Sunday, October 31, 2010

The Headlines - in 15 Words

My take on the recent news headlines in 15 words or less for each story:

Fear, Sanity, and Laughs at DC Rally



What is the liberal progressive response to conservatism becoming popular again? Mockery and contempt!

Conway Coverup: Rand Paul Opponent Involved in Obstruction of Justice

The one thing voters hate more than mudslinging is hypocrisy. But I just love irony.

ADHD Misdiagnosed In Nearly 1 Million U.S. Kids Say Researchers


I had a clever comment, but I forgot what it was. Good job, modern science!


Do You Know the Two Constitutional Questions on the Kansas Ballot?


1. Clarifies our right to own firearms. 2. Allows mental patients to vote... Democrats need more votes.

8 comments:

Liberty said...

On your first one, I'd have to say: Jon Stewart is a comedian. He does things because they're fun. He also has repeatedly mocked, not just conservatives, but liberals, too. (I do watch Stewart, and I find that I actually agree with him on many issues. Maybe that just shows how liberal I've become...except on economics, I suppose.) So yes. I wouldn't read too much into his rally. It wasn't intended as a political event, just a funny thing to show the silliness of modern political discourse.

Son III said...

I suppose I don't see the downfall of the greatest nation on earth to be silly or something to make light of, and while I didn't agree with most of the ideas behind Beck's Restoring Honor rally, I find it a heck of a lot more of a respectable to try to restore our country's dignity and previous status as a Christian and honorable nation than it is to mock and continually degrade the political ideology that men died for.

Yes, DIED - sometimes in terrible ways. All for the ideas that America used to embody, and now mocks.

I wonder what Nathan Hale, a young schoolteacher who was hanged for helping make his country free, would think of that comedy rally?

This is the sort of "silly discourse" that killed him, and he said, "I only regret that I have but one life to give for the cause." Was it silly to him?

What was that cause for which he died? The silly discourse of freedom and vigilance.

Perhaps if Nathan Hale was one's father or brother, not just a name in a history book, it wouldn't be so silly to try to fix your dying country. Maybe if it was you who was hung, you would have taken that comedy rally as a personal insult.

Perhaps the modern political discourse, which will effect your life and mine, would be more personal if you actually knew the starving men who gave us enough individual political ability to discuss it effectually.

Though, those men who left bloody footprints in the snow as they left battlefield after battlefield, mostly in retreat, couldn't imagine the more intellectual society we would have 200 years later, when boring politics needed to be spiced with humor and communistic and atheistic slant, as Jon Stewart often does.

Times are much more different now, men no longer die for virtues or causes or morals or principles, they make light of them.

I wish I'd been born in those days, when men were men, and people like Stewart were scorned.

How have you become liberal? Is it just that you've been so absorbed in popular culture that compromise is easier than conviction? You've allowed yourself to be boiled like frog in a pot of water - slowly the heat is increased until you've been cooked?

Have you compromised your faith as well? That would be even worse!

Why has God put me here, where my generation is departing from truth and seeking paths of the world?

My world is being pulled from under me, and I am left frustrated.

Liberty said...

I'm not sure what you're so upset about. Jon Stewart wasn't mocking our country. He was mocking the system we've fallen into- a system where "I'll scratch your back, if you'll scratch mine" has become the main point. It is ridiculous. Exposing it with ridiculousness is, to my mind, kind of genius. We're exposing something and having fun while we do it. There's nothing wrong with that.

Perhaps I just like to laugh too much to give up Jon Stewart. But you know, we all need a laugh sometimes. I'm tired of the doom-and-gloom of everybody else. Sometimes you need to take a step back, and say "you know what, this really is ridiculous. Why am I doing this?" then take it from there. That, to my mind, is what Jon's rally was all about- exposing the ridiculous by being ridiculous and making people take a step back and see just how ridiculous everything actually was. Were there people who took it a little too seriously? Absolutely. Were there people who went a little too far and were like a blonde girl on her first sorority night? Without a doubt. But that doesn't change what I think was the core message- that everything is pretty ridiculous, and we all need to take a step back and realize that.

I guess I haven't become liberal so much as just...more liberal in my ideas, if that makes sense? I was in a debate the other night (a formal debate, it was pretty sweet) with the Texas Young Democrats...and my side (libertarians) actually _agreed_ with them on many things! (Except, once again, the economy, but meh.) I see nothing wrong with compromise. That is the nature of political exchange. You have to compromise or you will get nowhere.

And no, I haven't compromised my faith. I am still very much a Christian. :))

Son III said...

I know what Stewart's message is, and that is liberalism. I've heard what he has to say, what his pet issues are, and he is funny, but wrong. Liberalism, in its modern form, is dangerous to our freedoms, which I prize.

I'm sorry you're bored of gloom-and-doom, but I'm happy for you that you've found some way to laugh at a time when our economy is on the brink of collapse and our dollar worthless, our sovereignty is a joke with the UN and illegal immigrants directing our domestic policies, our Congress is passing multi-billion dollar bills and scolding those who want them to read the bills before they pass them, and my taxes are about to go up in January.

Funny stuff.

You know, I understand it's grueling and aggravating to have bad news thrown at you day after day, but the answer is neither to laugh nor to compromise, it is to resolve.

When it comes to principles of government, one shouldn't compromise, because it took years of blood and sweat and tears to write up a way for government to work the way our political system works. If you so compromise, I'm afraid I must oppose your politics.

If you don't compromise, you conserve (hence the term Conservative), but if you do compromise, you will move in one direction, and that is toward the destruction of the country. Sure, one little compromise won't do anything too bad... but you've just opened the door for more and more compromise, until you get what we have today.

My suggestion is that you research some of Patrick Henry or Thomas Jefferson's writings to understand why America was great, and why it has fallen so far. They predicted what happened, and they explain why.

There was a time for laughing, and we've used it all up, now it is time to be serious, sober, and resolute in our conviction for freedom.

A question, what of your political ideologies makes you more liberal than not?

Liberty said...

Why we are in the mess we're in is because of the political system. Jon Stewart's rally was to expose the ridiculousness of that political system. It's failed so epically, I think it's okay to laugh at it. -.- (Jon also goes almost to libertarianism on some issues...for instance, the wars, which he has been against both under Bush and Obama. I like that. But in any case.)

I'm not saying compromise the way our system works, but rather compromise to reach a solution for the problem of it _not_ working like it's supposed to. Compromise has to be reached so that the collective population of the United States won't blow up and protest that their elected officials aren't doing what they were supposed to (which is, apparently, declare unjustified wars in countries of no concern to us, dig us into mine shafts of debt, and take care of their every whim with public funds that, ultimately came from them, not from a magician's hate). But I digress.

Yes, it's time be resolute in our conviction for freedom. But I see no reason why we can't do it with humor. Because humor is awesome, and it can make a point. A very good point, when used properly.

I agree with most liberals on societal issues- gay marriage, drugs, etc...at least, with everyday liberals. I am of the opinion that the elected officials, on both sides, are all the same: they just want power, and don't want to have to do anything uncomfortable, but they'll say anything if it gets them what they want. Hence why our debate with the Texas Young Democrats turned out so good. We agreed on most everything except the economy. XD It was a bit eye-opening. So was the fact that one of my so-called friends stole my snickerdoodles, but once again, I am getting off the point.

I see nothing wrong with using humor to expose systemic problems. In fact, it might be the best way to do it. People find it hard to be outraged when they're laughing. If you can find a common ground through humor, get them to see your point through it, then you've basically completed half the process.

Liberty said...

I'm not sure my other comment posted...it may have posted a couple times...but this is something I just wanted to add. :))

Also, on the compromise thing, I'd just like to add: I think you're misunderstanding what I mean by "compromise." I am talking about the meeting-halfway nature of everyday human relations. I compromise everyday, even in my home. My sisters and I compromise on who's going to fold the laundry. My brothers compromise on who's going to get the best toy gun...or rather, they don't, and mom ends up ending the conflict by confiscating the toy gun. XD

Compromise, the inter-relation of take-and-give is an endless cycle, and an integral component of human society. Without compromise, we'd see a lot more bad things happening, because people wouldn't be willing to live and let live.

Politics is the same way. In fact, politics is, in many ways, the ultimate perfection of the art of compromise. Our Constitution was the fruits of a very productive compromise- a compromise that took the best parts of the federalist and anti-federalist camps and put them together to form an arguably better system. We had the three-fifths compromise, an agreement between the north and south states that decided what kind of representation the states would have.

Compromise of the kind I speak is an indispensable part of our political process. Without it, we'd never get anything done because there are so many conflicting motivations, desires, and needs out there. We'd constantly be at each other's throats like the states were before the Constitution. So I hope that clears up what I mean by 'compromise'. :))

Son III said...

Ah, but does the law compromise?

The very point of law is so that there is no compromise without another, superseding law being created.

If I'm doing 50 in a 30 mph zone, can the policeman and I compromise? No, because he is bound to ticket me, and I'm bound to pay it, because I was originally bound to obey the traffic law. Uncompromisable.

If they decide it is fine to do 50, they can change the law. Is that compromise? You could think of that way, but the principle is never compromised without a total transformation of the system.

The modern political discourse is similar.

Obamacare, unlawful wars, gun confiscations, warrantless searches, all are points of law, and are not to be compromised.

Another law or a judge's decision might amend, clarify, or eliminate it altogether, but it is still the law.

Now, when the law is disregarded to a point where almost all politicians are either ignorant or dismissive of the Constitution, and those who would like to change that are mocked, chided, or called extremist (for me, it was all of the above).

The Department of Homeland Security and various police departments have declared conservatives to be dangerous (see my post on the MIAC Report).

I don't see the humor. I know you do, but I don't. I'm happy you're happy, but I ain't happy.

I ain't sad, I ain't pouting, I ain't suicidal, homicidal, or racist. I'm angry. Furious. Steamed. Ticked.

Further, I don't want to vent, I want to care. I want to do something about it, the natural way, the way a man was meant to solve a problem.

You might not be able to understand this because you're not a man, but to see the thing men are supposed to protect fall off a cliff doesn't make me want to laugh, even if the joke is funny.

I don't want to laugh, I don't want to cry, I want to fix the problem.

Again, I don't fault you for reacting differently from my reaction, because I'm supposed to react with resolve and passion.

It's biblical.

Not sure how you're supposed to react, though.

CarolineNot said...

I'm not amused to see the Hegelian dialectic so vigorously used and handily working, as evidenced here (compromise as a/the goal). And seeking the good of the collective is chilling. Approving strokes for those things the God of the Bible calls abominations is more than a little disturbing, yet representative of the foundational problem: a nation which has turned its back on God (YHWH), Who made her great...and is quite likely to pour out His wrath upon her (and most deservedly so).

I don't watch Jon and know nothing about what he's done. The only thing I find ridiculous is the nationwide ignorance of what's occurring in this land, and that not in a ha-ha way; it's enormously frustrating and most grievous. God help us all.

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me." -Jesus [John 10:27]

Websites That Make This One Possible

Ideations of a Jayhawker: Blog Policies

Comments
No vulgar, obscene, vile, or inappropriate language or insinuation may be used, and comments are subject to editing or deletion at my own discretion.

Please use proper spelling, following the rules of grammar of the English language.

The elimination of comments due to an objectionable account image may also be used at my discretion. Links given in comments that direct one to a website containing evil or unsightly content will also be deleted at my discretion.

Advocating or promoting specific acts of violence isn't allowed, but the vitriolic spewing of rants and ravings is encouraged.

Content

Content found in this blog is public domain, and it may be used freely; permission to recreate is automatically given, I only ask that I be informed when it is copied on another website; though this is not required, it would be considered a kind gesture.

Content found at any other website that was linked to from this page is beyond my control. I strive to put out as little objectionable content as possible here, but if you do find something that you feel is inappropriate, please contact me via comment, and I will duly edit it to a degree I deem appropriate.

Quotes you may find are all sic, including spelling, grammar, etc.

Following
Followers of this blog are more than welcome, but if you have a website that routinely displays content that you wouldn't allow a child to view or read, do not follow this blog unless you have a blogger warning previous to entering your website.
Failure to do so may result in being blocked from the followers list.

A follower may also be blocked if your account image is found to be objectionable.