CSPAN Question: Too Much Democracy?

- This morning on CSPAN: Is there such a thing as 'too much democracy'.

- Is CSPAN becoming more conservative...or is it my imagination? They seem to have more right-leaning than left-leaning guests. And the new call-in numbers? What's that all about? Support Bush* or support Democrats?

(Callers have asked Lamb about the new call numbers that mention Bush* by name and Democrats as generic. He only mumbles and says that the nation has never been this partisan or split...but never really explains the clearly partisan call in scheme.)

"too much democracy"? What an interesting concept.

The conservative right (Republicans, et al) is exactly like a religion. They exhort their followers not to think for themselves, just obey blindly.

Well, I'm a Democrat and an agnostic, and I prefer to think for myself.

Too much democracy? Not enough, if you ask me.

...is when 50%+1 vote to enslave the 50%-1.

Well put!

a Democratic Republic instead of pure democracy. The Majority is quite often quite wrong.

...with the tyranny of the minority?

- Welcome to Bush's* America.

:shrug:

- Is CSPAN helping to indoctrinate Americans into Bush's* New America?

- The second caller says that we have too much democracy...and wonders why CSPAN can be so 'neutral'.

- Another caller says that it's horrible the way the Democrats have been bashing Bush*. "Some of the things that have been said about this president are absolutely horrible."

- This is a common theme among RWingers...who seem to think it's proper to bash Dem presidents...but Bush* should be immune.

because they are minions of SATAN, unlike * who was appointed by GAWD. < /fundie >

if I'm not mistaken.

And aren't they sticking their snouts into the public trough, just like Clear Channel, hoping that by currying favor with the Bush regime they'll be rewarded with all kinds of goodies?

Pretty clear what's actually going on here...

...in the mornings as I sip on coffee. The change has been gradual...but it's there.

- Under the guise of being 'neutral'...they're just another mouthpiece for corporate America and the RWing/neocon agenda. And it's a great place for Republcans to call in to tell us just how much they hate (Clinton) and complain about 'Bush* bashing'.

- The push for CSPAN to have far-right conservative guests came about the same time as they changed their call-in lines to: support Bush* / support Democrats. Notice that Lamb goes into a state of denial when some callers mention that his new call in lines are very partisan in nature.

How can there be degrees? It seems to me you either "got democracy" or you don't.

Either everyone has an opportunity to participate, or you ain't got democracy.

http://www.wgoeshome.com

brian wants callers to mention their favorite websites.

- Is this CSPAN's effort to have their RWing groupie fans make fun of conspiracy theories about the 2000 election, 9-11 and Iraq? That's my bet.

- Another caller says that the Greeks proved you can have too much Democracy...and then mentions Jefferson as someone that thought we had 'too much'. On the contrary...Jefferson was a great proponent of democracy....and a democratic republic.

- Michael Barkun is the author.

http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/presidents/bill-clinton/
"28 May 1993 After being interrupted by AIDS protesters during a speech in Philadelphia, President Clinton opines: "Let me tell you something -- Wait a minute. You know one things that's wrong with this country? Everybody gets a chance to have their fair say.""

"19 Apr 1994 During an appearance on MTV's Enough is Enough, "When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans... And so a lot of people say there's too much personal freedom. When personal freedom's being abused, you have to move to limit it.""

...so why bring up Clinton? Won't they take your call at ConservativeSPAN?

- You're quoting from some nutbag RWing site that has taken those quotes out of context and quotes the debunked 'Clinton Chronicles'. Notice that the link you give portrays Clinton as 'Hitler'?

Simple. Clinton laid the groundwork for what we see today.
From Hussein Kamal's testimony they knew there no WMD's in Iraq, yet the bombing and sanctions continued. As did the fear mongering.
Even beyond that we continually see posts about the Republicans and Syria, for example, yet the Syria bill was promoted by Elliot Engel and fellow Democrats.
The overall point being made is that Democrats are just as bad as Republicans on most issues. Until people start waking up to the flaws in their own politicians how do you expect to keep the others honest?
Since at least Reagan there has been a right wing agenda set and achieved in the US. Clinton maintained that agenda. There is no need to rehash DOMA, the Drug War, Sanctions against Iraq, or the very many pro-corporate anti-people actions of his administration.
Consider this, if Clinton had gone left with his agenda there would have been no room for a Bush candidacy. With the glow from the economy he stumbled into, he could have done just about anything to protect workers and and the social safety net.
But he did not, NAFTA is a direct cause of what we see today in outsourcing.
So, while Clinton is not presently in office, his legacy of upholding a right wing agenda exists today.

HUH?
Can you READ? The site, Rotten.com shows what Clinton went through with the right wing and his own statements.
Rotten is NOT right wing by any stretch of the imagination.
But, you seem to be a knee jerk Democrat, so I will cut you a break for sheer stupidity.
Here are a couple of quotes from the site you chose not to read.
"19 Jul 1993 President Clinton unveils the universally-unpopular "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" rule. One person summarizes the policy: "the military now permits gays to remain in the military, provided they don't act like fairies."
23 Dec 1993 On his television show The 700 Club, Pat Robertson declares: "God and morality, the Clinton administration wants out of the country."
8 Feb 1994 President Bill Clinton shares part of his past with a bunch of General Motors employees: "When I was a younger man and had a life, I owned an El Camino pickup in the '70s. It was a real sort of Southern deal. I had Astroturf in the back. You don't want to know why, but I did."
18 Feb 1994 On his television show The 700 Club, Pat Robertson declares: "These socialists, and they're in there now, starting with the President and his associates ... they want to squeeze out religion because if people read the Bible, they can't be enslaved. You'll never have a socialist government where everybody's Christian.""

Those are FACTUALLY accurate, correct?
So what is wrong with ACCURATE facts?
Unless you are promoting some type of Republican thought process?

They try to cover themselves but I can tell just by their responses to people who have the gall to respond to issues from a center-left point of view.

I think Brian Lamb is a rightwing.

No it's not your imagination. sigh

Despotism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Despotism is government by a singular authority - either a single person or tightly knit group - which rules with absolute power. The word implies tyrannical rule; it suggests a form of government which exercises exacting and near-absolute control over all of its citizens.

--

Despotism & Democracy
Producer: Encyclopaedia Britannica Films - 1946
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4971.htm

Measures how a society ranks on a spectrum stretching from democracy to despotism. Explains how societies and nations can be measured by the degree that power is concentrated and respect for the individual is restricted. Where does your community, state and nation stand on these scales?

a lot of them just strike me as very phony.

is a Bush* supporter. They can call in under "other". I think now that Kerry is pretty official, they may update.