I think it’s a good one. I part ways with many liberal and moderate friends over Citizens United. I simply cannot see that having the government regulate the political speech of any citizen or group of citizens will have a positive effect.
Learn to live with freedom of speech. It may be messy, but it’s going to be better in the long run than regulated speech. As for money, the Obama campaign in 2008 proved how effective internet based fundraising can be.
I’ve been rather interested in the reaction to Keith Olbermann’s couple of day vacation. There was quite an outcry when Fox’s parent corporation donated money to the Republicans and at the time I wondered just who imagined that such a corporation would actually be neutral on such issues. Where they give their money is a substantially smaller issue, in my view, than the way they portray the news.
But with Olbermann we have the rather humorous situation of MSNBC trying to pretend that there was some sort of objectivity left in their afternoon and evening lineup on cable. I’m not sure who might have thought there was such a thing, but apparently the company was determined to make sure whoever it was remained deceived.
Of course, Olbermann daily does more for candidates and causes than his three donations would have done. I have no objection to MSNBC enforcing their rules. Let’s just not make the mistake of supposing that objectivity was anywhere on the playing field. Purely objective news is a myth, and always has been. There was no golden age when news reporters were purely neutral.
What we need to do is recognize the biases, and learn to watch, read, and listen critically. That is the only defense against biased reporting. The issue, I think, is not balance. A scales may be balanced even when using false weights. The issue is truth seeking.
Olbermann’s show was an opinion show before, and it’s an opinion show now. There was never any doubt about which way that show (and its network) was leaning. Nobody had any reason to be deceived.
I could have sworn I was a left-leaning libertarian, and certainly more moderate than this one makes me:
My Political Views
I am a right social libertarian
Right: 3.77, Libertarian: 5.64
Political Spectrum Quiz
Though this part doesn’t surprise me a bit:
My Foreign Policy Views
Score: -7.02
Political Spectrum Quiz
And this was a bit further left than I’d expect:
My Culture War Stance
Score: -8.09
Political Spectrum Quiz
Oh well! You can try the quiz yourself. I found a number of the questions excessively ambiguous. What exactly does “legislating on moral issues” mean? I consider murder a moral issue and would certainly expect legislation on the subject.
(HT: Power of Suggestion)
I found this image via the Vietnamese commerce web site Thuonggiaviet.com. I don’t read Vietnamese at all, but I occasionally read the site using Google Translator, a mildly challenging proposition.
I tracked the image to the artist, John Strieder, on deviantart.com. I’m not posting it here, despite the fact that I found it on a number of other sites (9 thus far), because I can’t find any permission to use it online. Check it out, though. I’d be interested in your comments. Besides the interesting 3d effects, how much of this do we do to our children?
These are five significant sites I read because of the things on which I disagree with the writer(s). That doesn’t mean I disagree with everything, but rather that I was attracted to the site and continue to read primarily because of my disagreement.
I read a number of news sources and some individual blogs on major sites (Huffington Post, Townhall.com, etc), but I’ve avoided those in this list.
There are a stack of “also-rans” in my Google reader, and if I wrote this list tomorrow I would probably choose some different blogs, but these will do for now! I’m so disagreeable, there are plenty to choose from.
There is very little that offends me more than the idea of manipulating people into Christian events or trying to convert them by force.
I’ve been thinking of writing something about this for some time. The problem is that I think it’s fairly clear. First, there’s no legitimate legal reason to prevent the building of this mosque. Second, I don’t think it is appropriate, nor does it send a good message, for Christians to oppose those of another faith having their place of worship where they would like, provided they fulfill other requirements of the law, such as property ownership and zoning requirements.
But today Dave Black went a step further, and I think he has a good point about how Christians should behave in such situations. We should always bear in mind that our kingdom is not here, and that our primary call is to be witnesses of our true kingdom.
…What is a kingdom mindset? It’s an attitude of gentleness that affirms the values and dignity of others, even those who are different from us. It’s an attitude of humility that considers others as better than one’s self. …
Read the rest at The Jesus Paradigm.
Our local excuse for the press, the Pensacola News Journal, is in endorsements season, and like many papers, they pick one in each of the primaries. Thus they have endorsed one Republican and one Democrat for governor.
I should note first that I have a problem with newspapers or media organizations endorsing politicians. I don’t mind individual journalists expressing their opinion. But newspaper endorsements have always seemed questionable to me. Of course, if it is a journal with an expressed political position, there may be some justification.
But to pick one in each primary implies, in my view, that there is somehow a “best” candidate without consideration of ideas, the sort of good general public servant. But I would not want to vote for an extremely efficient administrator, for example, who would promote (efficiently, of course) ideas of which I disapproved.
I think the news media should inform us about the candidates. They could list all the elements they use in their endorsements and then compare the candidates–without actually endorsing someone.
I must confess that I only read the PNJ when someone forwards me an article, or when it turns up in one of my topic-based news searches. So perhaps I’m not entirely objective about them either. But this isn’t really just about the PNJ. This is a frequent practice by newspapers, and I don’t think it’s a positive contribution to the political system.
