A few questions

[bush]

I was browsing Google video last night and came across a documentary that asked the viewer to answer several questions before it started. I will not say what the documentary was about, but the purpose was to get a point across without being disregarded because of affiliation.

I think everybody would benefit from asking themselves these questions before posting in P&R. It would help the quality of discussion within.


1. Am I so loyal to a political party that it will affect my likelihood of acknowledging factual information?

2. Will I be willing to accept any information that points to officials within an opposing party as criminals without examining the validity of that information?

3. Will I be willing to follow the information to its conclusions, even if it points to people who I previously respected and agreed with, as being criminally negligent or complicit?

4. Do I value Constitutional principles more than party loyalty?

5. Do I value Constitutional principles more than personal morality?

6. Do I automatically assume that anybody who criticizes the current administration must be a left wing liberal?

7. Do I automatically assume that anybody who supports the current administration must be a right wing conservative?

[Sibling]

Originally Posted by bush

7. Do I automatically assume that anybody who supports the current administration must be a right wing conservative?

This one seems to be the only one I find my self doing

[Fargin_Bastige]

#7, replace right wing conservative with idiot and ya got me.

[jim schmidt]

Originally Posted by Fargin_Bastige

#7, replace right wing conservative with idiot and ya got me.

I had the same thought but the replacement word was "dipshit."

[timd99]

Apparently you all fail.

[Choco]

what do you think, harold?

-i think we should drip-dry 'em, guvna.

it was a rhetorical question, harold. what did i tell you about thinking?

[BigBadBoom]

Originally Posted by Choco

what do you think, harold?

-i think we should drip-dry 'em, guvna.

it was a rhetorical question, harold. what did i tell you about thinking?

Great movie.

Do you like dags?

- dags?

[bush]

Originally Posted by BigBadBoom

Great movie.

Do you like dags?

- dags?

What the fuck am I going to do with a caravan with no wheels?

[bush]

Bump

[hybrid]

cant I just say I hate the entire system as it is?

Democrat...........Republican...........who cares? When was the last time you have seen any politician in it for the good of its people?

I havent.

hell I havent even seen a place where you could get all the information you want about what your reps are doing. I dont have 23 hours a day to sift and weed thru pages and pages of shit. The political system has swamped shit so badly that most people dont know what the fuck they are voting for and when they do vote someone in they dont know what the fuck that person is doing to them or for them.............its rediculous.

[jim schmidt]

Sounds like they were attempting to soften you up. I suspect their point of view was weakly supported. Am I right?

[bush]

No, it was a fact-based powerpoint with commentary. I don't want to get into what it was all about, it was the questions in the original post that got me thinking.

I like fact-based debate on these boards, and since we have some new members posting here I figured it wouldn't hurt to revisit those questions. Honestly I was more concerned with what people here in P&R would gain from asking themselves those questions than I was with the documentary itself.

[Target900]

The questions do point out something that is a serious problem. Factual information can be presented in biased ways. That is probably one of the biggest problems I've seen in "reporting". 1 set of results can look great or terrible just depending on the way you setup a graph.