Originally Posted by Camp David
I don't have to twist his words to make him sound ridiculous... he does a good job of that every time he speaks... The speech I cited was his address to graduates at Hampton University where he ridiculously claimed that "information becomes a distraction, a diversion"
... That's absurd.
Why is it absurd?
Most thinking people would agree with this statement. I suppose you have a right to disagree with it even if you can't articulate why or provide any reasoned argument.
And in a way that's what it boils down to: two sides - one thinking and reaching a conclusion (not necessarily a correct one but a conclusion) and others knee-jerking.
People will just have to decide which side they are on. Most likely those more into analytical consideration probably won't group themselves with those whose considered opinion is that Obama is a socialist.
But to address the point: information becomes a diversion in the context he discusses for two reasons:
1) It is out of context - placed in a milieu where 'News' has to be packaged in small soundbites where no deep consideration can be given.
This is the point actually - so NO deep consideration can be gone into.
2) It is 'pared down' to such an extent that it provides no information whatsoever. ANYTHING packaged in this way can ONLY become a diversion. because there is nothing to consider - it is too light.
With respect, your attitude is actually a classic example of the result of the process - everything is reduced the othe most simplified lowest common denominator: partisanship.
Obama is 'a socialist' and that's all you need to know. On to the next soundbite.
It is impossible to put an argument as to WHY he is a socialist - he must be one because you oppose him
In the Cronkite era people were capable of listening to hours of debate, contributing to the argument and THEN deciding someone was a socialist.
All that has happened is that the whole process of the ourney has been removed and all we have is the end result.
Most thinking people on any side of the political spectrum don't need explanations at to why this is 'a bad thing'.
This is the same guy whose campaign advertised on Xbox and who pioneered PDA instant messaging for his election...
So what? He's a hypocrite.
Why does that make his statement incorrect?
Can only non-hypocrites make statements that happen to be factually correct?
The argument that more information is harmful to democracy is asinine...
You don't get it do you?
The whole point is we are getting LESS information.
And no-one said anything about it being harmful to democracy.
a theory that media is putting pressure on our democracy is absurd.
And yet it is purely your own invention in this case...
What Obama is saying here is that Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength... if you agree with that you should ask yourself why...
Except he isn't saying it.
But I have no doubt he probably thinks it because he is part of the System.
And I disagree with it. And I know why. Because I am a rabid left-wing radical.