Obama: All this darned media is putting “pressure” on our democracy

[George Costanza]

Knowledge is power. Information is power. The secreting or hoarding of knowledge or information may be an act of tyranny camouflaged as humility.

--Robin Morgan

Funny how the smartest president of all time now calls information a "distraction". Could it be he actually believes the only information we should be allowed to access be government approved?

Only you cons can twist it around like this. I believe he is referring to "DISinformation" that is a threat to our government. Any problem with that?

 

[Skull Pilot]

So the birthers are simply patriotic dissenters who shouldn't be criticized or refuted...

Okay...

no less so than the "patriotic" Kill Bush sign wavers.

Now there's an endorsement...

...hey we're a bunch of stupid fucksticks but we're still better than the people who went around saying they wanted to kill Bush!!

Where was your "outrage" at the Kill Bush people?

And I am not a member of the tea party and I never really worried about Obama's birth certificate. I am just pointing out your hypocrisy.

 

[Jarhead]

Knowledge is power. Information is power. The secreting or hoarding of knowledge or information may be an act of tyranny camouflaged as humility.

--Robin Morgan

Funny how the smartest president of all time now calls information a "distraction". Could it be he actually believes the only information we should be allowed to access be government approved?

Only you cons can twist it around like this. I believe he is referring to "DISinformation" that is a threat to our government. Any problem with that?

Funny.
THAT is the twist.
What he refers to disinformation is not always disinformation.

Speaking of disinformation. When is our CiC going to admit that he MISinformed the public when he inadvertantly cited the facts wrong about the Arizona Law?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Knowledge is power. Information is power. The secreting or hoarding of knowledge or information may be an act of tyranny camouflaged as humility.

--Robin Morgan

Funny how the smartest president of all time now calls information a "distraction". Could it be he actually believes the only information we should be allowed to access be government approved?

Only you cons can twist it around like this. I believe he is referring to "DISinformation" that is a threat to our government. Any problem with that?

And only the government can decide what is disinformation and what isn't?

I'll take my information freely and undiluted in great quantity and make up my own mind. I certainly don't need the ******* government to give me advice on that front and neither should anyone else.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Knowledge is power. Information is power. The secreting or hoarding of knowledge or information may be an act of tyranny camouflaged as humility.

--Robin Morgan

Funny how the smartest president of all time now calls information a "distraction". Could it be he actually believes the only information we should be allowed to access be government approved?

Only you cons can twist it around like this. I believe he is referring to "DISinformation" that is a threat to our government. Any problem with that?

I totally agree and have been very upset at the bush admin, the obama admin, and the MSM for partaking in all this dissinformation....I mean just look at the latest lies about arizona's new immigration laws. The media is out there calling it racist and all sorts of other crap that makes no sense if you read the bill itself.

Kudos to you costanza for being a liberal who understands that all this missinformation from Obama and his MSM buddies is just as bad as the stuff we got from his predecessor, kudso sir!!!

 

[007]

"What good fortune for those in power that people do not think". - Adolf Hitler

"...information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment — rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation. It is putting new pressures on our country and on our democracy." - Barack Obama

He'll do the thinking for you, don't worry so much.

Yet, he's right. You're a ******* birther for christ's sake.

Only because so many people, like his own Grandmother, keep saying he was born in Kenya

Not to mention there is zero proof other than that of where he was born. To deny that is ignorance on a grand scale.

 

[NYcarbineer]

no less so than the "patriotic" Kill Bush sign wavers.

Now there's an endorsement...

...hey we're a bunch of stupid fucksticks but we're still better than the people who went around saying they wanted to kill Bush!!

Where was your "outrage" at the Kill Bush people?

And I am not a member of the tea party and I never really worried about Obama's birth certificate. I am just pointing out your hypocrisy.

If you have evidence that I ever supported the sentiment of killing GW Bush, by all means post it; no one here would be more astounded than I to see that.

Otherwise, what **** is wrong with you?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Now there's an endorsement...

...hey we're a bunch of stupid fucksticks but we're still better than the people who went around saying they wanted to kill Bush!!

Where was your "outrage" at the Kill Bush people?

And I am not a member of the tea party and I never really worried about Obama's birth certificate. I am just pointing out your hypocrisy.

If you have evidence that I ever supported the sentiment of killing GW Bush, by all means post it; no one here would be more astounded than I to see that.

Otherwise, what **** is wrong with you?

If you have evidence that you expressed outrage at it feel free to provide it.

 

[007]

Where was your "outrage" at the Kill Bush people?

And I am not a member of the tea party and I never really worried about Obama's birth certificate. I am just pointing out your hypocrisy.

If you have evidence that I ever supported the sentiment of killing GW Bush, by all means post it; no one here would be more astounded than I to see that.

Otherwise, what **** is wrong with you?

If you have evidence that you expressed outrage at it feel free to provide it.

That would be pointing out his hypocrisy, along with the vast majority of other liberals.

Sssshh... you'll hear the crickets chirping soon.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No. That is how you opted to translate it. But that is not the valid translation.

What I said was:

I use logic to understand what people are saying. Not the clean up men afterwards who try to explain what he meant.

Logically, he was obviously referring to those that show dissent....not those that want to grow flowers.

Seems I made it quite clear that I admit to reading between the lines and that he did not come right out and say it. And I further explained WHY I believe that.

You are having some serious reading comprehension issues today I see.

You also seem to be scrupulously avoiding the 'patriotic' aspect of the irrelevant off topic outburst.

No. I just dont see how it is not relevant. It is absolutely relevant.

Many such as myslef believes the President is referring to dissent.
So, I see it that he is claiming that dissent is putting pressure on democracy.
And seeing as a common phrase used by many Americans is "dissent is patriotic" then I can come to the basic conclusion, that Mr. Obama sees an act that many such as myself see as patriotic as a something putting pressure on democracy.

Cant say it any clearer than that. Anything you do to spin what I said will be futile.

I am entitled to my opinion and I clearly showed you how the patriotic thing is relevant as it pertains to my opinion.

Enjoy.

So in essence you're just reading something into what he said that you don't care who else sees it, or that it can't be tangibly supported by citing and breaking down what he said, you believe it because you believe it.

Okay, you win, I can't argue against your feelings. But don't pretend your feelings constitute an argument.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Where was your "outrage" at the Kill Bush people?

And I am not a member of the tea party and I never really worried about Obama's birth certificate. I am just pointing out your hypocrisy.

If you have evidence that I ever supported the sentiment of killing GW Bush, by all means post it; no one here would be more astounded than I to see that.

Otherwise, what **** is wrong with you?

If you have evidence that you expressed outrage at it feel free to provide it.

Who said they wanted to kill Bush?

 

[Skull Pilot]

If you have evidence that I ever supported the sentiment of killing GW Bush, by all means post it; no one here would be more astounded than I to see that.

Otherwise, what **** is wrong with you?

If you have evidence that you expressed outrage at it feel free to provide it.

Who said they wanted to kill Bush?

They were carrying signs

Surely that is more "violent" than ant tea party sign I have ever seen.

Feel free to express your outrage now.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Remember when Dissent Was Patriotic? What happened to that?

It wasn't as far as the pro-war right was concerned when dissension against the Iraq war occurred.

I don't recall one pro-Iraq war monger calling me patriotic for expressing my opposition to the war.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you have evidence that you expressed outrage at it feel free to provide it.

Who said they wanted to kill Bush?

They were carrying signs

Surely that is more "violent" than ant tea party sign I have ever seen.

Feel free to express your outrage now.

That would be a prosecutable offense imho.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Who said they wanted to kill Bush?

They were carrying signs

Surely that is more "violent" than ant tea party sign I have ever seen.

Feel free to express your outrage now.

That would be a prosecutable offense imho.

Is that outrage?

 

[Jarhead]

You also seem to be scrupulously avoiding the 'patriotic' aspect of the irrelevant off topic outburst.

No. I just dont see how it is not relevant. It is absolutely relevant.

Many such as myslef believes the President is referring to dissent.
So, I see it that he is claiming that dissent is putting pressure on democracy.
And seeing as a common phrase used by many Americans is "dissent is patriotic" then I can come to the basic conclusion, that Mr. Obama sees an act that many such as myself see as patriotic as a something putting pressure on democracy.

Cant say it any clearer than that. Anything you do to spin what I said will be futile.

I am entitled to my opinion and I clearly showed you how the patriotic thing is relevant as it pertains to my opinion.

Enjoy.

So in essence you're just reading something into what he said that you don't care who else sees it, or that it can't be tangibly supported by citing and breaking down what he said, you believe it because you believe it.

Okay, you win, I can't argue against your feelings. But don't pretend your feelings constitute an argument.

No. That is how you opted to take it.

You told me that the phrase "dissent is pratriotic" had absolutely no place in this thread.

And despite all of your spinning and twisting of my words, I showed you how I saw it differently and that it DOES have something to do with this thread.

The fact that you now want to take this debate of ours and imply it was about something else is a real sign of weakness on your part.

But please. Go for it. It is about the best you got anyway. IN MY OPINION.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is from a Barack Obama speech, at the University of Michigan, a couple weeks ago.

Read:

The second way to keep our democracy healthy is to maintain a basic level of civility in our public debate. These arguments we're having over government and health care and war and taxes are serious arguments. They should arouse people's passions, and it's important for everyone to join in the debate, with all the rigor that a free people require

But we cannot expect to solve our problems if all we do is tear each other down. You can disagree with a certain policy without demonizing the person who espouses it. You can question someone's views and their judgment without questioning their motives or their patriotism. Throwing around phrases like "socialist" and "Soviet-style takeover;" "fascist" and "right-wing nut" may grab headlines, but it also has the effect of comparing our government, or our political opponents, to authoritarian, and even murderous regimes.


Again, we have seen this kind of politics in the past. It's been practiced by both fringes of the ideological spectrum, by the left and the right, since our nation's birth.

The problem with it is not the hurt feelings or the bruised egos of the public officials who are criticized.


The problem is that this kind of vilification and over-the-top rhetoric closes the door to the possibility of compromise. It undermines democratic deliberation. It prevents learning - since after all, why should we listen to a "fascist" or "socialist" or "right wing nut?" It makes it nearly impossible for people who have legitimate but bridgeable differences to sit down at the same table and hash things out. It robs us of a rational and serious debate that we need to have about the very real and very big challenges facing this nation. It coarsens our culture, and at its worst, it can send signals to the most extreme elements of our society that perhaps violence is a justifiable response.

 

[Gatekeeper]

They were carrying signs

Surely that is more "violent" than ant tea party sign I have ever seen.

Feel free to express your outrage now.

That would be a prosecutable offense imho.

Is that outrage?

WOW, the guy even has his 'name' on his shirt!

 

[NYcarbineer]

And this:

Today's twenty-four seven echo chamber amplifies the most inflammatory soundbites louder and faster than ever before. It has also, however, given us unprecedented choice. Whereas most of America used to get their news from the same three networks over dinner or a few influential papers on Sunday morning, we now have the option to get our information from any number of blogs or websites or cable news shows.


This development can be both good and bad for democracy. For if we choose only to expose ourselves to opinions and viewpoints that are in line with our own, studies suggest that we will become more polarized and set in our ways. And that will only reinforce and even deepen the political divides in this country. But if we choose to actively seek out information that challenges our assumptions and our beliefs, perhaps we can begin to understand where the people who disagree with us are coming from.


This of course requires that we all agree on a certain set of facts to debate from, and that is why we need a vibrant and thriving news business that is separate from opinion makers and talking heads. As Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously said, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."


Still, if you're someone who only reads the editorial page of The New York Times, try glancing at the page of The Wall Street Journal once in awhile. If you're a fan of Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh, try reading a few columns on the Huffington Post website. It may make your blood boil; your mind may not often be changed. But the practice of listening to opposing views is essential for effective citizenship.

Now, by all means, feel free to pretend that the President never said any of this, or that what he said doesn't mean what it obviously means,

because I understand that acknowledging the above and last post blows your precious narrative to pieces,

and we certainly don't want that to happen.

 

[Skull Pilot]

This is from a Barack Obama speech, at the University of Michigan, a couple weeks ago.

Read:

The second way to keep our democracy healthy is to maintain a basic level of civility in our public debate. These arguments we're having over government and health care and war and taxes are serious arguments. They should arouse people's passions, and it's important for everyone to join in the debate, with all the rigor that a free people require

But we cannot expect to solve our problems if all we do is tear each other down. You can disagree with a certain policy without demonizing the person who espouses it. You can question someone's views and their judgment without questioning their motives or their patriotism. Throwing around phrases like "socialist" and "Soviet-style takeover;" "fascist" and "right-wing nut" may grab headlines, but it also has the effect of comparing our government, or our political opponents, to authoritarian, and even murderous regimes.


Again, we have seen this kind of politics in the past. It's been practiced by both fringes of the ideological spectrum, by the left and the right, since our nation's birth.

The problem with it is not the hurt feelings or the bruised egos of the public officials who are criticized.


The problem is that this kind of vilification and over-the-top rhetoric closes the door to the possibility of compromise. It undermines democratic deliberation. It prevents learning - since after all, why should we listen to a "fascist" or "socialist" or "right wing nut?" It makes it nearly impossible for people who have legitimate but bridgeable differences to sit down at the same table and hash things out. It robs us of a rational and serious debate that we need to have about the very real and very big challenges facing this nation. It coarsens our culture, and at its worst, it can send signals to the most extreme elements of our society that perhaps violence is a justifiable response.

So says Obama who regularly ridicules people who disagree with him