The Midside: Last Man Standing S02E01: Revealing Why the Right Wing is Falling Down

Posted by jmlesniewski 7 years, 10 months ago to Politics
3 comments | Share | Flag

Here's something I just posted on my blog about a lesson I recently learned from the show "Last Man Standing."
SOURCE URL: http://themidside.blogspot.com/2012/12/last-man-standing-s02e01-revealing-why.html


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by khalling 7 years, 10 months ago
    Well written. I didn't agree with you completely. You have a strong point about arguing abstracts rather than concretes with most people.
    Here's one line I had a hard time with.
    "The universal healthcare bill is written on a limited number of pages that can be accessed and read." I will agree there are a finite number of pages. It can be accessed and read-but no one did before they VOTED for it!
    I refused to watch the show, because I read an interview with Allen discussing his character and wanting the writers to make Mike a dogmatic character and use the election as the first plot vehicle to show his true colors.
    http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top...
    As a kid, I enjoyed All in the Family, because Bunker and Meatball were both idiots and at times lovable-but what made it funny was both characters did not discern well. If Mike in Last Man Standing is the only one perceived as dogmatic due to his political ideology, with moments of clarity-it's all just propaganda. I believe there must be balance to give the show integrity. The formula should show pitfalls ahead for every main character allowed point of view in the show. Allen saying that he wanted the character of Mike to yell "Commie" at every liberal point of view would not pull in the viewers. So they have toned down his rhetoric and nuanced his reasoning- is his daughter shown in a negative light ever? Is her reasoning suspect or option locked? Also, I am not sure I agree that in argument a concrete argument cannot be effectively countered with an abstract argument. I will agree that abstract arguments make for bad soundbites.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 7 years, 10 months ago
      All the characters learn their lessons at some point.

      "Also, I am not sure I agree that in argument a concrete argument cannot be effectively countered with an abstract argument."

      It depends on the context of the arguments. In the piece I wrote, I was clearly referring to the context of political debates.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by khalling 7 years, 10 months ago
        That's good all the main characters are put through their paces.
        Even in political debates-when someone says universal healthcare to help those who are having a hard time or lost their jobs-as an example, I immediately go abstract because we are so indoctrinated in this society how things sound take on connotations of good/bad. "universal healthcare" just sounds so nice and helpful. "privately run healthcare" sounds well, not helpful. This is the result of indoctrination and the left knows this well. So if you're discussing the issue with anyone who has a brain, you often have to step back. Not just (although I like it) "take your hand out of my pocket and leave me alone." It's on point but sounds kinda mean. but things like what is universal healthcare? Is it efficient? You hope so????? How many will it harm over time compared to how many it will help today? Is what we have right now really private health insurance? Who do you think pays for most medical advances in the world? Will we be able to continue advancements in diseases like cancer research, genetic research to diagnose disease early? Have you read the 2600 plus pages? Why does it punish people who unfortunately need devices as part of their care? How will they afford to pay for those devices? If it's universal, why did the President allow some companies out of it altogether?
        As more generations are taught from kindergarten on in our public schools to associate phrases with good or bad, they will react emotionally first. It is classic Pavlovian. Truth is not absolute. Up is down and down is up. Reason may or may not kick in without agreeing on abstract absolutes. For every one of us who has broken from or wasn't touched by that indoctrination, it is in our best interest to teach the rest about absolutes and to question what you're spoon fed because it tasted good when the spoon was put in your mouth but you're going to throw it up later, and if the poison was strong enough-it might kill you.
        well I rambled a bit, but I ended with a concrete thought. :)
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo