Deseret News | Back up claims with proof

Reader comments
Readers' forum: Back up claims with proof

More than black and white | 12:30 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

I am a Centrist. I find the tone of talk radio to be hateful, so I voted against the Republicans in the last election. Apparently, I was not alone.

Proof enough for you?

It goes both ways.... | 12:46 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

You are half correct. Both "sides" spit out endless ignorance. I am a socialist, and at work end up listening to conservative radio which wouldn't know a socialist from a fascist from a raisin. The lack of critical thinking skills that we Americans must possess, keep the liberal and conservative voice boxes' wallets fat. After their shows, they probably go out for a beer and laugh at the ignorance of the masses.

Thomas | 12:48 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

The problem I find with both sides of the political spectrum is the use of labels to define an opponent. What defines liberal or conservative? The use of labels does not enlighten because people fall into all shades of belief on many issues. Those who are opposed to "liberalism" might find they are more liberal than they realize. Unemployment insurance, public schools, guaranteed savings accounts (FDIC), child labor laws, public construction of dams, and food and drug laws were once "liberal" objectives. Do we really want to be "conservative" and return to the abject conditions we had back in the late 1800's and early 1900's?

Comments continue below

mark | 1:42 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

"Rather than calling the radio talk-show hosts spewers of hate, I wish those offended would tell us why they disagree and present arguments to convince us otherwise."

Well the arguments have been presented many times. Of course you will not hear them by just listening to conservative talk radio or reading conservative commentators.

But I will tell you why I disagree with conservative radio talk-show hosts: because they spin, misrepresent, use bad logic, are irrational, lie, both lies of omission as well as actual lies. They cater to the lowest common denominator, they are rude and dismissive, they talk over people, do not engage in real debate, think that yelling and shouting down people proves their argument, think they win arguments because they can hang up on people. Because they are arrogant, and intellectually lazy. Because they play on peoples fears, and they are hypocrites. Because they use junior high humor. Because they are partizan hacks with zero journalistic integrity. Because they think that other hacks, like Coulter, are legitimate, rational, political commentators. Because they think they are great Americans.

And, yes, I do listen to them.

Hypocrisy | 1:54 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

Proof?

What proof do you have that "liberals" are trying to install death panels?

What proof do you have that Obama is trying to take over the auto industry?

What proof do you have that Obama has hate for white culture?

What proof do you have that Obama is a Muslim from Kenya who isn't even an American citizen?

It's not worth arguing with you nutcakes anymore

Ok | 4:56 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

Keith Olberman does just that very well daily on his show!

Curmudgeon | 5:31 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

What a novel idea - dialogue rather than diatribe.

Roger S. | 5:36 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

Well said.

Americans spoke | 5:37 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

We nasty libs don't need to convince you of ANYTHING! We already tried that by electing an AWESOME PRESIDENT OBAMA. Utahn's just won't hear what they don't want to. Get used to it though, Obama WILL BE our President for another 7 years.

sore-LOSERS | 5:41 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

I'm sure you're still reeling from the decisive Obama victory, but I hope preaching to the choir at Des News makes you feel better. Can you keep it up for another 7 years though, that is the question? Pace yourself; ranting can really be tiring.

SMH | 5:51 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

We're glad you found the righ...I mean light, David. Now, go get a life.

Timj | 6:20 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

You can be a spewer of hate and yet still spit out truth. Look up Elder Wood's April 2006 Conference talk for good advice on what to stay away from, and why.

Go team go | 7:25 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

The writer demonstrates the problem when he refers to "convince us" of "truth". The "with God or against him mentality of group think" has eliminated independent rational thinking. The result is ex-bartenders, rodeo clowns and egotists spinning anything without proof in order to appeal to the emotional base of the "us" group. All citizens need to independently review the facts, various interests and not wait to find out what the neighbors think around the bonfire created by radio talk show entertainers.

Danny C. | 7:39 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

Excellent letter. I myself seldom listen to/watch political commentaries from either side of the spectrum but think it's important for people to listen to all sides of an argument then determine for themselves whose opinion to side with.

shecky | 8:04 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

Good idea. Then, perhaps conservatives will also agree to use arguments instead of terms like "libs", "socialists", "radicals". Much like "haters", these terms have come to mean exactly nothing.

Doug G | 8:06 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

Sorry about your luck, pal. I don't owe you that much explanation. I don't know what the 'true path' is, but I do know that when I've listened to talk radio my instincts and knowledge tell me it's vitriolic and unnecessarily spiteful, and that the need to resort to this methodology to make a point suggests something is missing. I am not incorrect in this assessment inasmuch as it is my own just like sowell's opinions are his own, and he's despised obama from day one. Have a nice weekend.

I'm a conservative | 8:11 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

and I think nationally syndicated talk shows are full of hate and ignorance. I even agree with many of their core values and visions, but I hate their methods---it destroys discussion and increases partisanship which is destroying our democratic system. Why?
-- They degrade the other side with namecalling ("libs" and so on)
-- They claim to allow open discussion, but when democratic callers call their show, they get shot down, talked over, and dismissed without a thought. Give me one example of any of them sincerely listening to a liberal caller's perspective and honestly giving it some weight in the argument. Like I said, I'm a conservative, but there are good ideas on both sides of the aisle, and I wish we could discuss the ideas in a reasonable way.
-- They blame the regular media for emphasizing irrelevant details and ignoring the bigger issues, and then they do it themselves. The media IS guilty of this, but so are the talk show hosts who emphasize missteps in speech taken out of context
-- They are hateful, pure and simple. Do you feel peace, calm, and uplifted from listening to them? I don't.

Anonymous | 8:16 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

Look, to say President Obama hates American values is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. It ranks up there with the old argument made by someone that they could use the Bible to prove anything they wanted. It is kind of like the talk show comedians schtick of using clips to show President Bush saying stuff that is really off the wall. And if Obama or anyone else disagrees with you, does that mean it is not an American value? Who sets "American values?" I thought we were a free nation, or do we have to be just like you or else, kind of like Stalin?

Some Examples of Liberalism | 8:20 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

Ben Franklin ultimate liberal. Signing the abolitionist petition to Congress. Believed in freedom, diversity, the Enlightenment, and progress.

Jefferson: brilliant, master architect, Lockean liberal. Nobody stoked the leftist rhetoric of revolution, democracy, equality and progress better.

James Madison, spouting off human liberties, drafting that ultimate liberal document the Bill of Rights.

George Washington, war hero. Offered the dictatorship and refused, saying America should remain a republic. Took enormous pains to make sure his slaves were freed upon his death. What a bleeding heart!

John Adams. Haitian slaves staged the world's second anti-imperial revolution, Adams stood by them. He even made national headlines by having a man of color to dinner!

Abe Lincoln, that liberal ACLU-type lawyer, fighting a war to free black people, telling big business southerners what they can and can’t do!

Then U.S. Grant, who established Yellowstone Park, and Teddy Roosevelt who fought for so many more like it. Greenies!! TreeHugging Environmental wackos!!!!

Put it all together and you have a group of pointy-headed liberal geniuses whose Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights, Emancipation Proclamation, national parks and much more remain the liberal bulwark of world freedom.

....

Both sides | 9:07 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

The author of the "Science Prostituted" letter needs to follow your advice as well.

Ned | 9:16 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

Aw, come on Dave. You want them to face the facts? You want them to back up their claims with something solid? You want them to provide a tangible list of reasons for their barbs? Drink the Koolaid, Dave....

EM | 10:18 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

You want proof? Here it is, David: It's written in the Bible. It's God's law. Liberalism is clearly the path our Divine Creator has in mind for us. Conservatives are hell-bent on flouting God's laws and they will surely reap what they sow! All the proof you need can be found in our faith and in the Bible. End of discussion, thank you.

KM | 12:48 p.m. Nov. 14, 2009

After reading all the Obama lovers on this article it occurs to me that your eyes are not open to what is truly going on in this country. Three words; WE ARE BROKE! Neither you nor Obama deal with reality very well. We can't just look the other way and pass yet another bill that burdens us with more taxes from now until eternity. We need to stop the spending and begin to think rationally about what we can and cannot afford. At the time being, we cannot afford another thing! Stop monetizing our debt! Stop borrowing! Stop spending! Children!

selective vision | 1:04 p.m. Nov. 14, 2009

the letter writer seems to be suffering from the same condition that most conservatives seem to selective blindness. I read no less then seven concrete examples given by people over the last two days on similar threads about uncivil words and outright lies by these talk show host. I suppose all of you selectively missed the lie Hannity was caught in just a couple of days ago and apparently no one read Becks book "arguing with idiots" where he calls Teddy Roosevelt an idiot.

@km | 1:31 p.m. Nov. 14, 2009

you know KM there is now a way for you to put your money where your mouth is, there is now a way for you to pay down the your portion of the national debt (yes if you have lived in this country you are partly responsible for the national debt), once you do that get back to us.

There are some good programs | 2:56 p.m. Nov. 14, 2009

PBS has some excellent programs, available on-line as well.
Last night, PBS "Now" program talked to Elizabeth Warren, Harvard Prof, on the panel overseeing how the bailout money is being spent. Very enlightening. I would recommend it to everyone, Repubs and Dems.

Charles | 3:06 p.m. Nov. 14, 2009

As of the comments of 1:31pm, not one Obama supporter has done what was asked. Not one.

Instead you've attacked the letter writer and conservatives and talk radio.

It's always nice to see people claim to be conservatives and then rip everything that goes with being one.

The proof of the ignorance on the left is found in the post @1:51 am. The only thing not proved on your list is where Obama was born. Why? Obama won't release his real, long form, birth certificate. If he has nothing to hide, why not release it?

Anyway, you have proved the content of the letter correct.

To the KO lover --- Olbermonkey has been debunked for years. Nothing of substance there.

Ernest T. Bass | 3:50 p.m. Nov. 14, 2009

They lie more than they tell the truth.
They're a laughing stock to anyone who really pays attention. Why is it that their party of choice has been in charge for 20 of the last 28 years and we're in such a mess? Why is it that the best years during those 28 years is when a dem was in the White House?
Why is it that moderates have been pushed out of 'their' party for extremists?
The current right wing is a sham, similar to Islamist extremists.

To: Charles | 4:13 p.m. Nov. 14, 2009

This morning I took several minutes and pulled together several "hateful" and "extreme" statements made by Glenn Beck. Unfortunately they have not appeared on this message board. I do not know why, but I really don't feel like taking the time to do it again. I've also posted numerous times examples of his blatant lies, but still his supporters overlook/ignore and demand "proof."
So, my suggestion to you is use google. Type in Glenn Beck hate speech or outrageous statements lies or anything along those lines.
Or, just wake up.

proven right | 5:39 p.m. Nov. 14, 2009

More name-calling. More baseles accusation. More hatred towards conservatives. The inane left-leaning comments here, so far, prove the writer’s point.

Mark@1:42 rattles off every accusation and insult he can think of, but STILL cannot offer a single shred of evidence to support his claims. Bias doesn’t cut it. Anyone can just as easily spew out a line of criticisms against Maddow, Stewart, Colbert, Oberman and others on MSN and NBC with the very same comments!

The constant and unproven accusations of hatred have grown so ridiculously tiresome. These talk shows comment on policies and actions — not the people making the policies or performing the actions. Only the left wants it to always be personal - as if that negates the criticism.

If anyone dares to disapprove of Obama’s policies, the left automatically stones them as Obama haters.

I really don’t care what liberals and leftists say. The baselessness of their criticism eventually will work to the benefit of conservatives. Most Americans are not as dumb as liberals think they are.

Some Examples of Liberalism | 8: | 5:41 p.m. Nov. 14, 2009

Those are examples of CLASSIC liberals,

even JEsus and Bible is an example of CLASSIC liberalism

which is QUITE DIFFERENT from modern liberalism or NEO-LIBERLISM.

TODAY's liberalism espouses dependenced and enslavement on a VERY strong central government rule by neo- liberal elites,

a strong cental government that conrol business, people's individuals and personal lifes, their homes, limits free speech, contols production and means of production, controls energuy, controls education, controls health care, controls...

NOT the same at all as classic liberalism.

mark | 6:20 p.m. Nov. 14, 2009

Seriously if you want to hear the arguments of Progressives it won't be on Right Wing talk radio, and why would you imagine that's where we'd try?
Those shows screen callers, they control if or how long someone could speak, and can censor any view they disagree with.
Progressive websites would be a much more likely place to read Progessive arguments. Those sites aren't hard to find.

@charles | 9:38 p.m. Nov. 14, 2009

what arguments did the letter writer make that "liberals missed charles he made no arguments other then to try to claim that liberals unfairly call conservative commentators rude without giving examples or debating the issues yet he presented no issues just name calling. I stick by my earlier comment about conservatives selective vision.

Anonymous | 11:47 p.m. Nov. 14, 2009

Your not hearing the reasons and argument because you are only listening to the agents of hate. Broaden your horizons and listen to both sides like an impartial litigator, then you will see for yourself.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.