Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It must suck going through life making an idiot of yourself.
Looks to me like you've learned how to cope with your condition. Good for you!
YOU say it doesn't matter where the money comes from.
That is the problem with many liberals who try to run businesses.
The Walker Report: The GOP Demographics Problem: Whiter Than Maine
For the Republican party, the numbers are damning. Congressional Republican membership is 96.33% non-Hispanic white. That is very white. To give you an idea of how white that is, if the congressional Republicans were a state, they would be the whitest state in the union. In contrast, Maine, the whitest state in the country, is only 95.5% non-Hispanic white.
Don't get mad at me for telling the truth. Besides, for a political party that is more than 90% white, I would think you would be proud that you managed to keep your party so "clean". I bet a lot of your members feel that way.
I'm a registered Democrat, but vote as an independent. The only reason I am so registered is because CA does not have open primaries.
But thanks for playing the Race Card - it's an indicator of your true nature.
The Walker Report: The GOP Demographics Problem: Whiter Than Maine
For the Republican party, the numbers are damning. Congressional Republican membership is 96.33% non-Hispanic white. That is very white. To give you an idea of how white that is, if the congressional Republicans were a state, they would be the whitest state in the union. In contrast, Maine, the whitest state in the country, is only 95.5% non-Hispanic white.
Don't get mad at me for telling the truth. Besides, for a political party that is more than 90% white, I would think you would be proud that you managed to keep your party so "clean". I bet a lot of your members feel that way.
I'm a registered Democrat, but vote as an independent. The only reason I am so registered is because CA does not have open primaries.
But thanks for playing the Race Card - it's an indicator of your true nature.
Pointing out that the Republcian Party is more than 90% white is playing the race card?
It's in its infancy because, prior to the success of conservative radio, they pretty much just billed themselves as talk show hosts talking about the topics of the day. Pure vanilla. They had a liberal slant, but no push was made to promote exclusively the liberal point of view. Their shows were not entertaining, and didn't really get controversial. This is partly because AM was pretty much a wasteland and no one wanted to really invest in it. Then conservative radio came on the scene and did bill themselves as promoting conservatism AND they were entertaining AND controversial. Bringing the AM dial back to life.
I think you got it flipped there. Air America, at least on their leading show (Franken), tried to be too intellectual. Dissecting and attempting to be too logical and laying out 5 point arguments and such. That is what was boring. As much as everyone wants to bash on it, there's a reason why Rush, Hannity and others are successful. Quick, in and & out soundbites that are entertaining and sometimes controversial. Meaning, they promote that conservatives are smarter, wiser, more compassionate, more civil....just generally better people....than liberals (to steal your phrase). But they also do it quickly, using 10 words instead of the 10,000 that Franken used.
So you are saying that Republicans speak more "simply". To be interesting, it has to be "simple". Could you say they are "simpletons"? Because it sounds like you are putting down Republicans. Calling them "simple".
I'm saying that conservative radio is more entertaining. Air America was not. Therefore, conservative radio is flourishing, and Air America failed.
BUT liberals can be just as entertaining on the radio, they just are lagging behind.
Or, in rdean speak, liberals have been too stupid to keep it simple to succeed.
So you are saying that Republicans speak more "simply". To be interesting, it has to be "simple". Could you say they are "simpletons"? Because it sounds like you are putting down Republicans. Calling them "simple".
I'm saying that conservative radio is more entertaining. Air America was not. Therefore, conservative radio is flourishing, and Air America failed.
BUT liberals can be just as entertaining on the radio, they just are lagging behind.
Or, in rdean speak, liberals have been too stupid to keep it simple to succeed.
Or, could it be that because liberals are black, white, Hispanic, Asian, etc, that it's very difficult to put together a radio station that caters to all those different types of people. Conservatives on the other hand, one giant block of white people who think alike and march in lockstep.
I'm saying that conservative radio is more entertaining. Air America was not. Therefore, conservative radio is flourishing, and Air America failed.
BUT liberals can be just as entertaining on the radio, they just are lagging behind.
Or, in rdean speak, liberals have been too stupid to keep it simple to succeed.
Or, could it be that because liberals are black, white, Hispanic, Asian, etc, that it's very difficult to put together a radio station that caters to all those different types of people. Conservatives on the other hand, one giant block of white people who think alike and march in lockstep.
yeah...no.
If liberals are all those, then they have a common theme, and a radio station catering to that common theme can be successful.
Try again.
It would seem that of late, the population of this board has taken a rather pronounced turn to the right.
New members have typically been right-wing oriented, and the posts have taken a decidedly right-wing talking point direction, including much in the way of repetitive spam.
It seems that many of my fellow posters on the left-hand side of things, have found this unpalatable and are posting less and less..
It would be unfortunate to see USMB turn into a right-wing echo chamber, ala Townhall.com.
Perhaps folks on both sides might want to talk about this issue and express their political leanings to see if my assertion has any validity whatsoever.
I, myself, am a leftie.
Almost, but not quite. Rush is entertaining and provocative. Air America, outside of Randi Rhodes, wasn't
Nope.
The arguments that
a) Air America failed because no one wants to listen to liberal ideology
b) Air America failed because liberals don't listen to what other people tell them to think
c) Air America failed because liberals like more intellectual radio
are all wrong.
Looking at the "Politics" section of the USMB today.
About 80% right-wing talking point attack threads.
Really sad.
Looking at the "Politics" section of the USMB today.
About 80% right-wing talking point attack threads.
Really sad.
And yet in the evenings on 'new posts' I have at times found almost the entire first page to be filled with leftwing attack threads.
Do you think that is equally sad?
Typically, a lefty expects fairness to be a static statistical distribution at all times.
Typically, a lefty expects fairness to be a static statistical distribution at all times.
I wasn't talking about the political leaning of the 80% of the posts, I was speaking about their content.
Perhaps you missed that.
Typically, a lefty expects fairness to be a static statistical distribution at all times.
I wasn't talking about the political leaning of the 80% of the posts, I was speaking about their content.
Perhaps you missed that.
Sometimes I don't bother looking into a thread because I only have so much time and the topic isn't of particular interest to me. There are some members who usually do start interesting threads I do at least peek in even if the thread title is mildly offensive and/or not particularly interesting. There are a very few members who are such consistent 'numbnuts' that I have to be really bored to check out a thread they start. But every once in a blue moon even they surprise me with a decent topic.
I guess all this is to say that none of us are going to be served our preferred cup of tea at any given time, but the Board does a pretty good job of providing something for everybody. And what I might label an 'attack thread' might not be seen that way by you or vice versa. It is unrealistic to expect a political discussion board to not have a lot of content critical of whomever is in power, and right now it would be your side that is in power. And it isn't common that your side would be initiating thread critical of our your own side.
If the balance of power should shift in 2010 and 2012, don't you think you'll likely be joining in criticism that will be mostly originating from your side the aisle?
I wasn't talking about the political leaning of the 80% of the posts, I was speaking about their content.
Perhaps you missed that.
Sometimes I don't bother looking into a thread because I only have so much time and the topic isn't of particular interest to me. There are some members who usually do start interesting threads I do at least peek in even if the thread title is mildly offensive and/or not particularly interesting. There are a very few members who are such consistent 'numbnuts' that I have to be really bored to check out a thread they start. But every once in a blue moon even they surprise me with a decent topic.
I guess all this is to say that none of us are going to be served our preferred cup of tea at any given time, but the Board does a pretty good job of providing something for everybody. And what I might label an 'attack thread' might not be seen that way by you or vice versa. It is unrealistic to expect a political discussion board to not have a lot of content critical of whomever is in power, and right now it would be your side that is in power. And it isn't common that your side would be initiating thread critical of our your own side.
If the balance of power should shift in 2010 and 2012, don't you think you'll likely be joining in criticism that will be mostly originating from your side the aisle?
Well, I guess that is all true for the most part.
I'll just have to grin and bear it. I wouldn't let a bunch of spam-trolls force me off an otherwise excellent message board.
Almost, but not quite. Rush is entertaining and provocative. Air America, outside of Randi Rhodes, wasn't
I find Rush to be as un-entertaining as I found Air America. All he does is expound on talking points all day, and repeat what a certain segment of the population wants to hear again and again.
His revisionist history can sometimes be astounding in its brashness, and his claims that his "predictions are almost always right" are only remotely true because he re-writes history.
But we do agree that Randi Rhodes was not entertaining. I found Air America to be just as distasteful as I find Rush Limbaugh.
Nope.
The arguments that
a) Air America failed because no one wants to listen to liberal ideology
b) Air America failed because liberals don't listen to what other people tell them to think
c) Air America failed because liberals like more intellectual radio
are all wrong.
But you see, I was saying that liberals listen to more intellectual radio (or view more intellectual media sources in general) to give the appearance that they are somehow more rational than their conservative counterparts. And I believe that to be true. I was not making a blanket statement that somehow Liberals are more naturally "more intellectual" than other folks.
I was not saying Liberals "don't listen to what other people tell them to think". I think you can find just as many Liberals who fall into the trap of "group think" as you can among conservatives.
Have you listened to NPR? That station puts me to sleep in about 10 minutes of listening, but it certainly creates the air of intellectualism.
