I wonder if in a few years we’ll be able to find a whole bunch of little “errors” in the stock price listings which, astonishingly seem to always have benefited Rupert and his friends. Does anyone really believe he wouldn’t stoop to such a thing?

Comment by Peter C — August 1, 2007 @ 10:03 am

Well yes, I don’t.
Primarily because what you are describing wouldn’t benefit anyone but would instead be of detriment to NewsCorp and nobody else.

Is that really your understanding of how financial markets work ? That what is in the newspaper dictates how much money you have made ?

What happens if it rains and your copy of the WSJ gets soaked and all the ink runs ? Is your entire stock portfolio wiped out ?

You know what, I bet that on a WWF fan forum they’re not complaining that Sewing Patterns Monthy magazine is being taken over, because none of them read it anyway.
So why do any of you care what happens to a newpaper you never read to start with ?

That is total BS on balance. Making more regulations and having the government control more of your life is the matra of the left. You cited one in the opposite direction. I have dozens of examples where liberals in government want more governmental control of the masses. One gun control, two taxes, three entitlements, four social security, ect….. If you want to get into a real discussion about the myth that liberals want less government intrusion into people’s lives I will certainly oblige.

“….and are in favour of having the government do something if it is cheaper for the government to do it.”

But that is almost never the case as a matter of fact.

“If you pay $2 to your government or $20 to your HMO, that 2$ in taxes is still 18$ less then you would be paying that HMO.”

What a BS argument! If you pay the governement that $2 vs. $18 to the HMO the only way that will happen is for your income to be taxed far more to make it look like you are getting a good deal. You go ahead and let the goverment decide who and how your healthcare is provided and let me opt out. Hell no!

“Further, free market=anarchy because not everybody suddenly becomes perfectly moral the second they start a business.”

And you think that the govenrment is moral when it comes to providing services? You want the government to control everything? Nationalized healthcare? How about lets just nationalize the energy industry and every other industy that is vital to the U.S. Are you serious?

While I am a liberal, I honestly am giving up on this site in disgust at the sheer idiocy displayed not by the trolls, not by any given articles, but by the person who decided on the filter that this site uses.

I may lurk for a while, I may return, but for tonight and this weekend, bugger it.

Oh, and paul if you are looking for reasons, because I did promise them:

You do not have the right to not get taxed, you have the right to freedom of speech, not the right to a free exchange of ideas or for your ideas to be treat with respect, generally liberals are in favour of reducing government’s rights (For example, the government does not have the right to dictate who you can marry) and are in favour of having the government do something if it is cheaper for the government to do it.

If you pay $2 to your government or $20 to your HMO, that 2$ in taxes is still 18$ less then you would be paying that HMO.

Further, free market=anarchy because not everybody suddenly becomes perfectly moral the second they start a business.

Should read

Okay, I stand by the latter, but I would really understand how this filtering system worked better if it was the other way round.

paul

You are making several false assumptions, you are assuming rights which don’t exist, and aside from that, liberals actually are in favour of limiting the government’s powers. I will explain it all later, for now, I have stuff that needs doing pronto.

Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. A liberal society is characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on power, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market economy, free private enterprise, and a transparent system of government in which the rights of all citizens are protected.

I believe both parties are guilty of straying from true liberalism. In particular, support for global warming initiatives (Kyoto and other regulations) subverts individual rights for the rights of the state. Also, excessive taxation (redistribution of wealth) for social programs also infringes on individual rights. Modern day democrats are betraying the free exchange of ideas when conservative speakers are shouted down on college campuses, when democrats refuse to debate on Fox, and when liberal organizers try to boycott television programs with the intent of shutting down the speech. Most, who claim to be liberals today, don’t try to limit the power of government (with the exception of the military industrial complex), then generally try to expand governments role in our lives with higher taxes and more government involvement. Market economy and free private enterprise? I’m not sure that even liberals here would debate that they support market forces over government intervention.

I also believe that today’s conservatives betray many liberal ideals, but I’ll those criticisms for you.

Most people who call themselves conservatives are actually liberals. They believe in civil rights, oppose torture, and recognise that company’s aren’t run by saints or even long-term thinkers.

They recognise that you don’t get a free lunch and are actually in favour of paying their debts. They don’t like taxes, and would much rather have tax loopholes closed then have to pay higher taxes themselves, but accept that it is frequently better to pay taxes then to let things degrade.

They are genuinely opposed to needless wars, but admit the need for war in exceptional circumstances. They admit that science has brought the world further forward, and a lot faster, then religion ever did. They are profoundly uncomfortable with the religious right, and with people telling them what to think, do, or otherwise believe.

They want their media to report fact as fact and fiction as fiction. They aren’t overly in favour of giving the media the right to lie to them.

They actually, when you get right down to it, don’t care if the gay couple down the street get married or not. They don’t even care that there is a gay couple down the street.

The trouble is, they are also the victims of rightwing hysteria. Nobody does hysteria quite like the rightwing do hysteria.

Because of Rightwing hysteria, they think that “liberals” want to force straight people into gay marriage, religious people into being atheists, force taxes into stratospheric levels in order to pay people to not work, the media into only ever reporting the liberal side of things and the courts into letting murderers go free complete with complementary machine guns.

They have been lied to and swallowed the lie, because they have not gone and looked up what liberal ideology really is.

What’s going to change? Except Murdock will change his spots as the circulation or right-wing popularity varies. They’ll still report the stock prices right and promote a”big business” is better philosophy.

I know, but it is a step in the right direction that they are willing to vote for a Democrat. Anyone want to guess who their favorite Democratic candidate is? Surprisingly, they almost all agree on this one.

There are a few conservatives out there with a conscience. I know five people who are conservatives and every one of them are ashamed of what their part has become and most say they will vote democratic in the next election. One is actually thinking about changing parties.

You think that posting my dissenting posts on redstate.com proves that I was not banned and that they don’t censure. Can you post anything other than the few posts I made within a half an hour period that I made? If not, all that shows is that they left the posts I made when they blocked my account and blocked my ability to even view redstate. The did the same thing the day before when I posted with a different name from a different IP address.

You have proven nothing. And I stand by my views that at least progressive/liberals allow dissenting views on their sites, no matter how ignorant and inane the posts are.

Says the wingnut that listens to Rush, Drudge and O’Reilly and spews what he’s told to think on this blog.

This is nothing but projection from you, you ridiculous little loser. Unlike the asshole pundits you suck off, Olbermann actually covers the full story. If by ‘told what to think’, you mean ‘told to think for yourself’, you’re right. Then again, the subtleties of reality are always lost on loonies, when the unicorn horn of neocroniesm is shoved up your ass.