The "Sanity" Rally. Is Jon Stewart naive?

[sandinista]

I can totally understand why some people might get upset at the level of discourse and choose to remove themselves from it, and it doesn't have anything to do with whether Sandinista is refuting an argument or not.

If you reread my post, you'll see that my point had to do with whether the other person was able to refute Sandinista, not whether he is able to refute them. He makes a point, they don't like being challenged with an argument they think is wrong but can't think of a valid counterargument to, they get annoyed.

I would not characterize Sandinista as someone who is fun to discuss anything with.

I find it fun. "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."

especially internet forum words...I mean...really?

[Warren Dew]

Oh, and the reason a "green" party that truly focuses on the environment will never gain power is simple: only humans are allowed to vote. If the trees voted, they'd win by a landslide.

[sandinista]

Bill Maher had a good talk about the Stewart rally on Real Time last night during 'new rules", listed even more reasons it was less than glorious. The million meh march.

[eXcommunicate]

The less people that vote the less the system is legitimized.

I'm going to have to call you "naive" here, sandinista. The system does not care how many people vote. There would need to be a massive country-wide boycott of the election in order to make an election look illegitimate, which just is not going to happen. No, with the current system we have now the only way to affect change is through very hard work, something not exactly encapsulated by a couple of comedians at a rally with ambiguous goals. The Tea Party pushed the Republicans so far right, not with apathy, but with a true belief in their cause. American "Liberals" are exactly how you described them: weak. They are disorganized and disillusioned. And while I agree with Stewart's general sentiment about the media, his rally couldn't have come at a worse time for the forces of sanity in this election. Anyway, the goal now should be a long hard slog to push the Democrats left of center, instead of allowing them to languish center-right where we've allowed them to drift over the last 30 years. Will The Coffee Party do this? No. They were so far up Stewart's nose on this rally thing it was disheartening. Liberals are taking all the wrong lessons from this electoral defeat, and they're lessons the Republicans and the Tea Partiers hope they learn.

The true lesson is the power of organization and common purpose. That's what won this election for the Republicans. And while the Democrats and "Coffee Party"-types stayed "reasonable" the Tea Party and Republican media machine curb-stomped them utterly. To any rational person a re-evaluation of tactics would be in order, wouldn't it? I thought after the drubbings the right took in 2006 and 2008 that they would re-evaluate their beliefs and adjust accordingly. I think this election proved just how wrong I was and just how much passion and organization can be a force for change (good and ill). The left needs to learn this lesson really fucking quick. Stop listening to the media shills and right-wing blogosphere harping about how the Democrats need to tack to the right. The media shills and left-wing blogosphere said the Republicans needed to tack left after their loss in 2008. Look how wrong they were. 50% of the conservative "Blue Dog" coalition was destroyed last Tuesday, while 95% of the Congressional Progressive Caucus was re-elected. Standing up for Progressive principles was victorious in the Democratic party, while wishy-washy corporatism did nothing to help those Blue Dog Dems. The course is clear for Progressives, and that is to stick with the Democratic Party and to push its course towards a New Progressivism for the 21st century.

[maiforpeace]

I can totally understand why some people might get upset at the level of discourse and choose to remove themselves from it, and it doesn't have anything to do with whether Sandinista is refuting an argument or not.

If you reread my post, you'll see that my point had to do with whether the other person was able to refute Sandinista, not whether he is able to refute them. He makes a point, they don't like being challenged with an argument they think is wrong but can't think of a valid counterargument to, they get annoyed.

I would not characterize Sandinista as someone who is fun to discuss anything with.

I find it fun. "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."

especially internet forum words...I mean...really?

Fun to be nasty and mean? So we won't be getting any reports of being personally attacked from either of you I expect.

[sandinista]

I can totally understand why some people might get upset at the level of discourse and choose to remove themselves from it, and it doesn't have anything to do with whether Sandinista is refuting an argument or not.

If you reread my post, you'll see that my point had to do with whether the other person was able to refute Sandinista, not whether he is able to refute them. He makes a point, they don't like being challenged with an argument they think is wrong but can't think of a valid counterargument to, they get annoyed.

I would not characterize Sandinista as someone who is fun to discuss anything with.

I find it fun. "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."

especially internet forum words...I mean...really?

Fun to be nasty and mean? So we won't be getting any reports of being personally attacked from either of you I expect.

who said anything about nasty and mean? If I report it's only to stop from being reported really. If someone is being a cunt I'll report em instead of being a dick back. Depends on my mood though, I'll report you if this keeps up! (joking....)

[Mahou]

ahhh you're just annoyed because you thought you "had me" by saying "smart people attend large rallies" when I showed that to be an utter falsity you were insulted.

Really dude? It was a joke. There was no point behind it. No hidden message. No insinuated argument. It was just a joke.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

[Warren Dew]

Fun to be nasty and mean? So we won't be getting any reports of being personally attacked from either of you I expect.

I think I'm unlikely to report Sandinista on anything, if that's what you mean. While he can be vehement on issues, he doesn't tend to get personal.

That isn't to say I agree with him on much, as should be obvious from our respective posts. And of course he could change posting habits at some point in the future, so I'm not foreclosing any options.

[Coito ergo sum]

Hey, if sand was wrong, it's hard to see how. The blue voters were all pretty much alive in the same proportions. They just didn't come out to vote. And yet the rally was one of the biggest in D.C. Somebody was naive and the midterms paid for it.

That's not exactly it.

The voters that won the election for Obama in '08 were the "Independent" voters. These folks, to the tune of something like 2/3 of them, voted for Obama in 2008. In 2010, however, that same demographic voted something like 2/3 of them in favor of Republican and Tea Party candidates.

It's not that blue voters didn't come out, it's that the fence sitters hopped from one side of the fence to the other in huge numbers.

[GreyICE]

The "sanity" rally was just a bunch of leftists who secretly realize that Obama went too far, but aren't willing to admit it to themselves yet.

The fact is, the present polarization is directly due to Obama's forcing his "stimulus", bailouts, and health care plan through on party line votes, instead of being willing to compromise in a bipartisan way. Even atheist liberals interested in bipartisanship could learn a lesson from bible: "first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye".

Wait, what the fuck?

Have you been dead for the past decade? The left was called traitors under the Bush administration, by important conservative pundits.

Traitors. Betrayed the United States of America. Sold out America to the enemy. And the repudations from the rest of the right wing? Oh yeah, they either hopped on the bandwagon or said nothing. Crickets.

The left polarized this? Obama is responsible? Fuck you. Obama wasn't calling people traitors before he ran for fucking senator.

[maiforpeace]

The "sanity" rally was just a bunch of leftists who secretly realize that Obama went too far, but aren't willing to admit it to themselves yet.

The fact is, the present polarization is directly due to Obama's forcing his "stimulus", bailouts, and health care plan through on party line votes, instead of being willing to compromise in a bipartisan way. Even atheist liberals interested in bipartisanship could learn a lesson from bible: "first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye".

Wait, what the fuck?

Have you been dead for the past decade? The left was called traitors under the Bush administration, by important conservative pundits.

Traitors. Betrayed the United States of America. Sold out America to the enemy. And the repudations from the rest of the right wing? Oh yeah, they either hopped on the bandwagon or said nothing. Crickets.

The left polarized this? Obama is responsible? Fuck you. Obama wasn't calling people traitors before he ran for fucking senator.

A friendly reminder to please refrain from personal attacks GreyICE.

Our Forum Rules.

[Coito ergo sum]

The "sanity" rally was just a bunch of leftists who secretly realize that Obama went too far, but aren't willing to admit it to themselves yet.

The fact is, the present polarization is directly due to Obama's forcing his "stimulus", bailouts, and health care plan through on party line votes, instead of being willing to compromise in a bipartisan way. Even atheist liberals interested in bipartisanship could learn a lesson from bible: "first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye".

Wait, what the fuck?

Have you been dead for the past decade? The left was called traitors under the Bush administration, by important conservative pundits.

I wouldn't say anyone important. Who? Ann Coulter? Hardly "important."

And, so what? The right were called names by the left - e.g. Moveon.org, Code Pink, International Answer, etc.

[GreyICE]

That's a personal attack? I mean maybe if I called him a wanker or something. I was expressing exactly what I thought of the entire "oh noes the left started it I can't remember the entire Bush administration and the noise conservative 'leaders' were making."

I guess I'll try and find a slightly less expressive way to say what I think of that revisionist piece of bullcrap next time.

[GreyICE]

The "sanity" rally was just a bunch of leftists who secretly realize that Obama went too far, but aren't willing to admit it to themselves yet.

The fact is, the present polarization is directly due to Obama's forcing his "stimulus", bailouts, and health care plan through on party line votes, instead of being willing to compromise in a bipartisan way. Even atheist liberals interested in bipartisanship could learn a lesson from bible: "first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye".

Wait, what the fuck?

Have you been dead for the past decade? The left was called traitors under the Bush administration, by important conservative pundits.

I wouldn't say anyone important. Who? Ann Coulter? Hardly "important."

And, so what? The right were called names by the left - e.g. Moveon.org, Code Pink, International Answer, etc.

Really? So Bill O'Reilly can call people who protested the Iraq War Unamerican, can smear the ACLU and people who support them as traitors, and it's the same as Code Pink, an organization with a membership that probably numbers 10,000 at best? Sean Hannity accuses peace protesters of committing sedition and treason, and it's the same as a video sharing website that took in some nutcases? Savage blasts whoever the hell he wants, and it's the same as a marginalized group of anti-Semites?

And maybe, maybe you'd even have a point if you had republican congressmen standing up and saying this stuff was nonsense, if you had Bush during the election criticizing these folks.

You know, the way John Kerry criticized MoveOn: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... r-the-top/

Where's Bush getting mad at O'Reilly? Where's your beloved Palin speaking up about Savage and Hannity? Where's these 'leaders' who take the principled stand on the right?

[camoguard]

Hey, if sand was wrong, it's hard to see how. The blue voters were all pretty much alive in the same proportions. They just didn't come out to vote. And yet the rally was one of the biggest in D.C. Somebody was naive and the midterms paid for it.

That's not exactly it.

The voters that won the election for Obama in '08 were the "Independent" voters. These folks, to the tune of something like 2/3 of them, voted for Obama in 2008. In 2010, however, that same demographic voted something like 2/3 of them in favor of Republican and Tea Party candidates.

It's not that blue voters didn't come out, it's that the fence sitters hopped from one side of the fence to the other in huge numbers.

Do you think the Rally had an effect?