Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DevilsSon
Ponrauil, the little satire you posted attributes EVERYTHING that has happened from a social policy rather than economical perspective to the democrats. Which is absolutely not true.
|
What? How does it attibute "EVERYTHING"? It doesn't. It just mentions stuff like quality standards or socialy orientated actions taken by the Dems. There are a lot of issues it doesn't address.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DevilsSon
This simply shows me that it is written for a manipulative purpose, just like the article about Obama.
|
Well of course it's sided. It was written by a democrat, what did you expect? It's like Michael Moore's work being slagged off because it's partisan when that is the main point of his work. You shouldn't judge something for what it was never meant to be.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DevilsSon
The Republicans themselves are responsible for a lot of the things which the story underlines (you even mention that in your first part of your last post), there have been joint initiatives by senators and representatives of both parties, etc. etc...attributing all to the democrats is a lie meant to manipulate people and make them think "damn, i vote for those republicans but when was the last time they did something for me?". Which is a skewed perspective.
|
I see it more like an answer to the question "When's the last time the Dems did something for me?".
Again it doesn't attribute ALL to the democrats, or deny EVERYTHING the republicans have achieved. It just recalls to the Joe-republicans of the US that SOME important things are to be attributed to the dems.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DevilsSon
Now you call it just a "story". Well, then I call the Obama article "just some article". They are both equally manipulative, the only difference is in that they address different social strata.
|
I'd call it just another article too, because there have been so many like this throughout this campaign, even during the primaries. But I also make a difference between an invented story, that will be obviously be different to reality, and an article that presents itself as serious and backed-up.
My reading is that the story is manipulative in a pro-dem way, not anti-rep way. I have much less issues with biased stuff when it's pro than when it's anti. And the Obama article is pretty much just that.
Ponrauil