What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

How To Know If You're The Problem With America... (1 Viewer)

What do you think?


  • Total voters
    56
He is the perfect mold of the case in point. But he'll never see it because he believes the MSM like cnn and msnbc are moderate. They're not and almost everyone but Tim knows it. It's outstanding his bootlicking for the MSM.
Look the MSM is close to moderate, but it's not moderate.

I can personally tell you that I WATCHED CNN shift into a less moderate take during the Trump years. I saw it happen. I still watch CNN because I largely agree with that shift in response to Trumpism, but I also make a point to get news from multiple sources, including ones I disagree with the slant on.

 
I think you have this backwards (as usual). Most conservatives are bombarded with leftist media and tech and also balance that with some conservative media. I know many on the left quite happy in their leftist echo chamber and refuse to venture out. We see all the time on these boards people saying things like "that's a link to a conservative site, I don't even want to click that" as though exposure to a different pov is something to be avoided at all costs.
You had me until your last sentence.

The number of bat s crazy links dropped in this forum... a conservative take, I'll read it. When it's a propaganda piece or just loony lies, I'm not interested in it.

FTR, once upon a time my job was to create propaganda (for the US Army). I know it when I see it. If I start looking at a link and it makes zero effort to do anything other than advance the author's own agenda, I know that it isn't news but propaganda.

 
You had me until your last sentence.

The number of bat s crazy links dropped in this forum... a conservative take, I'll read it. When it's a propaganda piece or just loony lies, I'm not interested in it.

FTR, once upon a time my job was to create propaganda (for the US Army). I know it when I see it. If I start looking at a link and it makes zero effort to do anything other than advance the author's own agenda, I know that it isn't news but propaganda.
This is correct.  Give me a link to reason.com and I'll read it.  If you give me a link to Gateway Pundit, I'll ignore it.  I'm not ignoring it because it's right-wing, I'm ignoring it because the first 10 times I actually did read a Gateway Pundit link, I learned that the site isn't worth reading.

 
This is correct.  Give me a link to reason.com and I'll read it.  If you give me a link to Gateway Pundit, I'll ignore it.  I'm not ignoring it because it's right-wing, I'm ignoring it because the first 10 times I actually did read a Gateway Pundit link, I learned that the site isn't worth reading.
Some posters were fond of conservative treehouse for a bit and thought that was a legitimate news source.

 
You had me until your last sentence.

The number of bat s crazy links dropped in this forum... a conservative take, I'll read it. When it's a propaganda piece or just loony lies, I'm not interested in it.

FTR, once upon a time my job was to create propaganda (for the US Army). I know it when I see it. If I start looking at a link and it makes zero effort to do anything other than advance the author's own agenda, I know that it isn't news but propaganda.
I'll be disappointed if your name is not Colonel Flagg.

 
When Americans were asked which three Americans they had the least respect for in a 1964 Gallup poll, [Martin Luther] King came in second at 42%. This was barely less than the 47% registered by George Wallace, the segregationist governor of Alabama.
I give you two sides, both believing the other was intent on destroying their way of life.

 
These two people will be misinformed in different ways, but I would not value either of their opinions on anything of substance.  Both are the intellectual equivalent of consuming nothing but Skittles and beer and imagining yourself to be well-nourished because you've grown fat.
This reminds me of the time we tried skittle brau in college. It was worse than you think it is. 

 
I disagree. But what I appreciate is you always make an attempt to pull the discussion here towards the center. If you have a political bias, I don't personally see it. I've seen others accuse you of it but they are just sealioning/gaslighting you, which is completely bizarre to me since you have the power to delete the entire PSF. Which, to be honest, and looking those two pinned threads, might not actually be a bad idea at all. There is clearly a level of gross entitlement that many Americans have, that "abundance" is a birthright. No one is entitled to waking up tomorrow and having any of these forums be here. No one is entitled to anything to be completely honest.

The real core problem in America, if we are talking about political divide, rests in three specific areas.

1) The most important, the entire country is divided in part because there has been sustained aggressive campaign against federalism by many of the powerful big money corporate fat cat donor overlords. The Democratic Party, the elected officials there, all the way across the board, want to centralize all authority in the federal government. The operational arm of this egregious assault  is the radical left which has made absolutely everything in our society into a political purity test.

Practical "federalism", which is a Conservative benchmark and more aligned to our Founder's vision of our country and it's future, ensures the role of the respective states to be the near complete center of gravity regarding functional governance and ground level public policy. The overturning of Roe v. Wade is very much in line with this. Trump didn't just put FedSoc Conservative Catholics onto SCOTUS, he put "originalists" in place. Hence what our Founders would have wanted to happen, flaws and all, because a federal ban on abortion restrictions would have actually silenced the views and will of many people in those states. A good immediately example is the 15-20 million Pro Life Democrats that exist in this country, spread out everywhere. The original Roe decision essentially made them politically homeless as their own Party apparatus pretends they don't exist at all.

The end result is traditional liberals in this country are effectively held hostage and the notion of "classic liberalism" is being effectively destroyed.

2) Most of us here are parents. And I've used this example before, if two kids are always fighting, what do parents do? Tell them to go play with other kids instead. We tell them sometimes you can't get along with other kids, you've tried, we've tried, the teachers and principal have intervened. Sometimes two kids need to stop talking to each other, stay away from each other and move on towards different lives and paths. There are 340-350 million people in this country. If you account for all the illegal immigrants flooding in plus the failures/struggles of the census. That's too many people to hold under one Big Government vision and find any kind of consensus. Well you can, in theory, but that requires a full authoritarian regime, which is what we are seeing now from the establishment Democrats, a push for chipping away at open dissent on all levels.

I said this pretty much in my first post in the PSF over a year and a half ago  - Conservatives and Republicans should live in states and cities and towns and geographic regions with like minded people. So should traditional liberals, Progressives and radical leftists. Once you are in a place where values are aligned, mostly, then you can work the problems of functional governance. There is where smaller government is better, you can be more reactive and responsive to the needs of everyday working class people, because you are closer to them. Because let's face it, working class people in America today are getting the shaft by political overlords that have no concept of what it means to be working class at all.

3)  Something Clemenza, Don Vito's enforcer caporegime,  said in Mario Puzo's The Godfather was that war needed to happen between the Five Families every ten years or so, it was a necessity because you needed to wash away all the old bad blood. America needs to go to war with China or have an all out internal civil war. While that might be abhorrent to you, there is too much bad blood out there. There can be a hyperfocus on putting that rage towards a common external threat, or people can just start picking each other off here domestically. But it's going to happen. One or the other. Personally I find going to war with China more practical and palatable.  What Clemenza was talking about was the reality of the human condition and human nature at work.

The fight is inevitable. Lots of people are going to die.

To alleviate that somewhat, we will need many states to secede and we will need economic "bifurcation"  But I've always advocated for this, and Ben Shapiro of The Daily Wire has pushed for this too - Conservatives and Republicans should focus their dollars and spending on other Conservatives and Republicans and to those who remain politically neutral.  You can still be a part of America, just a separated segment of it. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I do understand your sentiment. I don't think it's a bad sentiment. I think it's a very humanistic sentiment. But I don't see a pathway where what you want can happen. There has to be a functional pathway for hope to turn to reality.

I don't believe compromise is a dirty word. But surrender is a dirty word. What's being asked of myself and my godson and my employees and their children is just outright surrender. My answer is No. I love America but I reserve the right to not love all Americans. I reserve the right not to agree with all Americans. I don't think half of America's rank and file citizens are trying to destroy me and mine, I do believe we all exist on a playground where they should go play by the swings with their like minded group and I should hang out at the jungle gym with my cohort of allies.

There's a difference between accountability and blame. Sometimes, in your attempts to be centrist, which I actually do value and appreciate on a community level, I find you actually end up with more blame than you originally intended. You might even be unaware that it's going on. Saying everyone needs to be better has a place, but it also creates an escape hatch ( it's watering down blame onto everyone) for bad faith actors in our society who want to skirt past actual accountability. If that happens, it's just as dangerous as how you see open tribalism. People need to pay for their choices. They need to own their lives and answer for what they have done. This is something else we all teach our children.

Mercy has no value without discipline.
One of the best posts I’ve ever read in here.

 
Look the MSM is close to moderate, but it's not moderate.

I can personally tell you that I WATCHED CNN shift into a less moderate take during the Trump years. I saw it happen. I still watch CNN because I largely agree with that shift in response to Trumpism, but I also make a point to get news from multiple sources, including ones I disagree with the slant on.
I watch cnn also. Probably my go to news channel. Fox is second. Fox is obviously a conservative mouthpiece, just like MSNBC is a liberal mouthpiece. To me CNN is closest to the middle. They're not moderate, but they're the closest. 

I agree with you about watching them shift away from moderate during the Trump years. I saw it too.

 
If you still would vote for Biden considering how bad the economy is and with the current border crises, then you're part of the problem.

 
I mostly agree. 

The part about only watching or reading media that agrees with you- IMO that’s not a both sides thing. That’s currently only true of conservatives. 


It is only a conservative problem. MSNBC and CNN are neutral sources- they report things I don’t want to hear all the time. (I’m referring to news reporting, not opinion shows.) Whoever watches CNN news can generally be regarded as a well informed person IMO. I believe this is true of Fox News as well. It is NOT true of other conservative news sources however. 
We will always remember the day that @timschochetstrapped on the skis and decided to jump the shark 

 
when you are on the right, the center looks left.  When you are on the left, the center looks right.  Everyone thinks they are closer to the center than they actually are.
I actually think most people are closer to the center than they think. The loud polar extreme voices in the media are trying to convince you otherwise. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I actually think most people are closer to the center than they think. The loud polar extreme voices in the media are trying to convince you otherwise. 
Hmm...that may be accurate.  If you only compare yourself to the other side, you might think you are further from the center than actuality.  

Also, people slightly left or right of center might bicker just as much as extremists... I think that's the PSF in a nutshell.  Most of us aren't actually that far apart 

 
I actually think most people are closer to the center than they think. The loud polar extreme voices in the media are trying to convince you otherwise. 
Social media and TV get paid more to keep engagement rates high. Until the business model changes, I expect it to get worse. 

 
Social media and TV get paid more to keep engagement rates high. Until the business model changes, I expect it to get worse. 
As much as I use the internet for its many wonderful uses,  it isn't without fault obviously and is largely to blame for the divide in this country.

 
Social media and TV get paid more to keep engagement rates high. Until the business model changes, I expect it to get worse. 
The movie Network absolutely nailed us. The pressure from corporations to make news programming profit driven has been disastrous. 

 
Social media and TV get paid more to keep engagement rates high. Until the business model changes, I expect it to get worse. 
As much as I use the internet for its many wonderful uses,  it isn't without fault obviously and is largely to blame for the divide in this country.
Socail media and TV provide what is demanded.  To blame them for providing what is desired seems like a completely backwards way at looking at our capitalistic society.

 
The movie Network absolutely nailed us. The pressure from corporations to make news programming profit driven has been disastrous. 


How do we make the news networks NOT profit driven without costing someone some money somewhere?  People still need to be paid, cameras and plane tickets still need to be bought, etc...

Where does all of this money come from if there is no profit?  No profit = can't buy anything or pay people.

Has news ever been NOT profit driven at anytime in history?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Socail media and TV provide what is demanded.  To blame them for providing what is desired seems like a completely backwards way at looking at our capitalistic society.
We blame tobacco companies all the time. If their goal is to make their product more addictive, do you think we should regulate or attempt to change it?

 
How do we make the news networks NOT profit driven without costing someone some money somewhere?  People still need to be paid, cameras and plane tickets still need to be bought, etc...

Where does all of this money come from if no one can profit from it?
Subscription services instead of ad based models is my first thought. 
 

Edit: not saying companies can’t be profitable, I’m just tired of having people as the product.  MSNBC is selling people to advertisers.  I’d rather just pay the news network directly. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
We blame tobacco companies all the time. If their goal is to make their product more addictive, do you think we should regulate or attempt to change it?
I think the 24 hour news concept should be blown to smithereens personally.  Keep your local news and the thirty minute national news and get rid of the rest.  That can't happen with our Constitution, but it's my dream.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Subscription services instead of ad based models is my first thought. 


I only see that going so far, right?  I mean, if people have to make a choice between buying gas to get to work or feeding their family, subscription services go right out the window.

I suppose it could be done, but I don't see it as a reliable form to keep a news organization in business.  I see subscriptions kind of like wind and solar - supplements to the actual engine that drives things.

 
We blame tobacco companies all the time. If their goal is to make their product more addictive, do you think we should regulate or attempt to change it?
They did somewhat when they quit putting tobacco adds on TV.  Or did I misunderstand your post?

 
Hmm...that may be accurate.  If you only compare yourself to the other side, you might think you are further from the center than actuality.  

Also, people slightly left or right of center might bicker just as much as extremists... I think that's the PSF in a nutshell.  Most of us aren't actually that far apart 


I know that I am LITERALLY right down the middle on everything.  I am THE example of moderate.   With my clear vision of the problem of both sides I actually BRING people together and help others see what life is like on both sides so they get a better understanding of each other.

Yeah, that's the ticket!

 
They did somewhat when they quit putting tobacco adds on TV.  Or did I misunderstand your post?
I agree. We can and do try to change how companies behave in a capitalistic society. My point is that they are not mutually exclusive. We put warning labels on cigarettes and I think we limit some nicotine levels. We have sin taxes, ingredient labels, calorie count on menus.  
Current models for ad based media is based on consumer engagement. And engagement is highest when the content is based on conflict and disagreement.  IMO, this needs to change. 

 
How do we make the news networks NOT profit driven without costing someone some money somewhere?  People still need to be paid, cameras and plane tickets still need to be bought, etc...

Where does all of this money come from if there is no profit?  No profit = can't buy anything or pay people.

Has news ever been NOT profit driven at anytime in history?
If you are interested, https://www.irle.berkeley.edu/culture/papers/Benson.pdf  Go page 4 and read the section entitled 'Market-oriented' journalism: macro-economic pressures' 

The tl;dr is that newspapers used to be family owned businesses that did make a profit. In the 60s-80s they mostly were bought out by corporations as a means for profit. Smaller papers were ran out or consolidated, staffs were cut, soft news like lifestyle and travel came it to attract more advertisements, etc. It's one thing to run a business and make a profit, it's another to run a business with the sole goal being to maximize the profit. Who cares about quality or integrity if the goal is just to increase shareholder profit? 

 
If you are interested, https://www.irle.berkeley.edu/culture/papers/Benson.pdf  Go page 4 and read the section entitled 'Market-oriented' journalism: macro-economic pressures' 

The tl;dr is that newspapers used to be family owned businesses that did make a profit. In the 60s-80s they mostly were bought out by corporations as a means for profit. Smaller papers were ran out or consolidated, staffs were cut, soft news like lifestyle and travel came it to attract more advertisements, etc. It's one thing to run a business and make a profit, it's another to run a business with the sole goal being to maximize the profit. Who cares about quality or integrity if the goal is just to increase shareholder profit? 


Thank your for the link and I'll check it out.

My first impression is that whether it's a family owned business or a corporation, isn't PROFIT the problem to begin with?  I mean, even a family owned business tries to maximize profits, no?  They would fall into the same trap, just on a smaller scale.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
@BladeRunner Here is some info news as it relates to TV https://niemanreports.org/articles/the-transformation-of-network-news/

(note this was written in 1999)

Twenty years ago, there was no network news “business.” The Big Three broadcast television networks—ABC, CBS and NBC—all covered news, but none generally made money doing so. Nor did they expect to turn a profit from news programming. They presented news programming for the prestige it would bring to their network, to satisfy the public-service requirements of Congress and the Federal Communications Commission, and more broadly so that they would be seen as good corporate citizens.

Part of this was profit driven greed but also it was due to the increased number of options on TV. As more networks, cable, etc. came out stations were no longer as guaranteed to make profit so they had to find new ways to make money. They found that the news departments could become major drivers of profit. The article is actually very interesting to see their assessment of the situation in 1999.

 
@BladeRunner Here is some info news as it relates to TV https://niemanreports.org/articles/the-transformation-of-network-news/

(note this was written in 1999)

Twenty years ago, there was no network news “business.” The Big Three broadcast television networks—ABC, CBS and NBC—all covered news, but none generally made money doing so. Nor did they expect to turn a profit from news programming. They presented news programming for the prestige it would bring to their network, to satisfy the public-service requirements of Congress and the Federal Communications Commission, and more broadly so that they would be seen as good corporate citizens.

Part of this was profit driven greed but also it was due to the increased number of options on TV. As more networks, cable, etc. came out stations were no longer as guaranteed to make profit so they had to find new ways to make money. They found that the news departments could become major drivers of profit. The article is actually very interesting to see their assessment of the situation in 1999.


That is all very interesting.  I don't know how we put that genie back in the bottle though.  I have not read your link yet but do they have any suggestions?

 
Thank your for the link and I'll check it out.

My first impression is that whether it's a family owned business or a corporation, isn't PROFIT the problem to begin with?  I mean, even a family owned business tries to maximize profits, no?  They would fall into the same trap, just on a smaller scale.
I don't think most family businesses are trying to maximize profits. They need to make money but it's their baby, their name is on it and they probably have certain standards they want to hold on to.  I know a lot of small businesses and small business owners who sacrifice profit because they prefer a higher quality ingredient or they want to do more for their staff or they just want things to be a certain way. 

 
Thank your for the link and I'll check it out.

My first impression is that whether it's a family owned business or a corporation, isn't PROFIT the problem to begin with?  I mean, even a family owned business tries to maximize profits, no?  They would fall into the same trap, just on a smaller scale.
I think the difference is timeframe and metrics. Profit is a piece of it for the family business, not the only piece.  Relationships with employees, suppliers, and the community play a bigger role than at MegaCorp.  Louisburg Ford looks at things differently than AutoNation. 

 
That is all very interesting.  I don't know how we put that genie back in the bottle though.  I have not read your link yet but do they have any suggestions?
Not really. He acknowledges it's going to get worse: more options, more pressure for profit, etc. He questions whether networks will give the time and patience for quality journalism to take place. He ends it with what now seems laughably naive, the idea that in the end Americans will want quality and quality will win out. 

 
The post advocating for war with China or a 2nd Cvil War is one of the best posts you've ever read? 
Ek is a good guy and good poster but he’s also convinced,or at least highly concerned, a civil war is coming.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
question to all the strongly/mostly voters ... how many people do you have on ignore because you want to live in your own echo chamber and you don't want to listen or engage with people with opposite/different/other views?

 
I don't think most family businesses are trying to maximize profits. They need to make money but it's their baby, their name is on it and they probably have certain standards they want to hold on to.  I know a lot of small businesses and small business owners who sacrifice profit because they prefer a higher quality ingredient or they want to do more for their staff or they just want things to be a certain way. 
I work for one of these, though this family business did 150mil in revenue last year.  But it was built and still operates with most all the profits being put right back into the business either for growth or employee focused items. It’s what built this business from 1 venue to 50 (on our way to 100). A few years back I asked my boss, the founder and CEO, why do we continue to grow like we are.  He told me if getting rich was his goal he would’ve stopped at six or eight. But he loves providing opportunity for others. There’s a true sense of pride for him that we have 1700 employees feeding their family and making their life better.  That’s what drives him.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
question to all the strongly/mostly voters ... how many people do you have on ignore because you want to live in your own echo chamber and you don't want to listen or engage with people with opposite/different/other views?
none.  i would only block a spammer or doxxer.

 
I work for one of these, though this family business did 150mil in revenue last year.  But it was built and still operates with most all the profits being put right back into the business either for growth or employee focused items. It’s what built this business from 1 venue to 50 (on our way to 100). A few years back I asked my boss, the founder and CEO, why do we continue to grow like we are.  He told me if getting rich was his goal he would’ve stopped at six or eight. But he loves providing opportunity for others. There’s a true sense of pride for him that we have 1700 employees feeding their family and making their life better.  That’s what drives him.
That is great and somethng your family should take pride in.

 
If you still would vote for Biden considering how bad the economy is and with the current border crises, then you're part of the problem.
Biden is not a good president.

I'd still vote for him over Trump, and if you wouldn't, then you don't value democracy and I don't know what to tell you if you're okay with that. 

 
Biden is not a good president.

I'd still vote for him over Trump, and if you wouldn't, then you don't value democracy and I don't know what to tell you if you're okay with that. 
I value a Republic, not a democracy.  Also, isn't the bolded like biting your own nose off to spite your face?

 
question to all the strongly/mostly voters ... how many people do you have on ignore because you want to live in your own echo chamber and you don't want to listen or engage with people with opposite/different/other views?
I voted strongly and have 0 people on ignore.

 
I value a Republic, not a democracy.  Also, isn't the bolded like biting your own nose off to spite your face?
Trump actively tried to subvert the will of the people. I can't abide him running my government.

He also was a bad president FTR.

 
I value a Republic, not a democracy.  Also, isn't the bolded like biting your own nose off to spite your face?
Not if you think we’d be basically in the same place if Trump were POTUS. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top