A few comments. The parts I agree with, i'll leave.
"Spain's government toppled over involvement in Iraq"
Actually, Spain's government was leading by a wide margin in the polls. What changed and caused them to lose? The Madrid attack. The voters were temporarily shocked by the terrorists to vote for appeasement.
"and England's Labor party has suffered for their help"
They have not suffered much. Teflon Tony....
"They see support for oppressive governments like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan"
The interesting thing about this is that the so-called opposition in the Arab street to these governments wants to see them replaced with governments that are much more oppressive. I also take exception to charactarizing Jordan's government as particularly oppressive compared to the others.
"They see a once prosperous and stable (though not free) state [Iraq] turned into a ruined haven for terrorists who attack Muslims. "
Saddam had ruined Iraq long prior to the Bush invasion. It was not prosperous. "Stability"? Not for much of the country. The southern swamps were not stable as the people were being killed during the draining, and the ongoing situation of forcing Kurds (as part of a planned destruction of their society) out of their homes was not stable either
"It is wrong because it fails to achieve its stated goal -- to bring democracy and stability to the Middle East and to turn aside the tide of anti-Americanism"
Likely it is lucky timing, but prospects for democracy in the region are a lot stronger now than a few years ago, even aside from the two "regime changes": Lebanon, Palestine, even something in Saudi Arabia.
If you look at the "Top 4", you will see that the region groupings only allows one winner from North America. A Canadian college got this one, but there are US schools in the results list of runner ups.
They have "Middle East" and "Asia" as separate places, when most of the Middle East is actually part of Asia. If Syria had won, they'd have to place it in two at the same time.
The contest is in virus form. If you have Internet Explorer, you will find the winners on your machine any time now. It's great that the whole world will be able to participate in this contest.
"Why don't we support him instead of making fun of one misquoted comment he made 10 years ago."
The problem is not that it is misquoted. It is accurately quoted and paraphrased. However, it is that it is a misstatement, and Gore admitted that it was.
"A better method is Public Campaign Financing [caclean.org], where politicians who can get enough signatures and $5 token donations become eligible for public campaign funding. "
I think this might be fine only if the public contributions were voluntary. A checkoff on the tax form, like some states have done. No one should be forced to give money to candidates that go against their interest. This still does not take care of the other problem with it: it increases government control of the campaigns.
"Still, they do have a couple of talented radio personalities who have been working at the format for 15-20 years. Mainly Rhandi Rhodes and Mike Malloy"
These two are Air America's only chance at success: put them and others like them at the front. They are experienced radio personalities who happen to be liberal. Others in this thread said to save Air America by bringing in Chomsky and Carville. This would only compound the mistake of relying on non-radio people.
I've seen all these links. They even blame Dick Armey for the quote, when in fact it is from a CNN interview with Wolf Blitzer.
The problem with much of the links and material presented is that they attempt to excuse Mr. Gore's incorrect claim that he invented the internet by giving him great praise for helping the Internet after it was created. This is what Mr. Cerf is doing.
IMHO, he deserves this praise. Also, IMHO. the false "creation" claim is not anything like an intentional lie by Gore, nor is it anything like a symptom of a pathological problem where Gore liked to claim things he didn't really do. Gore himself admitted that he misspoke when he made this controversial statement.
There is plenty of wrong on both sides: the Right is wrong to claim this as an example of Gore's dishonesty. The Left is wrong to call Gore a liar in a way: whenever they claim that Gore really created the Internet, they are calling Gore's claim that it was a mis-statement a lie.
"Air America's problem is that it isn't mean spirited enough."
The audience for screaming "Hate Radio" is rather limited. There is an audience for mean, but it is small. In fact, the meaner you are, the smaller your audience.
"As for MoveOn, they do great work and are by no means "nasty". Telling the truth isn't "nasty"."
Sometimes they tell the truth, sometimes they do not. Actually, they are as truthful as the typical Madison Avenue advertising company. They are not in the truth business: they are in the business of trying to sell a political agenda. My statement has nothing to do with their political agenda: just with the fact that they are a glorified campaign commercial outfit. Plenty of these exist on the right as well. Those who buy into party promotion organs will always say that these organs are the Real Truth.
The parent said to you: "doing away with the electoral college would heavily favor the Democrats"
It sure looks like they are openly selling the Electoral College as a tool to increase Republican power. When someone proposes such a policy for blatantly biased or unfair reasons like this, it turns me off from it. This is similar to the racists who try to sell "PR" (Proportional Representation) to elect individuals of a certain race. Or the places where Republicans opposed "motor voter" because if it was easier to register, more Democrats might vote. (the reverse of this is Democrats who oppose IDs to prevent voter fraud, out of an apparent belief that too many fraud voters are Democrats and this would hurt them).
"Right wing or left wing bias in news media is unwelcome to anyone who actually thinks. The only job that jounralism has is to present the basic information and let people form their own opinions"
There is something to the realization that there is bias in all news media: bias in what they choose to report, what they do not choose to report, how they say it, how they don't say it, where they place it in the show, and so-on.
Of course, there is bias, and then there is BIAS. The ones who are respected as "the best journalists" are the ones who have a "bias" toward being "fair" to a degree that most others think they are fair, or they are good at selling their bias with a warm friendly voice.
"I think banning all private funds in campaigns would be a good start too."
This is one of the reforms I dislike the most. IMHO, it is a violation of my political rights to be forced to pay money political candidate campaigns that I do not like or agree with. Come on now, do you really want to be forced to give money to Pat Buchanan's campaign?
"Make all campaigns tax supported, give every candidate an equal ammount of money."
This also puts a big wound in the side of Democracy: now you have government choosing who will be in government by running the campaigns (when I think that federal funding should be eliminated, not increased). It is a big step toward the Soviet election situation.
"I think banning all private funds in campaigns would be a good start too. I say if you want to support a candidate you take out a commercial or ad space in the newspaper"
An interesting idea, but as we saw in the last election, the "independent" supporters tend to secretly collaborate (and thus become a part of) the campaign. The Move On, Swift Boaties, Soros, etc.
You make some excellent points. I think the reason that the "counter-Limbaughs" are not doing very well after many years of trying is that they are going about it all wrong.
They are going about it in a "Vast Left Wing Conspiracy" fashion: a group of guys get together and think "let's get left-wing talk radio out there.": They are overthinking it, and such plans usually do not work.
Why not look at how Rush Limbaugh came about? No VRWC created him: he was just a talented radio personality who happened to be very conservative. If the conservatives did the "VRWC" thing, they would fail at it too: radio programs by Dennis Miller, Gingrich and P.J. O'Rourke would be fizzling oddities. This is what the "VRLC" did with non radio guys like Cuomo, Hightower, and Franken.
The key is for a very talented radio personality who happens to be left-wing to rise on his own talents and his own audience appeal. When this happens, you'll have your Rush-crusher. The guys who created "Air America" would be much better off if they ditched their no-radio-talent roster headliners and replaced them with rising stars in talk radio who are left wing who have built shows on their own merits. They already have some of this on their schedule.
They'd also do better if their marketing focus was "good radio programs" rather than "radio programs you will only listen to out of duty because you think that doing so will stick it to Rush and Hannity".
"But vendors like Sun and Microsoft want us to remain in the dark ages suckling on their poisoned teat when the world can now ween itself of that sour milk and move on to the glory of free beer."
I think you shot the gift horse in the mouth after you closed the barn door.
"It is thus completely unlike dressing up as armies of orcs and elves and running around in the forest hitting each other with sticks*. Which I hear is popular in Scandinavia."
Haven't they been doing that on and off there for the past 3,000 years? Except for that time they put on horned helmets 1,300 years or so ago and played with boats for a while.
"You know, if they did, I'd be tempted to show with a projector and a leaked screener, just for the irony"
That would only encourage them. Then the same crew would line up at the Vatican, thinking that the Pope lying in state was one of Nute Gunray's pals in the Trade Federation. It's the hat that does it.
"No, no, they have to hang the Star Wars sign on a Star Trek movie"
The non-geek theatre manager flunky says "That Star Treck stuff is all the same, right? As long as it has Dr. Spock and Chewbacca in it, those propellerheads will eat it up!"
"Like Manitoba, or Minnesota, or Alaska, or Siberia. Heat the work area with the flow from the data center.
Hire your local population to maintain the data center"
P?
You really like Innuit women in bikini's, don't you?
"[sarcasm]But that would promote Global warming, the melting of the Polar Icecaps, the Greenland Glacier and other glaciers! [/sarcasm]
Seriously, I can honestly see someone arguing that point."
"Hey! Did you know that when you slashdotted that server near the Ross Ice Shelf, you caused 2 icebergs to calve? You insensitve clod!!!!"
Cooler servers, definitely. If you have cooler rooms, people from all over cubicledom will gravitate to the room during the dog days of August, followed by the inevitable "what does this knob do?" and secretive "what happens if I start switching around these funny phone cables in the back of the black box?".
The fewer rubes lounging by the server towers, the better.
"Oh yeah... they also said that they don't believe the movie isn't showing there and that "they always say that, but it always shows".."
Ah! The "If we queue, it will show" philosophy of movie-line waiting. I want to see them push it to the limits: line up weeks ahead of the debut day outside an abandoned grain silo in Nebraska. Let's see if their rule works there!
Slashdot Mirror
"Spain's government toppled over involvement in Iraq"
Actually, Spain's government was leading by a wide margin in the polls. What changed and caused them to lose? The Madrid attack. The voters were temporarily shocked by the terrorists to vote for appeasement.
"and England's Labor party has suffered for their help"
They have not suffered much. Teflon Tony....
"They see support for oppressive governments like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan"
The interesting thing about this is that the so-called opposition in the Arab street to these governments wants to see them replaced with governments that are much more oppressive. I also take exception to charactarizing Jordan's government as particularly oppressive compared to the others.
"They see a once prosperous and stable (though not free) state [Iraq] turned into a ruined haven for terrorists who attack Muslims. "
Saddam had ruined Iraq long prior to the Bush invasion. It was not prosperous. "Stability"? Not for much of the country. The southern swamps were not stable as the people were being killed during the draining, and the ongoing situation of forcing Kurds (as part of a planned destruction of their society) out of their homes was not stable either
"It is wrong because it fails to achieve its stated goal -- to bring democracy and stability to the Middle East and to turn aside the tide of anti-Americanism"
Likely it is lucky timing, but prospects for democracy in the region are a lot stronger now than a few years ago, even aside from the two "regime changes": Lebanon, Palestine, even something in Saudi Arabia.
If you look at the "Top 4", you will see that the region groupings only allows one winner from North America. A Canadian college got this one, but there are US schools in the results list of runner ups.
They have "Middle East" and "Asia" as separate places, when most of the Middle East is actually part of Asia. If Syria had won, they'd have to place it in two at the same time.
The contest is in virus form. If you have Internet Explorer, you will find the winners on your machine any time now. It's great that the whole world will be able to participate in this contest.
The audience will learn to appreciate Springer's serious side. Naked lesbian dwarves spitting at each other just does not fly on radio.
I don't find this one to be problematic, since, even if Mr. Gore had made this claim, it would have still been true.
The problem is not that it is misquoted. It is accurately quoted and paraphrased. However, it is that it is a misstatement, and Gore admitted that it was.
I think this might be fine only if the public contributions were voluntary. A checkoff on the tax form, like some states have done. No one should be forced to give money to candidates that go against their interest. This still does not take care of the other problem with it: it increases government control of the campaigns.
These two are Air America's only chance at success: put them and others like them at the front. They are experienced radio personalities who happen to be liberal. Others in this thread said to save Air America by bringing in Chomsky and Carville. This would only compound the mistake of relying on non-radio people.
The problem with much of the links and material presented is that they attempt to excuse Mr. Gore's incorrect claim that he invented the internet by giving him great praise for helping the Internet after it was created. This is what Mr. Cerf is doing.
IMHO, he deserves this praise. Also, IMHO. the false "creation" claim is not anything like an intentional lie by Gore, nor is it anything like a symptom of a pathological problem where Gore liked to claim things he didn't really do. Gore himself admitted that he misspoke when he made this controversial statement.
There is plenty of wrong on both sides: the Right is wrong to claim this as an example of Gore's dishonesty. The Left is wrong to call Gore a liar in a way: whenever they claim that Gore really created the Internet, they are calling Gore's claim that it was a mis-statement a lie.
The audience for screaming "Hate Radio" is rather limited. There is an audience for mean, but it is small. In fact, the meaner you are, the smaller your audience.
"As for MoveOn, they do great work and are by no means "nasty". Telling the truth isn't "nasty"."
Sometimes they tell the truth, sometimes they do not. Actually, they are as truthful as the typical Madison Avenue advertising company. They are not in the truth business: they are in the business of trying to sell a political agenda. My statement has nothing to do with their political agenda: just with the fact that they are a glorified campaign commercial outfit. Plenty of these exist on the right as well. Those who buy into party promotion organs will always say that these organs are the Real Truth.
It sure looks like they are openly selling the Electoral College as a tool to increase Republican power. When someone proposes such a policy for blatantly biased or unfair reasons like this, it turns me off from it. This is similar to the racists who try to sell "PR" (Proportional Representation) to elect individuals of a certain race. Or the places where Republicans opposed "motor voter" because if it was easier to register, more Democrats might vote. (the reverse of this is Democrats who oppose IDs to prevent voter fraud, out of an apparent belief that too many fraud voters are Democrats and this would hurt them).
I love the smell of self-immolating grammar-Nazis in the morning, don't you?
There is something to the realization that there is bias in all news media: bias in what they choose to report, what they do not choose to report, how they say it, how they don't say it, where they place it in the show, and so-on.
Of course, there is bias, and then there is BIAS. The ones who are respected as "the best journalists" are the ones who have a "bias" toward being "fair" to a degree that most others think they are fair, or they are good at selling their bias with a warm friendly voice.
This is one of the reforms I dislike the most. IMHO, it is a violation of my political rights to be forced to pay money political candidate campaigns that I do not like or agree with. Come on now, do you really want to be forced to give money to Pat Buchanan's campaign?
"Make all campaigns tax supported, give every candidate an equal ammount of money."
This also puts a big wound in the side of Democracy: now you have government choosing who will be in government by running the campaigns (when I think that federal funding should be eliminated, not increased). It is a big step toward the Soviet election situation.
"I think banning all private funds in campaigns would be a good start too. I say if you want to support a candidate you take out a commercial or ad space in the newspaper"
An interesting idea, but as we saw in the last election, the "independent" supporters tend to secretly collaborate (and thus become a part of) the campaign. The Move On, Swift Boaties, Soros, etc.
They are going about it in a "Vast Left Wing Conspiracy" fashion: a group of guys get together and think "let's get left-wing talk radio out there.": They are overthinking it, and such plans usually do not work.
Why not look at how Rush Limbaugh came about? No VRWC created him: he was just a talented radio personality who happened to be very conservative. If the conservatives did the "VRWC" thing, they would fail at it too: radio programs by Dennis Miller, Gingrich and P.J. O'Rourke would be fizzling oddities. This is what the "VRLC" did with non radio guys like Cuomo, Hightower, and Franken.
The key is for a very talented radio personality who happens to be left-wing to rise on his own talents and his own audience appeal. When this happens, you'll have your Rush-crusher. The guys who created "Air America" would be much better off if they ditched their no-radio-talent roster headliners and replaced them with rising stars in talk radio who are left wing who have built shows on their own merits. They already have some of this on their schedule.
They'd also do better if their marketing focus was "good radio programs" rather than "radio programs you will only listen to out of duty because you think that doing so will stick it to Rush and Hannity".
I think you shot the gift horse in the mouth after you closed the barn door.
A titan in the world of proprietary sales-only code does not like the idea of competition from useful programs being "purchased" for free.
Haven't they been doing that on and off there for the past 3,000 years? Except for that time they put on horned helmets 1,300 years or so ago and played with boats for a while.
That would only encourage them. Then the same crew would line up at the Vatican, thinking that the Pope lying in state was one of Nute Gunray's pals in the Trade Federation. It's the hat that does it.
The non-geek theatre manager flunky says "That Star Treck stuff is all the same, right? As long as it has Dr. Spock and Chewbacca in it, those propellerheads will eat it up!"
"Like Manitoba, or Minnesota, or Alaska, or Siberia. Heat the work area with the flow from the data center. Hire your local population to maintain the data center" P? You really like Innuit women in bikini's, don't you?
"Hey! Did you know that when you slashdotted that server near the Ross Ice Shelf, you caused 2 icebergs to calve? You insensitve clod!!!!"
The fewer rubes lounging by the server towers, the better.
Ah! The "If we queue, it will show" philosophy of movie-line waiting. I want to see them push it to the limits: line up weeks ahead of the debut day outside an abandoned grain silo in Nebraska. Let's see if their rule works there!