David : You are absolutely right that it is hard to find balance in the media. Jared Diamond is one of not all that many. Usually the best anyone can do is to look for partisans of either Left or Right who try to be fair even if mostly they are Right or Left. An example of someone who tries to be fair, who is mostly on the Right, is Michael Medved. On the Left it might be Tom Friedman. Someone who is an East Coast Radical Centrist --that is, RC in the form of Democrats who are moderate but with an independent streak, would be John Avlon. He appears on CNN now and then. I'd put Cokie Roberts in this category about some issues, but about half the time she is on the Left per se. Really hard to find elected officials who are remotely RC. Warner and Susan Collins are about as close as any get. We had a mayor here who was more-or-less RC in outlook, , the one before Commissar Piercy, his name was Jim Torrey, but he is history now and no longer is a factor. I don't know much about governors but would guess that there might be a few in swing states where it would be political suicide to be too far to the Left or to the Right, with a premium on a centrist approach as part of how things are done. This could explain Chis Cristie ; even though he is a conservative he also has a Left wing outlook about X number of issues. It might even help explain Romney although unlike actual RC where you are supposed to be principled and consistent, I don't see where Romney is all that principled or consistent. So, yeah, it is slim pickins out there. No question about it. My approach, for what it is worth, is that Democrats can be a good source of criticisms of the GOP and Republicans are excellent sources of criticism of the Left even when neither party actually offers all that much by way of productive ideas to fix the economy or almost anything else. At least each party is good at identifying the weaknesses of the other. I'd still recommend ( Highly ) Real Clear Politics. Every day is like an encyclopedia of political and other events, with selected articles from both Left and Right, with occasional "other" viewpoints represented in the mix. That is about as close to RC as you're going to get in the real world. That and C-Span on weekends. Brain Lamb isn't a Radical Centrist but he comes close enough on a number of issues. A writer who also comes close --at least now and then-- is McWhorter the black linguist. But his stuff doesn't get into print all that often. I don't want to leave out Lieberman, who obviously is mostly Leftist in outlook, but speaking of the real world and who approximates an RC outlook once in a while anyway. Of course he is in the twilight of his career. So far, very few women seem to get the idea of anything like RC. Hence most women, although in smaller numbers than 08, are Democratic leaning. You can see it here. After all this time, with a brief interlude when one woman showed up for a short time, still no RC women at RC.org. My guess is that women are, by nature, more opportunistic than men, which is saying a lot --considering how opportunistic some men can get. Since RC has not "made it" yet in the political world they could care less. If there is no obvious net gain from associating with Radical Centrists why bother ? Same sort of thing Re: Philosophy. In the entire history of philosophy maybe 5 % of actual philosophers have been women. Women can be damned smart but if there is no obvious advantage in a materialistic sense, forget it. Still, there is one more-or-less exception, Mara Liason, or she was an exception. But in the times when she was a panelist on Special Report on Fox she almost always was really good, and not reluctant to poke a stick at either party. This, for now, is the best I can tell you. Billy =========================== 3/25/2012 9:18:38 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
It's not difficult to understand, but it is damn difficult to find. I mean, you mention 1 (one) guy from UCLA who has even attempted it and it hasn't brought him roses from his own side. There's just about NO evenhanded approaches here. Sure there is blame to go around. And if I watch CNN/CBS/ABC/PBS/MSNBC and read the local rag (even in Texas), it's ALL the fault of the oil companies, coal companies, chemical companies, farmers and ranchers spraying pesticides and all that rot. Government is always on the side of good, and the companies are always on the side of evil, if I may go dualist in the opposite direction from my usual. Such appears to be the Democratic narrative. Oh yeah, and Libertarians are evil. There has to be a middle ground here. Where is it? I don't hear much of it. I hear the standard lines and complaints that either the environmentalists have poisoned the debate (from the Libertarians), or that the Libertarians have poisoned the debate (from the environmentalists and the MSM). The latter has the louder voice because they are buying TV signals (well, they actually OWN some of those)-modern day ink-by the barrel. I am so used to getting the government=good, companies=bad, that I will seek equilibrium by stressing the opposite. I get it in the news, I get it in the paper, and if I wanted to find more of it on the internet, I know I could. I took a nap today, so I may go past my 11:30 witching hour. Or maybe not. David _ "Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection."—Neal Boortz On 3/25/2012 9:04 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) wrote: Wait a minute. The point isn't that there is no fraud in the environmental movement. Nor is the point that the EPA under Obama isn't off the rails. And complaining about such things is a legitimate reaction. Ernie's point was that it is illegitimate to put all the onus on government, especially since private interests have, in fact, done a lot of harm to the environment. Which is not to say that businesses always do so. Jared Diamond's book, Collapse, is very clear about how responsible a good number of oil companies really are.His colleagues at UCLA don't want to hear this and he has gotten a lot of flak from the Left But there is no question at all that other oil companies have been very bad actors. Hence the argument is that it is foolish to blame only the government. But that is what you habitually do, its always the gvt's fault and only the gvt's fault. That viewpoint is the opposite of anything that can be called Radical Centrism. Obviously I will question such statements and Ernie also and anyone else who feels like it. If there are assumptions made as intrinsic to RC the prime example is the viewpoint that in just about all cases you will find blame on both sides of any equation. Therefore, any analysis which leaves out either gvt or pvt business is invalid and wrong. This does not say that, case by case, the worst offender may not be the government Its just that over any kind of comprehensive study the chances are very high that gvt and private business will commit approximately as many "sins." Its how the world works. As well, and this is testable, the public does not buy into the view that gvt is always wrong just as it does not buy into the view that business is always wrong. This is the prime problem with Rand and Libertarianism, the insistence that the problem is always the 'evil-doing' government, and that the market is always right. That viewpoint is simply outright false. And everyone knows it. Except a Libertarian minority that, for reasons of Libertarian ideology forever says that all problems are the fault of government. That belief is preposterous. It is, by the way, the mirror image of Marxist-Leninism. Almost exactly. For it is the Marxist-Leninists who forever say that the problem is always the private sector and the market is always evil. Most people --overwhelmingly-- don't buy that, either. Because Rand / Libertarians are so completely one-sided in their approach they cannot be taken seriously. They are not objective, they are ideological. Are ideologies wrong about everything ? Of course not. Clearly Libertarians make valid points about free speech, and their critiques of some particulars are right on the money. But overall, there is such one-sidedness that Radical Centrists must oppose Libertarianism, not tepidly, but clearly and strongly After all, that viewpoint stands for positions that are the exact opposite of Radical Centrism. There is blame to go around, including blame for the gvt. But there needs to be some semblance of objectivity. To leave out the blame that is due to private companies or the market is simply to misconstrue reality. Why is this so difficult to understand ? Billy ----------------------------------------------------------- 3/25/2012 4:34:06 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: We have EPA overreach and Globull Warming fraud all around and complaining about it is the distraction??? So we let the EPA strangle the energy supply and kill jobs because government is so saintly??? I cannot believe that I'm reading this. David _ "Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection."—Neal Boortz On 3/25/2012 12:21 AM, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote: Hi DRB, Sent from my iPhone On Mar 24, 2012, at 21:46, "David R. Block" <[email protected]>_ (mailto:[email protected]) wrote: I thought that we were in MORE opposition to the current Presidential office holder. This seems to be a distraction. While Billy's crusade may be overblown, he has a legitimate point. The idolization of the free market and demonization of the government is largely what is making the GOP lose the masses. Yes, we can't blame all that on Rand and the libertarians, but they are the ideological core of those messages. In short: they are the distraction. E -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community _<[email protected]>_ (mailto:[email protected]) Google Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ (http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) Radical Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ (http://radicalcentrism.org/) -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
