You misunderstand my point...The bulk of the country (the red states) is what you see as far right. I see them as average and moderate.
The press and academia are in general...far left.
The dichotomy between the two has created the market for Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc.

Can you not understand that this is **your** point of view - not an objective measure of left/right?

It should be intuitive. Look around the (western) world - if the average person is "centre", then the US (on average) sits to the right.

It appears that of the 280 off million people in the US, you sit to the right of about 275 million of them.... which may explain why you struggle with objectivity (and rage towards the population of the US who consider themselves left or liberal).

"Far left", objectively, means fully socialist. Price controls, wage controls, cradle to grave welfare. This does not describe the media.

Once again, if you look a a map of the US "red" states...or even better if broken up by precinct....almost 75% of the country by area (by my estimate) is red...or voted for Bush...so as I posted...the bulk of the country is average or moderate...and voted for Bush. I sit about the center. There are some folks to my left that votred for Bush...and some that voted for Kerry...I consider the media to sit to left of that...or the far left. If you consider the populace to be broken up into percentages with 25% as far right and 25% far left....yes, I would consider the bulk of the media to be in the far left 25%. Surveys have shown time after time that they vote that way.
Obviously I was not talking about the mean or the median when I used the term (average man).

John Kerry!!!

He did? When?

Fortunately much of that land has barely any people in it....so 75% land mass means nothing.

I sit about the center.

No you don't! You are pretty close to the rightest of all the people posting on this BBS, and I'm guessing that Porsche BBS's are inherently right biased...

Besides, the average person in the western world is still left of the average person in the US. If the media is "centre" or apolitical (as it should be) then it is going to be left of the US's centre.

It doesn't make it "left" though.

now now . .. don't confuse effective making his point with being an extreme position of that point.

Do you actually dispute what I say? Name someone obviously righterer than Fint?

If one was to confuse "never backing down" with "effectiveness", then I guess one could be confused about what I said ;)

(edit) Applies to el Presidente Bush too, not that I think about it. Never admitting a mistake is not the same as always being correct.

cam
glad to see you agree that I am right.....maybe in NZ I am far right...but herer in the US...I am a moderate.

Oh, and I will happilly admit a mistake (and have) when I make one. You do a pretty darn good job debating...you guys just need better material. If you would take the right side, you would do much better....but it would not be so challenging.

oh, sure, Cam; I suspect many on the board are much further right. (and many left of you)
Thing is, the further from the center they are, the more emotionally vested they are. (often) So, they just don't post much, here.

But why use state boundaries for your analysis? You could just say that as Bush got the majority of the vote nationwide then the US is "red" therefore 100% of the country by area voted for Bush. ;)

I agree with both of you (especially the emotionally vested part). However, Fint - as you never, ever, ever see anything positive in liberal viewpoints (which by sheer weight of number, and as many involve opinions, must have validity), I can't consider you a moderate. You can't be near the centre if you never consider viewpoints to the left of centre.

Huh?

I consider all opinions....and do see positives in some liberal positions...the point is...pretty much the only debates I do here are defensive.....because the liberals here post so many flat out misrepresentations which unfairly malign people or our nation. If something is posted that I agree with....there is no reason to post an argument....and I do not.

Then why are you always demonising liberals and Democrats?

I know its popular amongst the polemicists (sp?), but I can't believe that liberals/Democrats are responsible for the ills of the world, and like it or not,, that's the picture you paint.

Note that there are dozens of posts in "Off-Topic" that I do not respond to...many by liberals....so clearly I do not always take the other side. But, when you are wrong...you are wrong. The dishonest tactics are what I hate the worst and where I usually respond....As far as I am concerned, I am only point out the facts to the misled....I must assume that once they know the truth, they will change their position.

You assume too much.......

See my other post about the "truth". We're all guilty of interpreting what we read in the media selectively.

Recognising it is very difficult - I have to assume that for each time I catch myself doing it, I've done it unnoticed a number of times.

An example? I've caught myself reading a (media) viewpoint I disagree with and starting to skim it - looking for the holes. I have sometimes chosen to discount it without considering the merits, because I find what I read challenging or disconcerting.

How often do I do that without even noticing?

agreed