Michael Youhana Liberal isn't a very descriptive word so I understand the confusion here, and I think it's being used confusedly. I think Janna is basically saying that the bulk of corporate media is skittish about aligning itself with the Republican party -- sometimes true, sometimes false. Depends on the time and the Republican. I think Rick's saying that there are positions further to the left of Obama that a lot of corporate media is skittish about adopting.
Michael Youhana Ew, at "ancient tribal societies." Cradle of Civilization is the more more common phrase written in conjunction with Iraq. And modern sectarian conflict in Iraq is best understood, by and large, as a production of modern political currents. One could certainly, count neoconservatism among those currents. Put another way, avoidable intervention is not just often ineffective -- it's often devastating.
Michael Youhana I like this. It's a clear-cut incentive to write articles and makes the effort to become a Pundit more serious. Rookies don't show up on the homepage, but they have more of an incentive to get their mic count up as a result.
Michael Youhana This is something of an ambitious editorial goal, but: I think it would be awesome if editors pitched a few more stories designed to up the site's international readership. Not all traffic is identical; and traffic that promises to internationalize discussion on topics from austerity, to guns, to conflict has the potential shift debates.
Michael Youhana Of course, there should still be an option on something like the 'Contact Us' page to submit stories anonymously to the editorial board for security purposes etc. I feel like it's possible to have a cake and eat it too, on this issue.
Michael Youhana I strongly support this. Not just from a user-experience standpoint. Aesthetically it will make the site look far, far more professional to not have ugly, gray blank profile pictures adjacent to names with numbers in them.
Michael Youhana "These terms are well-understood enough" Disagree. To be honest, I think your present definition leaves much to be desired. I have no problem with "adversarial teams" (groups of people who disagree with each other), in democracies. "you concluded that I lack a sense of humor" Right. Sorry that bothers you. On the other hand, I'm not bothered at all that you're predisposed "to disagree with whatever [I] say." You've engaged in a fairly long bout of personality criticism, due to your dissatisfaction with a joke. Wish you'd dedicate as much time to fleshing out your own policy critiques/proposals or writing your own article. Or you could keep writing about how much you hate my joke or my "attitude." Real "worthwhile."
Michael Youhana "Tear gas can be quite lethal." "[Correction] Biggest logical fallacy: All weapons are lethal (Not true), therefore all weapons are equally lethal." "Fact of the matter is, the laws that make AR-15s illegal for hunting large game are based on the muzzle velocity and foot-pounds of force exerted by rounds measured at the end of the barrel...Whether you agree with the reasoning or not, power actually IS analogous to deadliness when discussing firearms." I'm pretty sure a civil war canon could effectively kill most large game -- yet I'd say still say an AR-15 is more deadly than a civil war cannon. Try again.
Michael Youhana I wouldn't call that a logical fallacy. I'd call it a difference in taste -- something that you appear to have a clear problem with. To your second point: I urge you to consider what failing to clearly define terms (in this case "polarization" vs "disagreement") does to consensus politics.
Michael Youhana As I understand it, it takes a lot of power to kill particular game. Power is not analogous to deadliness to people (hence the logical fallacy). Other factors weigh in depending on the weapon (e.g. firing rate). A canon is a very powerful weapon, but I'd argue that many less-powerful modern guns are more deadly. "I suppose you can argue that some "weapons" are not lethal, but I'd challenge you to name one." Most riot control weaponry. Tazers are supposedly not designed to be though they can be. Nor is tear gas. Nor are smokescreens. A lot of tranquilizers aren't. I mean, technically almost anything can be deadly (e.g. one could choke on an appleseed), but I wouldn't classify almost anything as a deadly weapon
Michael Youhana "Uh, all weapons are lethal." [Correction] Biggest logical fallacy: All weapons are lethal (Not true), therefore all weapons are equally lethal. "That's exactly why the AR-15 is illegal for hunting large game in most locales." Comparably large logical fallacy: Just because a weapon is not the most effective choice for hunting game it's less deadly than a hunting rifle.
Michael Youhana "Bigger logical fallacy: Looks like a military weapon analogous to special kind of high-powered, extra-evil killing machine." Biggest logical fallacy: Assuming that if it's not as deadly as an M16, it's not a special kind of high powered, killing machine. Comparably large logical fallacy: Performs just like some more-benign looking (though equally deadly) weapons, is a benign weapon.