Actually what he/she said isn't without logic, but you failed to think about it before posting a smarmy ass reply.

His/her point (this is just a made up example to demonstrate how %'s can swing rather easily):

If 100 people died in WWII, and 10 of them were from friendly fire: 10% died from friendly fire.

If 50 people died in VietNam, and 10 of them were from friendly fire: 20% died from friendly fire.

If only 10 people died in the Gulf War and 5 of them died from friendly fire: 50% of them died from friendly fire.

The number of friendly causalities didn't change or went down in my above examples, however, the percentage shot up each time. That was his/her point. Because less Americans are dying in modern wars, friendly fire causalities have now become a more visible percentage despite fewer overall American deaths.


>> ^nanrod:

The number one casualty of that comment was logic.>> ^Tymbrwulf:
In order to compare friendly fire statistics you'd have to compare that against actual war casualties.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that each successive war after WWII had less casualties, but the same rate of friendly fire. Mathematically this would show a statistical increase in percentage friendly fire even though the actual casualties are less and less.
I wouldn't say the problem is getting any worse, but it definitely isn't getting any better (which is still a problem).

I agree with a lot of what you say, and like I said in my reply -- it's common for the extremists on either side to be the loudest voices -- despite the fact that they're a vast minority.

There is no true "news" anymore, no matter which channel (or website) you visit, there is an ever present slant, being it right or left leaning, and some sort of agenda in play. The only TRUE method of absorbing news today is to listen to what both sides have to say, and coming to the middle ground on our own (which I try to do). For example, many sifters, diggers, or reddits will either love one opinion maker -- or hate them -- there is [almost] no middle ground. Example: Bill O'Riley is a XXXXX (you can fill in the blank), or the opposite occurs: Bill O'Riley is awesome! Same applies to Maddow, or Olbermann, etc. Fact is, Bill O'Riley is neither a XXXXX or awesome, he's just a person giving HIS opinion, some of which people will disagree with. But like anyone, there ARE things [people] will agree with him on, whether [they] like it or not. In either case, the truth lies somewhere between what Olbermann says and what O'Riley says for the sane people, as both have an agenda, clear or not. These tea-partiers are no different. Instead of getting annoyed by them, or hating them, or calling them all morons, you have to listen to what they have to say, and pick out the rational thoughts they have, not the ones infected by fear or hate. There ARE some things the tea-partiers say that makes sense, whether we like it making sense or not doesn't matter.

Oh, and I tend to ramble, too. Mostly because I like intelligent conversation.

The problem with the media, and the government today (either side), is that you will often see this, and I use this example because it's at the forefront of politics right now.

Republicans are often (almost always) accused of being an elite class of rich people protecting an elite class of rich people. You will often hear democrats regurgitate this, as if they're the voice of the middle class/under class people, which is what they market themselves as.

The problem I have with that is simple: Everyone in Washington (and I mean EVERYONE) and everyone that has a TV show (like Olbermann/Maddow), are VERY rich people. These very people ARE the elite they are supposedly protecting us from. So it's very insulting to me when they try to talk as if they're one of [us] (middle class). I've been to a few political events in my life that are non-party events (both Democrats/Republicans in attendance). It's quite amazing how much hate they spew at each other in the spotlight/on television, and now friendly they all are behind closed doors.

The republicans and democrats almost all universally care about one thing -- votes. And why wouldn't they when they're all paid hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to "fix" all the nations problems when all they end up doing is breaking it more with every change they make [for our sake]. Not to mention the back end 1 million plus dollar book deals they all end up having when they do get voted out and/or leave.



Sorry for rambling.

>> ^peggedbea:

hmmmm, i realize it's a geographic phenomenon and an example of a very vocal minority. but this phenomenon is having an impact on everything else (see the recent texas state board of education decisions), and i believe, a detrimental one at that.
and sure the only exposure to the media i have is through the internet, but it's also very sporadic and i'm generally pretty good at realizing hyped up bullshit when i see it.
let me clarify this last bit. i don't think they're misguided because they fear, hate, distrust the government. honestly, i think most of the time not trusting politicians is warranted and wise. BUT the trust they put in sources that intentionally misguide them("they" being the dozens of people that claim tea party affiliation that i have every day exposure to) is what i think is "misguided fear and distrust".
and yes, "authority" was just a device to emphasize that i speak to dozens of people with tea party affiliation every day, my family get-togethers are dominated by political conversations with tea baggers weekly, i hear loads of first hand "tea bagging nonsense" daily. i'm very curious, very friendly, and work a job where i go into peoples homes and a side effect is forging relatively intimate relationships with the whole household, so when my families are having these discussions (daily), i listen, and ask questions respectfully and try to seem unbiased. my experience is not from sensational news sources, but from the mouths of a movement i find misguided and threatening. my friends and family and neighbors and clients are scared. they tell me they're scared. and they're being scared by sources they trust and shouldn't and that makes me sad.
i think the most damning evidence that this far right, very vocal minority, is actually something to worry about is the texas state board of education. it was slowly infiltrated over the last decade or so by young earth creationists and the christian right. they planned it this way intentionally. the sources that fund the political campaigns of far right christian groups intentionally set their sites on the texas board of education because of the impact decisions in texas have on the rest of the country. the board of education votes every 10 years on new textbooks and new curriculum standards. because of how huge texas is, textbook publishers usually just sell whatever books texas orders to most of the other states in the country. this year the vote came up and and extreme far right political/religious agenda won. now, they have dictated the educational standards of an entire generation, very nearly nation wide.
also, another thing that makes me shudder is my city recently did a multimillion dollar renovation to the science museum. millions of those dollars came directly from oil and gas companies (that also silently fund the tea party movement). we now have a science museum in a major city that is largely dedicated to energy with zero mention of conservation, pollution or climate change. and almost zero mention of alternative sources of energy production in the future.
so my overall points being that, 1. i know,literally, dozens of people that claim tea party affiliation and i don't think any of them stupid or crazy. (but i think the movement as a whole is very stupid and very crazy and very deceptively steered, not individual people) 2. i don't think just because nationwide news outlets sensationalize things, that we can discount the very very real impact this extremely far right, mostly religious, and extremely loud minority is having.
but.. i ramble too.

This is a geographical phenomenon. Where I live, there are nothing but far left liberals that bother protesting, holding signs in the streets, etc. However, I never hear a peep out of what I'd consider the common every day democrat (such as my parents), their honest thoughts, etc. It's always the extremes that have the loudest -- and usually most annoying -- voices.

Also, keep in mind that if the only exposure you have to the news media and pop culture is through sifting (or the Internet), than you are only seeing the most sensational of the sensationalized, and the most popular of pop culture.

You completely lose me, however, when you say people are misguided because they fear, hate, or distrust the government. To top it off, you claim to say this with authority? Far be it for me to correct you on this, but no, you don't. You simply say it because you can, and it's of your opinion, and the word authority doesn't belong anywhere in the sentence. Now, I realize you worded it that way to add emphasis, but there are better ways to add emphasis other than to elect yourself the authoritative voice of reason on VS. Keep this in mind, the reason that this country (and many others) exist, is because of this misguided distrust, fear and hate of governments the world over. Sometimes this distrust, fear, or hate is within reason and is counter-detrimental and necessary. I'm not saying it is or not, as I do not know yet. But time will tell.

>> ^peggedbea:

i wish i could feel that way that "the news media sensationalizes" this stuff, but my reality is that
1. i dont own a television to get sensationalized by. literally the only exposure i have to the "news" media and popular culture is through my sporadic bouts of sifting (i'll go 2 weeks and watch a bunch videos or i'll 2 months and watch 1), or whatever my facebook friends post and i chose to watch.
2. i live/work for/am related to/ very literally surrounded by people with this world view constantly. there is at least one tea party rally at least once a month here. there are right now, literally, 6 tea bagger signs in peoples front yards on my street alone. i do realize this is kind of a very loud minority movement. and that in other parts of the country, or the world at large, this just seems like a few people who are being pumped up by the media to look like dumbshits for profit. but the reality in, what i imagine is most of the southern states, is that this shit is absolutely everywhere. and it is having an extremely real impact on legislation and education, especially in texas (which will impact the education of 46-48 other states because of its sheer size, spending power, population and influence). the growth and popularity of this movement, particularly in texas, is having a very real and lasting and detrimental impact on what will eventually be the rest of the world. (with the dumbing down and godifying of educational standards, which has already happened, and the intense popularization of climate change denial, and making science denialism a populist movement).
and while i love the people i know who buy into this, and empathize with the fear and misguided hatred of the government, i can say with some authority that this world view is absolutely, detrimentally, batshit. and one that feeds and thrives and exploits ignorance and fear.
>> ^hPOD:
As for the other guys comment about tea baggers and sanity, he/she needs to understand that just because someone has a different view of life/set of opinions than he/she does, doesn't make them insane, retarded, stupid, or otherwise. I'm so sick of this kind of crap on Sift and other such boards. Not for nothing, but the media loves to sensationalize the idiocy of society. You almost never see a regular democrat/liberal, republican/neocon or tea bagger in the news...you always see the extreme idiot that makes them all look stupid.

I just wanted to say -- FINALLY -- someone gets it.

As for the "joke", it wasn't very funny. While I don't find O'Donnell particularly intelligent, or amusing, he took what she said out of context.

Not to defend her, what she actually meant to get across was this:
If monkeys evolved into Humans, why are monkey's still around? She messed up when she asked this, and Maher made an equally dumb comment on what she said, but everyone gave him a pass. As you said, we didn't, in fact, evolve from monkeys. And Maher is an imbecile in his own right for alluding to that we did.

As for the other guys comment about tea baggers and sanity, he/she needs to understand that just because someone has a different view of life/set of opinions than he/she does, doesn't make them insane, retarded, stupid, or otherwise. I'm so sick of this kind of crap on Sift and other such boards. Not for nothing, but the media loves to sensationalize the idiocy of society. You almost never see a regular democrat/liberal, republican/neocon or tea bagger in the news...you always see the extreme idiot that makes them all look stupid.

>> ^BicycleRepairMan:

>> ^Fantomas:
She makes an excellent point. Really! If evolution is real, why aren't teabaggers evolving into sane people?

Actually both are invalid points, and Maher isnt really making sense in the video either. As I never tire of mentioning:

1. We did not evolve from monkeys (or from chimps or bonobos or gorillas) we evolved alongside them. They evolved, we evolved, fruit evolved, and so on. Its not a matter of time as Maher implies, because monkeys would never, even if you could watch them evolve and reproduce for a billion years, then turn back time and replay the tape a billion times, evolve into humans. Which brings me to...
2: Evolution is not directed towards a specific goal or goals. if that was true, there are something like 10 million separate "goals" on this planet, species that undoubtably will, in the fullness of time, join in death the 99.9% of all "goals" that are now extinct, either by outright extinction, or by evolving into subspecies that look nothing like them.
EDIT: thats not to say I didn't understand the joke, btw

Sadly, this is pretty much what Bill Maher's show has become. I used to be a fan, but it's pointless to watch it now. He's fallen off the deep end. While not super funny, this skit basically captures every one of his shows the last few years in a nutshell: He calls everyone in the US stupid, and the audience applauds. They go into a discussion on the same topics (week after week), and the same guests (they're actually different people, but they're the same), agree with everything he says and/or make canned 'talking points' that you can tell they are regurgitating.

Quite sad, I used to enjoy this show.

Do note that I did not apply what I said to *every* member of VS, but *half* of them...and IMO, though not scientifically provable, I'm correct in this assessment. About 50% of any thread is riddled with one side or the other side sifters, with almost no in-between and no attempt to even try to understand their opposition. The way you addressed this, you applied what I said to everyone, which I never did.

Onto the meat of the subject, you claimed my post was negative (in so many words), however, it wasn't negative, it was merely in disagreement with the speakers approach, which is a completely different thing. As for cynicism, I can admit it creeps into the equation, however, that doesn't mean I can't listen too and hear what other intelligent people, such as yourself for instance, have to say.

As for the final things you said, I'd agree if you cut out the entire middle portion of the video -- in which he preaches -- if that part didn't exist, I'd agree with you that his point was in attempting to start a discussion, however, he tried to steer the discussion to where he wanted it. He didn't merely speak of a specific subject objectively in the interest of starting a discussion, as he went into a mini-soap-box rant in the middle portion, rendering objective discussion almost moot as his speech became suggestive in nature. At least, this is my opinion on the matter.

>> ^Truckchase:

>> ^hPOD:
Can't make his point clear, so he continues to ramble on endlessly in hopes of accidentally making it...which he never quite does.

There is a point here, which I'll address in a moment. I first need to call out this disease in the bottom of your post.
>> ^hPOD:

I can see this in half the posts I read on sift...the most vocal arguments come from the far left or the far right...neither of which even listen to the other side, they merely use the time reading the others points to think up their equally useless responses.

You're doing exactly what you're criticizing. As am I, admittedly, by addressing your negative post directly, but I'm hoping to defend the people on the sift as a whole. I find most of the regulars on this site to be very sharp and engaging.
This portion of your post resembles cynicism. Cynicism is what happens when people have lost hope in the government system that works for them. When this sets in, people discontinue listening to others' ideas and lash out at those who pose legitimate food for thought as wasting their time. It's hard to sit and think about a situation that perhaps you would rather not be in. It is much easier to live day-to-day and pretend the issue doesn't exist. Let's attempt to be aware of that line of self-delusion and dispense with it to move forward.
As for Mr. Hedges' point; The point is nothing more than to make you think about the situation we find ourselves in. If you're waiting for someone to come along and give a simple, predefined cause and effect along with a prescription for continued success, you'll be waiting a long time. This is a very complicated downfall that has more to do with mass psychology than it does with the actions of individuals. There will always be people without a notable conscious; those who live for greed. Sadly so long as we don't expect people to contribute to our government (meaning the governing of people as a practice, not a particular national government) on an individual level the number of people who can be easily exploited will continue to rise and the greedy can very easily take advantage of the populous. This is Chris' point. Stop. Stop fighting with each other. Stop labeling those around you. Think about what you're doing and where we're going. Let's all sit down and discuss this.
There is a real danger here in the age of ever diminishing attention spans and increasingly effective marketing based on soundbites rather than ideas. We need to ensure that we focus on ideas where it really matters. Mr. Hedges isn't trying to make a "point" and he's not trying to tell you what to do. He's trying to start a discussion.

Can't make his point clear, so he continues to ramble on endlessly in hopes of accidentally making it...which he never quite does.

While some of this is coherent thought, it skews into the preach zone which then becomes corrupted by political leanings one way or another.

The real problem can be highlighted by using this person as example A -- he's right, and if you don't agree with everything he says, you're wrong. It's this exact kind of thinking on both sides that keeps everything at stalemate, yet everyone seems to ignore it. It's easier to latch onto the ideas you agree with than to consider the other side. The REAL fact is -- contrary to everything this man says -- is that the answer lies somewhere in the middle, but neither side is willing to meet half way...so the problem continues to manifest itself.

I can see this in half the posts I read on sift...the most vocal arguments come from the far left or the far right...neither of which even listen to the other side, they merely use the time reading the others points to think up their equally useless responses.

Seems you missed the very point the teacher was trying to convey. Instead of looking at it in an evil way to 'screw with innocent minds', maybe you need to see the necessity of the harsh lesson learned that day.

By that rational, we should never teach the hard/harsh lessons at all, because that would be 'screwing with innocence'. Instead, we should just "hope for the best" and let whatever may happen...happen. If you wait too long to teach these lessons, it's too late. Though this doesn't surprise me that you and others feel this way...as this seems to be the prevalent way to teach these days. Merely ignoring the harsh realities in life and teaching sunshine and rainbows 101.

Far be it for me to dispute the seeming popular opinions of VS, but, IMO, it's never too early to learn a lesson like this one, harsh or not.

In reply to this comment by legacy0100:
My my, what a way to screw with the innocent mind...

Seems you missed the very point the teacher was trying to convey. Instead of looking at it in an evil way to 'screw with innocent minds', maybe you need to see the necessity of the harsh lesson learned that day.

By that rational, we should never teach the hard/harsh lessons at all, because that would be 'screwing with innocence'. Instead, we should just "hope for the best" and let whatever may happen...happen. If you wait too long to teach these lessons, it's too late. Though this doesn't surprise me that you and others feel this way...as this seems to be the prevalent way to teach these days. Merely ignoring the harsh realities in life and teaching sunshine and rainbows 101.

Far be it for me to dispute the seeming popular opinions of VS, but, IMO, it's never too early to learn a lesson like this one, harsh or not.

Really good, but honestly, from the title -- I expected even better. Don't jump on me for it, either...it's much better than I could dream of doing, but it was just...boring to me.

Forward this video to 2:53 for what I consider a truly amazing bass solo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeCczUfCcsU