FOX News is a joke.

[Dark]

[i]people can usually post that they're a Libertarian online without holding very many of the actual views and get off scotch free.[/i]

The term is [i]scot-free[/i], by the way. Scotch is a type of whiskey or a brand of adhesive tape.

I don't understand any of that logic. If you meant libertarian in terms of the party, who would want to lie and say that they're part of a group of radical extremists that have abandoned their once-logical ideology? If you meant libertarian in terms of the actual ideology, a lot of people are libertarians in a loose sense without even knowing it. The whole principle behind libertarianism is that the government should have less restrictions placed on the people, hence the libertarian view on abortion and homosexuality lines up with the liberal view, but the libertarian view on gun control or free markets lines up with the conservative view. Nobody can sanely follow this principle in its entirety, just like very few people will advocate a legalization of abortion but a lack of gun control. At the core, we're more split between the liberal-conservative line than any other line. [i]However[/i], many consider themselves more libertarians than liberals [b]mainly because of their stance on the economy[/b]. I refuse to call myself solely a liberal when my economic views line up more with the moderates.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

I'm aware, Dark. Freudian slip.

It's not a lie. If it weren't Ron Paul would not be the current leading force in the movement when he stated that only a minute fraction of the government programs and departments should be kept. You can still call yourself an actual Libertarian for your views, but understand that I wasn't referencing that whatsoever, as I've said a number of times.

And you could always call yourself a moderate, you know.

[Dark]

[i]understand that I wasn't referencing that whatsoever, as I've said a number of times[/i]

> [i]Libertarians have a habit of calling...[/i]

Maybe you should clarify at any given point whether you're talking about the Libertarian Party of America or the libertarian ideology as a whole. Libertarians can refer to either those in the party or those that follow such a theology, and specification is always needed because it is such an ambiguous word. I admit that my posts have been lacking that specificity as well which in turn [i]started[/i] this whole needless discussion, but you could have ended it entirely by specifying whenever you made an accusation against the actual party and not those who follow the theology.

[i]And you could always call yourself a moderate, you know.[/i]

Considering my left-wing social views, moderate doesn't accurately describe me. The only way I can say "socially liberal and economically moderate" is with the word [i]libertarian[/i], really.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

I usually pointed out when I was talking about the general concept. I'm not gonna' go through this thread and sort them out, but you can assume I was talking about the party unless stated otherwise.

Except whether you're taking it to an extreme or not, the Libertarian ideology is that of economic conservatism. You can simply be socially liberal and economically moderate, ultimately identifying yourself as belonging to the Libertarian realm of thought, though that would slightly dilute your actual opinions. Whatever.

But yeah, pretty pointless discussion.

[Dark]

Not like there is much left to discuss on the [i]actual[/i] on-topic discussion, so it doesn't matter.

[i]Libertarian ideology is that of economic conservatism[/i]

That's where I start to disagree. I can understand the free market capitalistic ideologies of both, and I understand the lack of monopoly restrictions on both, but I still don't believe libertarianism represents what economic conservatism does. They are very much related, sure, but the former does not revolve around nor is it based on the latter.

And yes, I wish there was a better word to describe "socially liberal and economically moderate", but for now [i]libertarian[/i] will have to do.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

It's true that there is a slight difference, just like Libertarian ideals don't perfectly align with liberal social issues. The main one probably being Corporatism compared to Free Market. Conservatism tends to favor both while Libertarian economics favors the Free Market.

I've stopped even skimming Fox nowadays. I crossed it on the channels a few days ago, and one of their reporters was interviewing the head of Israel and talking about the wonderful relationship the countries shared with the caption "Threat of Radical Islam" at the bottom. Sigh.

[Lonk]

This is why I watch CNN for National News.

[Dark]

I think the best thing to do is to take whatever FOX says with a grain of salt, really. If you just assume they're all being satirical, it really causes you [i]not[/i] to lose hope in society. It also makes for very good comedy when you convince yourself that they aren't being serious. At the end of the day, though, lying to yourself puts you in no better position, although I've had my fair share of laughs from watching Glenn Beck. Maybe more than my fair share, but who's counting?

[Tentacruel]

Glenn Beck has even admitted that he intends his show to be nothing for than entertainment. [size=1](For conservatives) [/size]

[Agro]

[quote name='Dark' timestamp='1315333593' post='5496575']
I think the best thing to do is to take whatever FOX says with a grain of salt, really. If you just assume they're all being satirical, it really causes you [i]not[/i] to lose hope in society. It also makes for very good comedy when you convince yourself that they aren't being serious. At the end of the day, though, lying to yourself puts you in no better position, although I've had my fair share of laughs from watching Glenn Beck. Maybe more than my fair share, but who's counting?
[/quote]
Or you could get all your news from actual satire.

[Dark]

Actual satire...?

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Colbert"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Colbert[/url]
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Maher"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Maher[/url]

Only two guys I need. <3

[I-dreezyAFG]

i think dark read my posts.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

^Or, you know, he saw Fox. Derp.

I get my news from RT(Russia Today). Since getting biased reports are pretty much unavoidable no matter where you look, I decided to go the distance and get it from a mafia government's propaganda generator. They had a report on UFOs disarming nukes in the UK once. Really quite groundbreaking.

[Hydra of Ages]

[quote name='~Coolio~' timestamp='1315342124' post='5496881']
They had a report on UFOs disarming nukes in the UK once. Really quite groundbreaking.
[/quote]

Interesting. France's primary newspaper ran a similar story once. Coincidence? I think not.

[Tentacruel]

[quote name='Dark' timestamp='1315337405' post='5496687']
Actual satire...?

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Colbert"]http://en.wikipedia....Stephen_Colbert[/url]
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Maher"]http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Bill_Maher[/url]

Only two guys I need. <3
[/quote]

What about Jon Stewart? According to surveys a lot of college-age people actually get their news from him.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Makes sense too.