'Murica! (234 Viewers)

[swag]

I think that was the angle he was going for. At the very least he obviously catered to a specific crowd.

But he clearly showed himself capable of applying mockery on both sides of politics. But rather than make his political base too uncomfortable, he chose a more expected path.

Great material, but still a missed opportunity I think he could have killed it even more at.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[swag]

So only one side is showing signs of self-importance? Come on.

OK, maybe not so much self-importance as self-satisfied airs of intellectual superiority.

 

[Seven]

But he clearly showed himself capable of applying mockery on both sides of politics. But rather than make his political base too uncomfortable, he chose a more expected path.

Great material, but still a missed opportunity I think he could have killed it even more at.

The author is right in saying that it was playful banter towards one side and harsh criticism towards the other. But I think that's what his audience wanted. Sure, it would have been awesome if he had treated them both the same, but perhaps it would have cost him viewers. Don't forget that the whole world likes to mock republicans.

 

[king Ale]

Yep. We already have too many politicians who sit back and take pot-shots at things without contributing anything as it is.



I wouldn't say it was his job as much as it was a missed opportunity as potential targets. There's a wide swath of potential mockery that Stewart avoided that was ripe for the picking, and he essentially chose not to over ideology.



Strange, yes, but not wholly inaccurate. Why liberals often attract such ire is the sense of self-importance that they are intellectually and/or morally superior to others ... when in fact the only major difference is an unwillingness to admit to one's own faults and flaws.

Liberals are on average more educated although i agree that probably doesn't say much. As for moral superiority, read this article when you have time: http://projectimplicit.net/nosek/papers/GHN2009.pdf

Here's the abstract:

"The authors developed several ways to measure people’s use of 5 sets of moral intuitions: Harm/care, Fairness/reciprocity, Ingroup/loyalty, Authority/ respect, and Purity/sanctity. Across 4 studies using multiple methods, liberals consistently showed greater endorsement and use of the Harm/care and Fairness/reciprocity foundations compared to the other 3 foundations, whereas conservatives endorsed and used the 5 foundations more equally. This difference was observed in abstract assessments of the moral relevance of foundation-related concerns such as violence or loyalty (Study 1), moral judgments of statements and scenarios (Study 2), “sacredness” reactions to taboo trade-offs (Study 3), and use of foundation-related words in the moral texts of religious sermons (Study 4). These findings help to illuminate the nature and intractability of moral disagreements in the American “culture war.”

 

[Martin]

OK, maybe not so much self-importance as self-satisfied airs of intellectual superiority.

Well, intellectually they are superior. Is John Kerry intellectually superior to Trump? Quite obviously yes, going by their public statements.

Having said that, neither is the peak of intellectualism exactly.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

Liberals are on average more educated although i agree that probably doesn't say much. As for moral superiority, read this article when you have time: http://projectimplicit.net/nosek/papers/GHN2009.pdf

Here's the abstract:

"The authors developed several ways to measure people’s use of 5 sets of moral intuitions: Harm/care, Fairness/reciprocity, Ingroup/loyalty, Authority/ respect, and Purity/sanctity. Across 4 studies using multiple methods, liberals consistently showed greater endorsement and use of the Harm/care and Fairness/reciprocity foundations compared to the other 3 foundations, whereas conservatives endorsed and used the 5 foundations more equally. This difference was observed in abstract assessments of the moral relevance of foundation-related concerns such as violence or loyalty (Study 1), moral judgments of statements and scenarios (Study 2), “sacredness” reactions to taboo trade-offs (Study 3), and use of foundation-related words in the moral texts of religious sermons (Study 4). These findings help to illuminate the nature and intractability of moral disagreements in the American “culture war.”

i highly doubt it

 

[Seven]

Well, intellectually they are superior. Is John Kerry intellectually superior to Trump? Quite obviously yes, going by their public statements.

Having said that, neither is the peak of intellectualism exactly.

Looking at the achievements of some republican candidates I sometimes wonder if they actually pose as less intellectual.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

Well, intellectually they are superior. Is John Kerry intellectually superior to Trump? Quite obviously yes, going by their public statements.

Having said that, neither is the peak of intellectualism exactly.

not quite what he was getting at, liberals do see themselves as cultivated rennaissance scholars, while conservative cultivate more of a 'simple' pragmatic man image

 

[Martin]

Looking at the achievements of some republican candidates I sometimes wonder if they actually pose as less intellectual.

Who are we talking about?

 

[king Ale]

Well, intellectually they are superior. Is John Kerry intellectually superior to Trump? Quite obviously yes, going by their public statements.

What????

 

[swag]

Well, intellectually they are superior. Is John Kerry intellectually superior to Trump? Quite obviously yes, going by their public statements.

Having said that, neither is the peak of intellectualism exactly.

Despite the William F Buckley Jrs of the world, there's a difference between being intellectually superior and smoking the pipe and merely believing that per se nota.

And good paper, Hoori -- I will check that out more.

 

[Seven]

Who are we talking about?

I think of George W. Bush for example.

 

[Martin]

not quite what he was getting at, liberals do see themselves as cultivated rennaissance scholars, while conservative cultivate more of a 'simple' pragmatic man image

do they really? i think that's a bit exaggerated

 

[GordoDeCentral]

here's an intellectual conservative expanding on this subject:

 

[Martin]

What????

go on

 

[GordoDeCentral]

do they really? i think that's a bit exaggerated

you'd be surprised

 

[Martin]

you'd be surprised

surprise me with something positive, i'm way too cynical as it it

 

[king Ale]

i highly doubt it

I'm pretty sure about it, we were working on this subject the whole past year, may have to ask for the stats from my friend.

- - - Updated - - -

go on

One example from each side and you were proving your point?

 

[Martin]

One example from each side and you were proving your point?

Okay, first of all proof doesn't exist. Only in math. And even then it only exists in the sense that you either find it convincing or not.

Beyond that, what I've seen of Dems vs Repubs there's a pretty clear trend. That's an opinion. No I will not provide data.

 

[Seven]

Okay, first of all proof doesn't exist. Only in math. And even then it only exists in the sense that you either find it convincing or not.

Beyond that, what I've seen of Dems vs Repubs there's a pretty clear trend. That's an opinion. No I will not provide data.

Which is essentially what proof means in any other context too. You're losing it, Martin .