And don't fall down any stairs. D= I'm not leaving juuuust yet. 
What the hell was that?
Not really, they can just make symbolic concessions and the media will report as though they're doing real change.
Probably.
Probably yeah. He didn't really run as a dove; he always emphasized that he would be intensifying combat operations in Afghanistan and a substantial of the 18-35 bloc that voted for him had strong anti-war sentiments but it's noteworthy that Obama fell behind in polls after the RNC until the worst part of the recession started. Effectively he was elected as a result of the economy. But yeah, according to the media he's decreased the military budget (he's actually increased it by about 4%) and he's a huge pacifist because he's willing to sit down and talk with countries like Iran and Cuba (which really is just common sense and shows you how completely unhinged the Republican Party is).
Nah it's fine. If you want to start a thread in there go ahead, it's definitely moar appropriate there anyway and moar people will respond to it.Alright, sorry for asking.
No one is using laws to preventing anyone from saying anything. The thing is, this is the internet. It's effectively a bottom-up method of communication. That's never existed before. The media is a top-down system. He who controls the media corporations controls the message that gets out. It's a form of de facto censorship - the government isn't doing it, a private corporation is doing it. If someone says something that's unacceptable to the people controlling the media, they can be forced out. So effectively, yeah, we've always had nominal freedom of speech, but the fact is that the powerful, and those who are willing to voice opinions that the powerful wish to have voiced, have always had a lot more freedom of speech than the rest of people have had. Thanks to the internet that's changing somewhat now and there are all kinds of books coming out bemoaning the "cult of the amateur" and the "dumbest generation" and such because the idea of bottom-up control is very threatening to the people in power. It may not last if net neutrality is done away with, but for now there actually is the potential that things may change eventually. Still, the majority of people don't use the internet as obsessively as we do, and even of those who do, probably only a very small percentage are willing to research politics thoroughly and find out about things like this. If real change is going to happen it's going to take a lot more coordination.
Maybe you're starting to get sick? With more than a cold, obviously. Maybe. Hehe.
Why would the media do that? Do they get paid or somtehing?
Is he more focused on the economy or getting us out of the war? Because getting us out of the war would give us a bigger jump on the economy, right? Or am I wrong?
I don't know what I should call it, tbh. I suck at making threads.
Wouldn't the same be said for Bush though?
They're owned by corporations who don't want anything to change. NBC is owned by General Electric, ABC is owned by Disney, CBS is owned by Viacom, Fox is owned by Rupert Murdoch (who can basically be considered a mouthpiece of the Republican Party), etc. These are all giant corporations who serve to gain absolutely nothing from anything but the most rigid form of pro-corporate capitalism and thus they have a vested interest in making sure that other forms of economic organisation aren't even talked about.
No there's a very strong case that ending the war would help the economy since it would free up money to be spent on other things, though there's also the possibility of screwing things up by pulling out too quickly and allowing things to descend into chaos as we did by pulling suddenly out of Afghanistan after the "collapse" of the Soviet Union, which allowed the Taliban to take over. I think Obama wants to be cautious about preventing a repeat of that, which is commendable, though other parts of his foreign policy are much less so. But so it goes, you don't get anyone perfect in charge.
"The Propaganda Model and associated discussion" would probably be fine.I don't know what I should call it, tbh. I suck at making threads.
Bush ran as a compassionate conservative and then proceeded to make a complete mockery of the idea of compassion for the rest of his two terms in office
That didn't stop the media from buying the charade wholesale though.
no uStop editing Aaron.
No problem.
Yeah one thing America actually is #1 at is legal freedom of speech. Europe actually has outclassed us in just about everything else (Scandinavia in particular is way way ahead on indicators like standard of living and people's satisfaction with the level of democracy in their countries), but we actually have much more freedom to say what we mean without consequences from the government than people in any European country that I'm aware of.And hey, at least America is the most outspoken country. We don't get killed if we speak up.
I cut myself.You liked it on the inside.
Not cool.