Amsterdam teaches Bill O'Reilly a thing or two.

[Elphaba]

Bill O'Reilly adamantly stated that Amsterdam is a cesspool full of corruption, and other equally unflattering comments.

Of course, Amsterdam's citizens were incensed at O'Reilly's caricature, and responded with the following two videos:

YouTube - Bill O'Reilly Slam on Amsterdam Factless?

YouTube - The Truth About Amsterdam, RE: Bill O'Reilly loves Amsterdam


Elphaba

[prisonchaplain]

It's easy to cook up a few facts to make a case one way or the other. And yes, Oreilly does it too. So, this "pot shot" (pun intended) is fair.

However, if our liberal friends are right, that corporations cannot be trusted, and government is a more objective force for good, here's what the Drug Enforcement Agency has to say: The DEA Position On Marijuana

[bytebear]

I don't think Amsterdam is a cesspool of corruption, but I certainly think it would shock people what isn't shown in the rebuttal video. I visited Amsetdam several years ago, and I saw a Hooters type restaurant where the bar maids would strip down the male patrons to full nudity as they danced on the tables. This was not in the red light district and it was an open sidewalk restaurant so I saw this while just walking down the street.

Now, when you go to the red light district, things are considerably more sexual, with pornography that includes bestiality. It was quite an eye opener. Just because you have a society that largely ignores the vices it allows, doesn't mean we should accept such vices as the reason for their happiness or low crime rates.

[prisonchaplain]

If donuts were declared a health food, and exercise labeled a risky endulgence, I'd be happier too. :-)

[hordak]

Originally Posted by bytebear

I don't think Amsterdam is a cesspool of corruption, but I certainly think it would shock people what isn't shown in the rebuttal video. I visited Amsetdam several years ago, and I saw a Hooters type restaurant where the bar maids would strip down the male patrons to full nudity as they danced on the tables. This was not in the red light district and it was an open sidewalk restaurant so I saw this while just walking down the street.

Now, when you go to the red light district, things are considerably more sexual, with pornography that includes bestiality. It was quite an eye opener. Just because you have a society that largely ignores the vices it allows, doesn't mean we should accept such vices as the reason for their happiness or low crime rates.

They did it wrong, Here in the USA its the women on that table that strips.

Though I wold agree with your premise that what works for one culture doen't mean it is right for another. And that one cultures freedoms/vice isn't necessarily the cause of their happiness.

But the cesspool comment was the typical emotional, non fact driven response we hear to often from the "talking heads" on both sides of the aisle.

[bytor2112]

Well....that convinces me.....O'Reilly is obviously an idiot, Fox is a shill for them ignert conservatives and Amsterdam is doubtless light years ahead of the good ole USA. Utopia.....maybe it will attract more disaffected US libs and leave the US cesspool to closed minded, uneducated, racist, bigotted, homophobic, unenlightened, redneck, gun totin, bible thumpin, war mongering right wingers.

[Elphaba]

Originally Posted by prisonchaplain

It's easy to cook up a few facts to make a case one way or the other

That is why I trust the citizens of Amsterdam to know what they're talking about, rather than the far right pundits who exploit the city to further their own agenda.

We can assume we know you, PC, inside and out, but we don't. It would take spending a great deal of time with you, and listening to you, watching you, and you opening up and showing us the shadow within.

Most importantly, you'd have to want to be known, for without that, the whole effort would fail.

The same is true for a city. Unless you have lived there, you cannot discover its nuances, its heart, its virtues and its vices. That's why it's ridiculous for anyone, regardless of who, to believe s/he "knows" enough about a city to criticize it.

. And yes, Oreilly does it too.

They all do it, both on the left and the right. I don't know one conservative who admits the benefits of another country's health care systems, and I do not know one liberal who admits its flaws. I mean that literally.

So, this "pot shot" (pun intended) is fair.

Didn't your mother ever tell you nothing in life is fair?

Seriously, though, how is it "fair" for O'Reilly to demonize a city he knows nothing about? Is his mistake fair because other pundits have criticized him? Or do you mean something else?

"That's not fair," seems so juvenile to me. It makes me want to tell them all to grow up and quit trying to man each other up.

Amsterdam is not the only city that bristles at all of the criticisms the far right keeps insisting are true. The following are some links to articles about this:

Britain's National Health Service and the "Appreciation of Life"
Britain Defends its national health care system
UK health system hits back at US critics
'Sick Around the World': Contrasting U.S. Health Care with 5 Other Capitalist Countries

However, if our liberal friends are right, that corporations cannot be trusted,

I think we have plenty of evidence that numerous poweful corporations cannot be trusted. I do believe liberals acknowledge it, where conservatives don't. But, for some reason, liberals dance around the obvious, for fear of having to stare down the big bad scary conservatives. Bleh.

I also think there are a vast number of major corporations that can be trusted.

and government is a more objective force for good,

I've never said the government is more objective, and I don't personally know anyone who would do so either. Anyone who truly believed this would be very naive.

I do believe our government representatives are trying very hard to be a force for good, which is exactly what they should be doing. They're not potted plants--they're activists who are commmitted to representing their constituencies the best way they know how. Of course he will be criticized by his opponents, and they may even be right. But I do believe their motivation is for the good, as they understand it. That is how it should be.

here's what the Drug Enforcement Agency has to say: The DEA Position On Marijuana

I'm not sure what your point is, given the subject is Amsterdam, which, comparably, has a much lower percentage of people who have used marijuana.

It is a thought-provoking article nevertheless. Andrew Sullivan often addresses the issue of legalizing pot. I think the subject could have its own thread, if people were interested.

Elphaba

[Elphaba]

Originally Posted by bytor2112

Well....that convinces me.....O'Reilly is obviously an idiot, Fox is a shill for them ignert conservatives and Amsterdam is doubtless light years ahead of the good ole USA. Utopia.....maybe it will attract more disaffected US libs and leave the US cesspool to closed minded, uneducated, racist, bigotted, homophobic, unenlightened, redneck, gun totin, bible thumpin, war mongering right wingers.

Finally!

Elph

[prisonchaplain]

Originally Posted by Elphaba

Seriously, though, how is it "fair" for O'Reilly to demonize a city he knows nothing about? Is his mistake fair because other pundits have criticized him? Or do you mean something else?

"That's not fair," seems so juvenile to me. It makes me want to tell them all to grow up and quit trying to man each other up.

You misunderstood me. I meant that the youtube response was a fair rebuttal. It doesn't convince me that Amsterdam's solution is all that, but it matches the Oreilly piece.

I've never said the government is more objective, and I don't personally know anyone who would do so either. Anyone who truly believed this would be very naive.

I do believe our government representatives are trying very hard to be a force for good, which is exactly what they should be doing. They're not potted plants--they're activists who are commmitted to representing their constituencies the best way they know how. Of course he will be criticized by his opponents, and they may even be right. But I do believe their motivation is for the good, as they understand it. That is how it should be.

I'm not sure what your point is, given the subject is Amsterdam, which, comparably, has a much lower percentage of people who have used marijuana.

It is a thought-provoking article nevertheless. Andrew Sullivan often addresses the issue of legalizing pot. I think the subject could have its own thread, if people were interested.

Elphaba

To me the point goes beyond Amsterdam to the question of legalizing pot. The DEA is neither Democrat or Republican, right or left. So, it's perspective is probably worth considering. I was also being ever so slightly clever in invoking a government source to support a hardline drug policy.

[Elphaba]

Originally Posted by prisonchaplain

You misunderstood me. I meant that the youtube response was a fair rebuttal. It doesn't convince me that Amsterdam's solution is all that, but it matches the Oreilly piece.

Do you have any idea how much angst I went through writing all of that!

Sorry I misundersood. My bad.

To me the point goes beyond Amsterdam to the question of legalizing pot. The DEA is neither Democrat or Republican, right or left. So, it's perspective is probably worth considering. I was also being ever so slightly clever in invoking a government source to support a hardline drug policy.

Once, again, sorry I misunderstood.

I agree with you about the DEA--it gives the report clout because as you say, it is neither right nor left. I think that's why I thought it was interesting.

I admit I only skimmed through it, but what I saw was intriguing. I have been, and for the moment, still am in favor of legalizing pot (I'm so old--no one calls it that anymore). But I realize it isn't that simple.

My first husband smoked pot 24 hours a day, and he was stupid and lazy, and could not hold down a job. I remember when I got pregnant I brought home the list of foods my doctor gave me to eat, and when my husband read it, he had a fit. "We can't afford all of this!"

He spent all of our money on pot, and threw a fit because I needed to buy milk.

So, I have seen its negative effects. But I have also known quite a few people who used it recreationally, and had no problem with it. I never liked it because it made me paranoid.

Ahhh, the good ol' days.

Elph