Mike Rowe explains how intelligent people discuss/think...

[DKW 86 7,726]

https://www.facebook...627469493929864

[bob Reidel: "Mike - Saw you hangin with Bill Maher. I had no idea you were a liberal. Really blew me away. Love everything you do but now that I know who you really are, I won't be tuning in to watch anything your involved with."]

Well, hi there, Bob. How's it going? Since your comment is not the only one of its kind, I thought I'd take a moment to address it.

Bill Maher is opinionated, polarizing and controversial. I get it. So is Bill O'Reilly, which is probably why I heard the same comments after I did his show. ("How could you Mike? How could you?")

Truth is, every time I go on Fox, my liberal friends squeal. And every time I show up on MSNBC, my conservative pals whine. Not because they disagree with my position - everyone agrees that closing the skills gap is something that needs to happen. No, these days, people get bent simply if I appear on shows they don't like, or sit too close to people they don't care for.

What's up with that? Is our country so divided that my mere proximity to the "other side" prompts otherwise sensible adults to scoop up their marbles and go home?

Back in 2008, I wrote an open letter to President Obama, offering to help him promote those 3 million "shovel-ready" jobs he promised to create during his campaign. (I suspected they might be a tough sell, given our country's current relationship with the shovel.) Within hours, hundreds of conservatives accused me of "engaging with a socialist," and threatened to stop watching Dirty Jobs with Mike Rowe if I didn't come to my senses.

When I made the same offer to Mitt Romney (who actually responded), thousands of liberals chastised me for "engaging with a greedy capitalist," and threatened to stop watching Dirty Jobs if I didn't take it back.

You may ask, "But what did these people think about the issue at hand?" Who knows? They were too busy being outraged by my proximity to the devil. (Poor Ed Shultz at MSNBC nearly burst into tears. "You were on the wrong stage, Mike! The wrong stage!! With the wrong candidate!!!")

Oy.

Here's the thing, Bob - Profoundly Disconnected (http://profoundlydisconnected.com/) is not a PR campaign for Mike Rowe. It's a PR campaign for skilled labor and alternative education. PR campaigns need ... that's right, PR, and if I limit my appearances to those shows that I personally watch, hosted only by those personalities with whom I personally agree, I might as well start a church and preach to the choir.

Point is, I didn't go on Real Time to endorse BM, and I didn't go on The Factor to endorse BO. I went on because millions of people watch those shows. I approached our liberal president for the same reason. Likewise, his conservative opponent. And I showed up on Sesame Street with the same agenda that I took to Congress.

Closing the skills gap is bigger than you or me or any particular venue, and Real Time gave me an opportunity to reach 5 million people. I'm grateful for that, and I'll do it again if they want me back.

As for Bill Maher off-camera, you'll be pleased to know that the guy was a perfect gentleman. His staff is excellent, and his after-party included an open bar with a spread I've never seen in such a setting. Bill took the time to hang out with his guests and their friends after the show, chatting about this and that for over an hour, and taking pictures with anyone who wanted one. Trust me, that's rare.

Yes, he's outrageous, inflammatory, and to many, a jagged little pill. But he's also gracious, generous, engaging, and taller than he appears on TV.

Which, frankly, surprised me.

Sometimes, people arent the bad guys they are made to appear like just so they will be well known enough to get a show going and keep it going. Maher & O'Reilly are simply just part huckster, and that means they have to be over the top in some ways. We need to take a breath and examine that in our own views. Are we REALLY open minded to both sides of the debate? I know in my own life i was that guy that came to blindly accept one side and ignore the other. Then one day in 2005 i woke up to the fact that the people i was supporting were just not what they appeared to be. It wasnt one thing, it was a lot of little things. Bush43 made speeches that sounded like nails-on-a-chalkboard to me. And then some insider reporting...

http://www.dailykos....-Autobiography#

A GW Bush insider, David Kuo, detailed the Rove directed cynical manipulation of the religious right to help GW Bush win his first election.

David Kuo was a well connected evangelical Christian. He helped GW Bush get elected by coordinating the religious right and was rewarded with a position as Special Assistant to President GW Bush and Deputy Director of the Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives (FBCI). Kuo’s tell all book, Tempting Faith, was published in 2008.

Kuo claims that while others were nominally in charge, Rove actually directed multiple offices, including the FBCI and Political Affairs. After explaining how the Bush campaign relied heavily on the religious right to win the election, Kuo quotes promises from Bush’s inauguration speech to give Christians “an honored place in our plans and in our laws,” What actually happened? Kuo writes that upon joining the White House staff in January 2001:

“[bush appointed Don Willet, a Texas lawyer not affiliated with the Evangelical movement, to run the new office of FBCI]. On a good day one plan after another was rejected. On most days [requests for a staff, budget, or plan] were simply ignored…..

“[upon transition] Every other White House office was up and running. The Faith based Initiative still operated out of the nearly vacant transition offices.

“Three days later, a Tuesday, Karl Rove summoned Willet to his office to announce that the entire faith-based initiative would be rolled out the following Monday. Willet asked just how—without a director, staff, office, or plan—the President would do that. Rove just looked at him, took a deep breath, and said, “I don’t know. Just get me a f*%ing faith based thing. Got it?” Willet was shown the door.” Tempting Faith, Ch 9, pages 135-140.

Kuo later explains that the Bush Administration would glad hand the religious right leaders to their face. But privately referred to them as "nut jobs."

IOW, Rove and Bush43 were just as big political phonies as they could be...THAT was definitely a part of the change in my own political views. Call me whatever you want. As a man, if i know you are a liar and are a phony, i will just assume that everything you ever say is just as much BS as the last.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

BRAVO!

An objective look at Karl Rove and Dick Cheney, led me to the same conclusion.

I think we should all take a skeptical look at who we listen to and, realize to some extent, Hannity, Matthews, or even Finebaum are rip offs of the Howard Stern business model. Outrageousness = Ratings = Revenue.

I think we all have to ask ourselves, does our own rhetoric parrot what we hear and see or, are we thinking objectively. Are we truly interested in effective government or, are we been caught up in the political theatre? Are we informed or entertained?

[homersapien 11,812]

This is a surprise?

I already knew about the Bush team referring to the religious right as "nut jobs", but hadn't heard the "just give me a f'ing faith-based thing" comment. Hilarious!

Remember the show "West Wing"? They had it about right.

Politics has always been full of cynical showmanship. The internet and especially cable have just accentuated it. Very little critical thinking going on.

[TheBlueVue 177]

BRAVO!

An objective look at Karl Rove and Dick Cheney, led me to the same conclusion.

I think we should all take a skeptical look at who we listen to and, realize to some extent, Hannity, Matthews, or even Finebaum are rip offs of the Howard Stern business model. Outrageousness = Ratings = Revenue.

I think we all have to ask ourselves, does our own rhetoric parrot what we hear and see or, are we thinking objectively. Are we truly interested in effective government or, are we been caught up in the political theatre? Are we informed or entertained?

LOL I am SHOCKED....SHOCKED I tell you to see you rah rahing over a piece from Daily KOS. lmao

[DKW 86 7,726]

BRAVO!

An objective look at Karl Rove and Dick Cheney, led me to the same conclusion.

I think we should all take a skeptical look at who we listen to and, realize to some extent, Hannity, Matthews, or even Finebaum are rip offs of the Howard Stern business model. Outrageousness = Ratings = Revenue.

I think we all have to ask ourselves, does our own rhetoric parrot what we hear and see or, are we thinking objectively. Are we truly interested in effective government or, are we been caught up in the political theatre? Are we informed or entertained?

LOL I am SHOCKED....SHOCKED I tell you to see you rah rahing over a piece from Daily KOS. lmao

Well it could have come from another source easily, but i just chose it for the phrasing. It really was a cynical manipulation of the situation for immediate politicsal benefit. IE: Phony as hell. If you are supporting anything YOU KNOW is phony, than you are as phony as what you support.

[TheBlueVue 177]

BRAVO!

An objective look at Karl Rove and Dick Cheney, led me to the same conclusion.

I think we should all take a skeptical look at who we listen to and, realize to some extent, Hannity, Matthews, or even Finebaum are rip offs of the Howard Stern business model. Outrageousness = Ratings = Revenue.

I think we all have to ask ourselves, does our own rhetoric parrot what we hear and see or, are we thinking objectively. Are we truly interested in effective government or, are we been caught up in the political theatre? Are we informed or entertained?

LOL I am SHOCKED....SHOCKED I tell you to see you rah rahing over a piece from Daily KOS. lmao

Well it could have come from another source easily, but i just chose it for the phrasing. It really was a cynical manipulation of the situation for immediate politicsal benefit. IE: Phony as hell. If you are supporting anything YOU KNOW is phony, than you are as phony as what you support.

Yes, I get that, but my comment was not directed at you. Indeed there are disappointments in the details of both parties because we are all human. I align myself in keeping with philosophies of governance knowing full well that if i get too hung up on idealistic imaginings I'll end up hating all politicians and frankly, Im not far from that now. However, liberalism in my view, will NOT even solve the problems it creates and it creates many because they think the solution to everything is to throw money at it. Look at the VA...even though problems existed before Obama became Pres, he ran on fixing those problems. Six years later and more than enough budgetary apportionments people are dying from his lack of follow through. The problem is not always money.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Ah yes, another day in the Politics forum, another person dismissing information they don't like simply because it comes from a ritually impure source.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Ah yes, another day in the Politics forum, another person dismissing information they don't like simply because it comes from a ritually impure source.

I take it this retort was directed at me. Amirite? Not exactly sure what the context of "ritually impure" is but I would argue that Daily KOS is indeed ritually pure progressive propaganda.. After all, it was founded for the advancement of progressive thought. So, pardon me if I'm not immediately swayed by their points of view.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Kos

[DKW 86 7,726]

http://www.atheistrev.com/2007/04/karl-rove-is-atheist-more-evidence-and.html

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20061020.html

[quote}

When CBS News asked Kuo about his motives, he said he had been greatly disappointed with what he saw as the gap, recurring time and again, between what Bush promised his Evangelical Christian supporters and what he actually delivered. This disparity, Kuo said, had "been gnawing at both him and his wife since 2003, when [Kuo] learned he had a malignant brain tumor, and left politics for good."

When asked by "60 Minutes" about whether he anticipated his colleagues would attack him, Kuo responded, "Of course they will. I can hear the attacks, right? 'Oh, he's really a liberal.' or, 'Oh, maybe that brain tumor really messed up his head.' Or, you know, 'He's an idealist.'" Regardless, Kuo says, "I'm fine with it."

There's really no reason, then, to think Kuo has any hidden political agenda. He's admitted his disappointment in the Bush Administration. And he's sought out the best forum possible -- a book where he can set forth the details of how he believes Bush and his aides are politically manipulating Christians -- at the best time, to call attention to his inside knowledge to those who share his beliefs. His agenda seems to be the simple one he claims: To convey to his fellow Christians how much he feels the Bush White House has let them down.

I could have linked countless articles on this.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/15228489/ns/msnbc-countdown_with_keith_olbermann/t/book-says-bush-just-using-christians/

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2007_05/011250.php

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080526013049AAQ1elI

[TheBlueVue 177]

http://www.atheistre...idence-and.html

http://writ.news.fin...n/20061020.html

[quote}

When CBS News asked Kuo about his motives, he said he had been greatly disappointed with what he saw as the gap, recurring time and again, between what Bush promised his Evangelical Christian supporters and what he actually delivered. This disparity, Kuo said, had "been gnawing at both him and his wife since 2003, when [Kuo] learned he had a malignant brain tumor, and left politics for good."

When asked by "60 Minutes" about whether he anticipated his colleagues would attack him, Kuo responded, "Of course they will. I can hear the attacks, right? 'Oh, he's really a liberal.' or, 'Oh, maybe that brain tumor really messed up his head.' Or, you know, 'He's an idealist.'" Regardless, Kuo says, "I'm fine with it."

There's really no reason, then, to think Kuo has any hidden political agenda. He's admitted his disappointment in the Bush Administration. And he's sought out the best forum possible -- a book where he can set forth the details of how he believes Bush and his aides are politically manipulating Christians -- at the best time, to call attention to his inside knowledge to those who share his beliefs. His agenda seems to be the simple one he claims: To convey to his fellow Christians how much he feels the Bush White House has let them down.

I could have linked countless articles on this.

http://www.nbcnews.c...ing-christians/

http://www.washingto...7_05/011250.php

https://answers.yaho...26013049AAQ1elI

Politics isn't always gratifying to every constituency...obviously it happens. How do those same Christians feel about the current administration?It It's not a surprise, at least not to me, that a politician manipulated voters to win an election. However, regardless of the obvious disappointments that are routinely associated with politics, in my view, like I said, it is strictly a matter of philosophy of governance. An awareness of that makes it virtually impossible to vote for a man, as it were. If one likes larger govt that seeks to continue to expand its reach and powers to serve the "greater good" almost always at the expense of the individual and the Constitution, more regulation, more taxation to fund rapid growth of social programs to address every conceivable grievance then, regardless of who runs, that person should vote democrat.

By contrast, if efforts to balance the budget matter, if one believes the govt simply cannot solve every conceivable problem, if one believes the private sector is better than the govt in a lot of things, if one believes efforts to stabilize and, when possible, reduce tax burdens are good for the economy and lastly if you believe that individuals are granted by their creator with certain inalienable rights one should vote republican. In the specific case of the Christian vote, do you think those voters would have better served by a party that figured out a way to federally fund abortion by burying it in the 20 thousand pages of the regulations of O-Care?

Bottom line, disappointments are going to occur in politics. Its the nature of the business. Neither party will satisfy all their constituents all the time..thats just not going to happen.

[DKW 86 7,726]

Well the point wasnt so much that they ignored the evangelistic community.

It was that they were openly manipulating them. I am not one of the die hards that is complaining about not being represented.

I am complaining that in DC, it is just 24/7 politics to manipulate voters. You conjure all these "boogiemen" (strawmen actually)

to turn your base out for the election and then bemoan how uncivil it has all become. You throw red meat to the fringes and then try and govern from the center.

This is why we have DINOs, RINOs, LINOs, & CINOs. Maybe we should just try and be honest and stop all the subterfuge and all the emotional pleas.

You know, adults do not act like the folks in DC.

[homersapien 11,812]

Well the point wasnt so much that they ignored the evangelistic community.

It was that they were openly manipulating them. I am not one of the die hards that is complaining about not being represented.

I am complaining that in DC, it is just 24/7 politics to manipulate voters. You conjure all these "boogiemen" (strawmen actually)

to turn your base out for the election and then bemoan how uncivil it has all become. You throw red meat to the fringes and then try and govern from the center.

This is why we have DINOs, RINOs, LINOs, & CINOs. Maybe we should just try and be honest and stop all the subterfuge and all the emotional pleas.

You know, adults do not act like the folks in DC.

(Proverbial) "adults" don't act like most of the people on this forum either. That's the real point. All people think using the emotional side of their brains.

Politicians don't create the disconnect between political discourse and critical thinking. They just exploit it. Politicians - and talk radio hosts - just give people what they want. At least the smart ones do. The rest are just part of the audience.

The following books offer excellent explanations of this from a scientific perspective:

The Righteous Mind, by Jonathan Haidt

Thinking Fast...Slow, by Daniel Kahneman

[icanthearyou 4,468]

I dont give to scents about how intellugent people think or talk. I no how they think and talk. Like me.

[Strychnine 1,804]

And if they don't think like you, they is wrong.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

And if they don't think like you, they is wrong.

Damn right!