. That only leads to hate – because when a lot of people get together and set their minds to something… well, mob mentality is a real thing.
The truth is half of the hot button issues we’re so passionate about these days like gay marriage and abortion are things that really don’t even concern us unless we ourselves are gay or considering abortion. Why can’t we just let everyone live the life they want to live? Why can’t we worry about ourselves and our priorities? Isn’t that the whole reason our founding fathers and their constituents left England? Freedom from oppression, anyone? Religious freedom and tolerance? If I’m speaking a foreign language, please let me know.
John Boehner’s name is a little too close to John Boner for me to be comfortable with him.
I love him campaigning to “change Washington”. Uh, Sparky, so what have you been doing since you’ve been in office? Sitting on your hands?
Oh that’s right – throwing a toddler-esque hissy fit and refusing to represent your constituents because your party wasn’t in power.
It’s harder for Stewart to take it as far as Colbert. Colbert’s playing a character that can go as far as he wants with no worries. Everything that Stewart says is seen as a reflection of himself and his reputation and over-analyzed by the media (which makes me wonder, why do they have so much time to analyze Jon Stewart?). I thought Jon had a lot of great one-liners tonight, though some of the correspondence bits took away from the show (Olivia Munn). Colbert seemed like he was having trouble staying in character. They both had solid shows. That being said, they both have great material for the next two years. Which, to be fair, I wish they didn’t.
Best Line of the night was Oliva Munn referring to Bohener as an “orange American.”
True, but that little segment went on waaaay too long.
Bravo to split government!
Yes, so the policy of doing very, very little (or from the Reppublican side, nothing at all)will continue until the rest of the country falls apart. Yippee! /sarcasm
might sound naive here, but, why not third major political party? one that will represent the people and not corporate America? lets face it, no one is really representing us. Both parties are way too deep into their own personal interests, and that is getting rich through corporations and other interest groups
It sounds like a good idea and would be awesome if it could work that way. That being said, “we” are a very indecisive people and would probably have a stroke trying to contemplate a world that is shades of gray, rather than black/white, yes/no.
The system isn’t set up to support more than two parties. It isn’t going to happen.
No, because its always just black and white, either or, there can never, ever be (gasp) compromise!! A third party would be just that.
Did anyone vote for The Rent is too D… High guy?
Nah, it hasn’t worked on Survivor…I don’t think it would work here. (The final three sucks! Bring back the final two!)
I am a 17-year-old, and I don’t know the difference between a democrat, a republican, a conservative, or a liberal, and somehow I’m proud for it. I don’t think the current political system is working, and in the future something better needs to be implemented. So much money is wasted on the stupid people, with their campaigns, and then there’s all the garbage about their personal lives. Bring on the political revolution!
You should never be proud of ignorance. Before you can change the system you need to see why it’s broken. Claiming to be ignorant, and proud to be ignorant, just makes me happy that you aren’t old enough to vote. Keep watching MTV sweetheart, they’ll tell you what to do.
Liz, you’re right in saying that “you should never claim to be ignorant.” However, if more teens took interest in politics in general like Jen has, it would change the game as we know it. I would love to sit down with Jen and people like her, and truly listen to what they have to say.
Merredith, Jen has not taken an interest in politics if she doesn’t know the difference between a conservative and a liberal. She is very right that the system is broken, bt being ignorant of how or why will not lead to a better one.
The system is working exactly as it was intended to work. When the majority wants to do something that the minority strongly opposes the minority has the right to block that action. There is a tendency to call the system broken because you can’t have your way, but the system wasn’t designed for you to have your way.
Dear Jen,
I like your attitude. I also appreciate that a 17 year old is paying attention to politics and seeing it as shades of gray. I’m only 9 years older than you, and I am jaded by the political process. Don’t get jaded- get involved. Read, research, and stick to Jon Stewart. His show may be on Comedy Central, but he is the smartest and most direct “news source” I’ve seen.
I agree, just b/c you don’t know the difference between lib and con does not mean that you are an idiot teen. The definitions of those ideologies has changed with the centuries several times. Its good that you, and hopefully others like you, can’t tell the difference. hopefully, then, a message can be sent that there is ok difference save for the facade of dogmatic gibberish that comes out of the mouths of both sides.
thank you Meredith. I wouldn’t say I’m proud of being ignorant, but rather that I’m not wasting my time on labels and stereotypes. I’m not very interested in politics, but I do want to have a say in how my country is run. The current political system is not working, but I’ve realized that just pointing that out isn’t really helping. Maybe it is time for me to educate myself and work towards a better future.
Jen, here’s an idea! When you turn 18, relocate to Afghanistan. It is SO easy to understand the system there! You won’t be fettered to the impossible-to-understand political mechanics of the USA. That way, you can continue to live the same self-absorbing, self-centered life you currently pursue (unless of course it’s raining outside..I mean, who want’s to get wet in the pursuit of a dream, eh?) In Afghanistan you can concentrate 100% on what really matters–YOU. “Have it YOUR way,” as Ronald McDonald says, right? Why, just LOOK at ALL the people, legal and illegal, immigrating to Afghanistan! And the best part? As a woman, you will be afforded the highest recognition you deserve by giving you the simplest form of government that simply works! Ready to hear what it is? There are merely 2 choices in any given political circumstance. First you can agree with THERE WAY. Secondly, you can agree with THERE WAY. What, I ask you, could be better??? Have a great life in Afghanistan. After all, you deserve it.
This was a really dumb post.
“Have it your way” was the Burger King slogan.
If you don’t understand the basics of politics, how are you going to revolutionize it? Just saying.
Because no third party has the money to spend $1 mil per week per state for months, as both parties were doing in Nevada. And sadly, THAT’S what it takes to win a seat in Congress now.
Those same corporations can now give as much $ to a candidate as they desire… and not even disclose the amounts… so it’s only gonna get worse, not better.
His comments and his reaction prove that Stewart is nothing more then another left wing puppet. He tries to pretend to be a moderate. How long after the last election did he finally make an Obama joke. He should love this now he can make fun of the house for two years withouth offending his left 95% white base
He pretends to be moderate? No, he really doesn’t.
I’m a black guy and I watch both Stewart & Colbert religiously. It’s neither of their fault that more minorities don’t watch their shows. They do nothing to discourage it, sometimes it just works out that way. So, reprimanding either of them because of who they appeal to is asinine in my opinion.
I am actually glad that congress is split. I don’t vote down party lines–trust me, there are morons on both sides of the aisle. Now they will HAVE to work together to get something done. And as for repealing anything from the last term, I doubt it will happen. Democrats still have that senate majority and Obama can still veto.
Unfortunately they WON’T work together and NOTHING will get done for the next two years. We are too entrenched in political cement to be able to move towards one another in the spirit of compromise and what’s best for the country.
The alternative, Bob, is that NOTHING will get done. Which, sadly, is more likely. Boehner (aka, the Tall Oompa-Loompa) is the King of No, and sees it as his job to make sure nothing at all will ever get done.
Clinton was in the same position, but things still got done. I’m a little worried about the ‘no compromise’ rhetoric from Boehner, but, for the good of all of us, I sincerely hope that history proves cj and Monet wrong.
I stopped watching Stewart and Colbert a while ago because I don’t like bullies – in this time, when young people die because they become a target or are made fun of them, these two comedians get away with it in the name of satire. I am a liberal and today I can look at my face. I don’t need the likes of Colbert or Stewart to “guide” me. I have a brain.
Lets be honest with ourselves folks. We are in a quandry. There are not enough Americans willing to learn what their representatives really stand for. Many Americans are more willing to listen to their favorite Reality TV Show, Nascar Driver, Movie Star, Football or Baseball Player or Wrestler than analyize what the Politicans are saying out of both sides of their mouths. It’s no wonder there is so much apathy in this country. THe Majority are Frickin Ignorant.
Jerry totally agree with you on the fact that upwards of 50% of voters have no idea what their official stands for. More people vote because of what their union told them to do, the color of skin, name recogintion ect.. Although this election more then any if you voted for the health care law people knew it and voted against you. I know the Main Street media would try to deny that but the truth is the truth
Actually, I know my rep voted for the health care bill and that was a large part of the reason I voted for him again. And I’m glad he’s keeping his job because he did the right thing.
I’m with Jess. I was having a hard time deciding between 2 candidates (pretty similar on lots of issues), but when one said he would fight to exempt my state from the health care reform, I voted for the other guy.
The Main Street media is Corporate America which controls EVERYTHING!
I have no doubt that the Dems will throw Obama under the bus in the next few months.
Loved Colbert last night. Jon’s guest was obviously a lib – and I typically vote that way – but that was too much.
What I found strange is that I went to Stewart and Colbert for election results. I tried CNN (the first newschannel on my guide that I found) and after, no kidding, one minute, I muted the TV. I’m old school. I watch the news for for facts and those characters were all giving their opinions on what they *think* would happen next. Just the facts, please!
I agree with April in that watching CNN was a waste of time last night. It was like listening to 40 people watch grass grow.
I think James Carville had the best comment of the night on CNN, when he chastised the other talking heads for speculating out so damn much by saying, “I just want to know what’s going to happen tonight.” Smart man.
One of the problems is that news used to be a requirement for broadcast television stations, but that requirement has been lifted. Now, the so-called “news” is a profit-making show rather than a public service. As a result, the shows are no longer interested, nor do they have any incentive, to report facts without giving it spin.