How can we become fully and truly human in a world plagued by violence, pain, sorrow, greed, exploitation, war, failure and death?
Matthew, I hope you are smart enough to not use Huliq as a news source.BYT
It is me again.You hope she doesn'trun again, Why?If she is as much a light-weight, I'd think those way over on the Left would encourage her to run.
Good observations. First, Huliq. Well Huliq is an amateur production. It has no fact checking dept. And no professional journalists. So, indeed I do not use it as a news source, at least not by itself. I write stories for Huliq, and get paid by page views, so I often link or refer to the sight so more people will view my stories.What I like about the page is that it shows ordinary people struggling to make sense of and get their news - and allows them to share that. But it is not a news source.I should lay my own news sources bare. I get my news information from Reuters, BBC World News, the Associated Press, and Al Jazeerha. I get most of my commentary and analysis from PBS, Newsweek, The N. Y. Times, The Guardian, and sometimes NPR. I do my basic fact checking at Media Matters, Snopes, and fact.check.org. These are not all my sources, but they are my most common.Now to the Sarah Palin comment. I'd actually like to see the Republicans run a viable candidate. I'm not impressed with Obama. If, however, Obama runs again Newt, or Romney, or Bobby Jindal, or Palin .. I will have no choice but to vote for him over these screw balls! In short, I'd like to see a thoughtful Republican candidate, not a imcompetant and radical right wing reactionary from Wasila!I think it is unfortunate how much the far-right has taken over the GOP. Rush Limbaugh, Blen Beck, Anne Coulter: these mentally ill hate-mongers and their brood has taken over the party! It's very sad.You know the John McCain of 2000 (not the latter sell-out to the right wing McCain) would have got my vote over Gore, and if Colin Powell would have run, he would have probably got my vote too. And I think of thoughtful Republicans like Chuck Hegel on Nebraska - these folks - good, respectable conservative thinkers and policy makers - are been marginalized in the party, to both the detriment of the party and the detriment of democracy as, it has made one party of our two party system a party of extremists. And that's quite sad, if you look at past Republican presidents, e.g. Eisenhower, or the first Bush, (or even Nixon!), they governed as moderates and actually represented more of the country for it. You will like the post I'm publishing tomorrow. In that post, I will be honestly asking how folks like me can make common cause and find common ground with conservatives - real conservatives, not these right-wingers.Thanks for the comments!M. W.
""Rush Limbaugh, Blen Beck, Anne Coulter: these mentally ill hate-mongers and their brood has taken over the party!""It does seem like they have, doesn't it? :-(I guess we have to go back to these folks.First, none of them are mentally ill.Second, these folks are communicators, whose earnings are directly tied to how much BS they can stir up. I shall add, that they do a pretty good job, and are very well paid for doing it.I do not agree with 95% of what they say, but they are no different than the Lefties like Ed Schultz, K Olberman, and the rest of the goofballs that were on Air America.Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow are not to be included with the goofballs, though they certainly have a strong slant.I wish Jack Kemp could have worked the system enough to make it to the top too.I read the WashPo then the Wash Times. I read the NY Times then FNC. I also look at the CS Monitor, and Reuters.I don't think I need to see what the middleEastern paper has to say, but that's me.byt
Well they are either Crazy, or charlatans or both. What they really are is irrelvant. They have become the voice of the right-wing, that's scary.Olbermann is biased, and a bit pompous. But I think his commentary is far more factually accurate, his opinions more reasonable, his commentary more intelligent, and his willingness to criticize his own side more apparent than those others. Despite his problems he is not the same type of figure as Glen Beck or Limbaugh. Though, I grant that he is partisan and, like them, can be a loud-mouth.Huliq news is not MiddleEaster, the editor lives in North Carolina. But you may have been Al Jazeehera. Al Jazeera is far superiro to most American News! But no matter. The washington posts and washington times are good, I look at them sometimes too.Again, I want to work with and find commong ground with moderates and thoughtful conservatives. It's only the "right-wing" which is the "Beck/Hannitty/Palin" crowd, which I fear, despise, and passionately oppose.
Palin has no chance in US politics, unless she reinvents herself. Perhaps that is a reason she has steped down.It is amazng what a person can learn if they spend 40 years in the wilderness.I don't know if you noticed, but my read news list was a yin/yang deal. I prefer to see what each side says on an issue, then judge which is more plausable.By staying with propaganda sheets on only one side, no matter how well written, or how much a person agrees, they are missing part of the story.My favorite show is Red Eye, which comes on at midnight here and 3:00am in the East.In almost every show, I catch myself LOLing. Their purpose is to present a funny/intellectual show with a "Right" perspective.The 3 folks that are always on come from the Left, Right and the Libertarian-Center.It is a nice mix.If you watch, please watch it more than once, and watch it all the way through. I surfed by it many times because on first blush it seemed so outrageous. I wish I had stayed with it from the beginning.Brutus
I did notice the back and forth on the news sources.I'll check out that show, sounds interesting. I do read a couple conservative blogs, and Occassionally read the Wall-Street Journal and the National Review. But these are generally very far right. That, of course, just gets my anger up.So I've been looking for more reasonable conservative news outlets. One can sometimes find some such articles in the N. Y. Times (e.g. David Brooks), Newsweek (Zakaria - who is a moderate/centrist) and Time ... that's much more sane and sensible - though, naturally, I still rather strongly disagree with much of it.
I should add that, despite appearances, I'm not a full blown liberal. I am pretty strongly left on Economic and social justice issues. I am also theologically quite liberal. But on certain moral issues I am rather moderate, or in the middle, - e.g. Abortion, Euthansia, Capital Punishment, the use of force, Family values. Though, confessedly - and I think quite correctly - I would be defined as very liberal on gay marriage. I believe in full legal marriage for gay people, and I find no moral wrong in homosexuality at all. But on other such Personal moral issues, I tend toward the center.
Comments from many different points of view are welcome. But I will not publish any comments that are hateful, insulting, or filled with profanity. I welcome and encourage dialogue and disagreement but will not publish any hate speech.