English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

And what will arguing source bias instead of credibility and factual relevance do to political debates?

2007-01-06 16:30:33 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

11 answers

What Thomas Jefferson advocated for every 19 years, we'll have a revolution against the status quo.

2007-01-06 16:33:33 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

Growing disrespect can be changed. Oh, it will take time, but it can be reversed. Sadly, few people any more actually trust our government. People believe that all politicians lie and cheat. Some are even child molesters. So where can we get replacements who are honest? Good question. The future of this country will change. It will start this month actually. The president realizes that his honeymoon is over and now he faces challanges that he has never faced before. He will have to account for just about everything he does. Will it keep him honest? Probably not. Didn't work with Nixon, Bush 41, Clinton, or Reagan. But it created checks and balances and when they get caught, they do have to answer. Granted, its usually a slap on the wrist, but presidents are more concerned with how they will look in history books than anything else. Do you think that Clinton wants history to show his impeachment? Did Nixon want history to show that he resigned in disgrace? Nope they don't, so this too should account for their behavior.
As to your question about factual relavance in a political debate, facts are so plentiful that anyone getting into a debate has no reason not to be well equipped with factual information. But they do.
for example, Cheney knew that there was no weapons grade plutonium in Iraq and could have stopped the war before it started. Now that statement is completely accurate, but I promise that someone will disagree.

2007-01-07 00:48:09 · answer #2 · answered by David L 6 · 0 0

Lets see; when I was 18 and stuck in the military way back in the late 60's young people were rioting in the streets against the authority. I don't see where it has grown; quite the contrary, it has diminished.

I see young people joining our military and serving authority with pride and then I see some youth, in my opinion for I only know what I see, that are far too self absorbed to really do anything other than whine, complain and spout absurd insults at the powers that be. Much as the petulant child cries when it doesn't have the attention that it craves.

The really wonderful thing about this country is that you don't have to ask permission to help others. If you don't like what The President is doing you can volunteer for service at the office of somebody you do support, lord knows there is enough of them. If you think people are going hungry then volunteer you time or money to help them. Get off the couch or out of your chair and go help, don't just whine about our country.

America Rocks

2007-01-07 00:48:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Believe it or not, we all grow up. If you look at the Viet Nam conflict there were thousands marching in the streets of D.C. That's why Nixon made LSD illegal, he thought it was making all the young people angry militant protesters, I guess he didn't notice all the adults protesting along with them. You get disrespect for authority when authority disrespects its' citizens. Look at the cops and how they can sometimes get out of hand, our President involving us in his immoral war. You get what you give. As for politics, bias has always ruled the day.

2007-01-07 06:20:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

there is a growing disrespect for "political authority" in this country. Unfortunately much of this disrespect has been earned by the politicians. For example, Congress during the last 6 years has been nicknamed the "do-nothing Congress". When you have earned a name like that, how is it that you can command respect. There needs to be some political reform on behalf of the politicians in order to earn back the respect they have lost.

2007-01-07 00:42:48 · answer #5 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 3 1

I think future people in authority will be far more careful about the type of constraints they put on people.

For example, how can you have any respect for the law when it tells you pot is bad and everyone knows it isn't?

2007-01-07 03:53:32 · answer #6 · answered by bettysdad 5 · 1 1

The blatant disrespect that I often see in my neighborhood is indeed worrying. It will plunge the nation into turmoil if it is not stopped, I think.

2007-01-07 00:55:30 · answer #7 · answered by Aquilus 2 · 1 1

We will be building more and more jails and prisons. We will be hiring more and more policeman. We will lose more and more of our rights.

What political debate? There is only shouting down and calling names. Cut and paste of questionable sources. If you do not agree, you are stupid.

Worse, around here, if you present a reasonable and logical argument, you are reported incessantly for the heinous TOS violation of chatting.

2007-01-07 00:35:28 · answer #8 · answered by ? 7 · 1 4

is it a disrespect for authority or just disrepect for the person in authority? I think it's the latter

2007-01-07 01:17:28 · answer #9 · answered by Nick F 6 · 1 2

well if you think the other countries wont be holding their hands out for our money no matter what they think about us your wrong

2007-01-07 01:25:37 · answer #10 · answered by stygianwolfe 7 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers