We're a Messed Up Country Part III

[Bruzilla]

FARGO -- Democratic lawmakers in Washington are asking a North Dakota radio personality to take on Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and other conservative talk show hosts.

Ed Schultz, who earlier considered running for governor, has been tapped by national Democratic leaders for a talk show to start in January.

Democratic lawmakers in Washington are raising money for the show, and Democrats have pledged about $1.8 million over two years to get it off the ground, Schultz said Monday. He said a half-dozen stations are looking at whether to carry it.

http://bismarcktribune.com/articles/2003/10/28/news/state/sta01.txt
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speaking of entertainment making it or not, here's a perfect example. If this goes through you can bet there will be no shortage of reporting, hyping, and interviewing. But it isn't Republican lawmakers who fund Limbaugh or Hannity, it's listeners. Once the Democrat's money is gone, so will the show.

 

[Larry Gude]

I can't wait...

...I hope it's just like the democratic debates everyday.

"More taxes on the rich!"

"More money for schools!"

"Less military!"

"George W. Bush is dumb!"

"Free college for everybody!"

"More everything for everybody!"

"No more free trade!"

"You are owed and I'll get it for you!"

"See #1...lather, rinse, repeat..."

Just what exactly are they gonna talk about? The individual?

 

[SamSpade]

They'll talk about the Republicans, the conservatives, Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly. I have yet to meet a liberal who can talk politics without framing it about conservatives. Reminds me of this bit from "The Importance of Being Earnest".

Jack. I am sick to death of cleverness. Everybody is clever nowadays. You can’t go anywhere without meeting clever people. The thing has become an absolute public nuisance. I wish to goodness we had a few fools left.

Algernon. We have.

Jack. I should extremely like to meet them. What do they talk about?

Algernon. The fools? Oh! about the clever people, of course.

Jack. What fools!

-------------

Their problem is, they don't have anything to talk about, except those they don't like. How interesting will THAT be?

I think that it is funny though - it's clear enough to me that liberals have HAD the media telling their story their way for decades, but should the conservatives find an outlet of their own, they just have to combat it!

It's like when I used to ask my mom "We have Mother's Day, and Father's Day - when is it Kid's Day?".

Remember the answer? I'm sure every parent under the sun said it, not because they were in collusion, but because it is the truth.

"*EVERY* day is Kid's Day, son"

Why do liberals want their own news outlet NOW? They have so many already.

 

[Bruzilla]

There are no individuals... just "The Rich" and "Working Class Americans" AKA "People Just Trying to Put Bread on the Table"

 

[jlabsher]

Sounds like a great country. Political discourse. Nuthin wrong with that, except maybe some thinking and changing of ideas.

 

[tlatchaw]

It never fails to surprise me that the libs can't see how they alienate folks that are just trying to get by. As a WASP, I have had to come to terms with the assertions that I am 1) a bigot 2) a racist 3) a "homophobe" (whatever that is, maybe afraid of those like you?) 4) responsible for all of the evil ever purpetrated upon the world by Western Society just because of who I was born to be. Sorry, bought it when I was too young to know better, but life's lessons have taught me to drop the guilt because it ain't mine.

Can't wait for these anti-Limbaughs to start crawling out of their holes and trying to "take back" radio waves they never had. I remember hearing Mario Quomo on the radio a few times. He was laughably bad. He insulted his callers and hung up on them whenever they challenged one of his wierd assertions. Funny, that's what they accuse Hannity and Limbaugh of doing, but I've lost count of the number of times that thsoe fellows just let some lib babble until they hang themselves in their own logic or start shouting (anybody catch Teddy Kennedy on Hannity last week? funny stuff!)

 

[jlabsher]

Ever stop to think that maybe Rush was divisive in his rants? I don't see him as reaching out to unite the other side too often. Maybe I was just too stoned on pain pills to realize he WAS the great liberator! The true white hope, the answer to all our problems, yeah that's the ticket.

 

[tlatchaw]

Reaching out to unite with the other side was not the point of his program, and I'm not sure it would have worked anyway. Rush's perspective appears to relate more to appealing to logical sensibilities such as "equal opportunity does not guarantee equal outcome." Legally, I have the right to become a professional athlete if that is the path I choose. Just because I do not have the skills or training to do that, there is no reason I should cause a big ruckus when I am not selected to play for a team.

There are lots of people in this country of ALL races who feel as though we owe them a living just for getting up in the morning. Let's all try to understand how this capitalism thing works before we give up and watch Jerry Springer all day.

As for your personal attacks about pain pills and veiled references to racism with "white hope," I see you are using the name calling tactic favored by those with nothing left to argue with. No, he's not the answer to all our problems, and doesn't even pretend to be. He may say things like "I'll tell you what to think" but those that don't get the joke about the media are probably too far gone anyway.

 

[Larry Gude]

THAT is why...

Sounds like a great country. Political discourse. Nuthin wrong with that, except maybe some thinking and changing of ideas.

...we're NOT a messed up country! At the end of the day political discourse is about voting and that is when a citizen passes his/her judgement. We NEED the debates and lib radio to hear what people are all about, people who wish to lead us.

It is brain dead simple to complain about any issue. The question is; what will you DO?'

Limbaugh, last I heard, has not, is not and will not be running for office. He's probably gone about as high as he is going to go. ... ... I'll wait... ... OK. Like him or not he is about provoking thought in the 'arena of ideas' and you, jlab, should fear that no more than anyone else should fear The Dennis Kuccinich Show.

 

[jlabsher]

I don't fear Rush, I pity those who listen to and believe him, because of the very fact that he doesn't allow discourse. The few times I have heard him he didn't allow anyone to present an opinion other than his own. That to me is wrong.

The difference is, he and other conservatives (Liddy, etc) won't allow discourse, will cut it off before anyone disagrees with them, the libs will allow a different opinion to be raised but tend to weasel out of answers.


Which is worse? You be the judge.

The whole post about this being a messed up country is wrong, the first 2 messed up country posts were about slimebuckets, now all of a sudden it is political. Get a life and move on folks.

 

[Larry Gude]

This IS...

...moving on with life, at least to me!

Rush Limbaugh is the direct result of a huge number of people getting sick of the evening news and newspapers presenting editorials as fact. They were sick of talking to the TV and the paper all the time: "That's not right! That's not what happened!"

Limbaugh found a market created by the profound bias in the major media. If the major media wasn't so overtly slanted, Limbaugh has no audience. Of course you could argue that the lock step media of the 1970's and 1980's was right and therefore no dissent was needed.

I happen to agree with you about Limbaugh not allowing guests, dissenting guests. His thoughts and arguments hold up fine but the thing is he is terrible on his feet. He gets upset and loses his train of thought, so, he'll never do it.

Peter Jennings isn't going to do it either. They both want to TELL you what to think. Rush happens to be honest about it.

the libs will allow a different opinion to be raised but tend to weasel out of answers.

I hope the Al Sharpton Show or DK or whomever from Dakota will welcome guests so that we can judge.

At the end of the day both sides try to make the case to each other all the time because we really do care what our fellow citizen thinks and how they vote. And I think it is fair to say we all have doubts to some extent, no matter how private, as to whether or not the other side has a point.

We just wanna hear a good argument.

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by jlabsher
Ever stop to think that maybe Rush was divisive in his rants? I don't see him as reaching out to unite the other side too often.

Not his job, as TLatchaw pointed out. I think it's hysterical that libs are always raving about "free speech" when it comes to pornography and profanity, but BY GOD you let some Rush Limbaugh come on with a differing political view and watch the censorship begin!

 

[tlatchaw]

You fellows should stop and listen to Hannity or Limbaugh sometime when they let a liberal talk. They talk and talk for about 5 minutes or more until they either talk themselves out or show themselves to be more than a little nutty.

Funny, the only time I heard host hollering "you're wrong!", and then hanging up on someone in mid sentence was that bastion of free speech, Mario Quomo.

I do applaud the fact that we still live in a country where we can voice differing opinions. Without challenging assumptions, we all just move in mandated lock step off the edge of the sociological cliff.

 

[Bruzilla]

I think the fact is that Liberals just don't get the fact that most people disagree with them, and that's why their shows fail. It's not because their hosts aren't entertaining, or funny, or smart. It's because they aren't saying anything people in real numbers want to hear. And whn one of the unwashed masses dares to challenge them, they blow them off as right-wing fanatics.

Sorry jlabsher, but I don't think there will be much changing of minds or exchanging of ideas on this guy's show. He'll have an agenda, and most people won't bother tuning in.

 

[jlabsher]

Originally posted by Bruzilla
I think the fact is that Liberals just don't get the fact that most people disagree with them, ...It's because they aren't saying anything people in real numbers want to hear. And whn one of the unwashed masses dares to challenge them, they blow them off as right-wing fanatics.

Sorry jlabsher, but I don't think there will be much changing of minds or exchanging of ideas on this guy's show. He'll have an agenda, and most people won't bother tuning in.

Wow, I guess that means more people voted for Bush than Gore huh? Sorry, but where is your source that shows there are more conservatives than liberals in this country?

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Bruzilla
I think the fact is that Liberals just don't get the fact that most people disagree with them

There was a guy over at the DU who acknowledged that their opinions are in the distinct minority. Then he went on to say that it was their job to re-educate the masses so they could believe the correct way, read: ultra left wing.

God, how I wish I'd have copied that post. It was a classic.

 

[SamSpade]

Originally posted by jlabsher
Wow, I guess that means more people voted for Bush than Gore huh? Sorry, but where is your source that shows there are more conservatives than liberals in this country?

Yeah, that's right. Registered voters precisely represent the quantity of liberals and conservatives (especially since there's no such thing as a 'moderate'). When less than half the people vote, that "proves" it, doesn't it?

 

[SamSpade]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
There was a guy over at the DU who acknowledged that their opinions are in the distinct minority. Then he went on to say that it was their job to re-educate the masses so they could believe the correct way, read: ultra left wing.

God, how I wish I'd have copied that post. It was a classic.

You're right, that IS classic. Like that quote from Mo Udall, "the *people* have spoken....the bastards". The liberals speak for the masses of ordinary men, they're their champion, their voice --- unless the "masses" disagree. Then they have to TELL them what to think.

I think they'd be better off knowing they don't really 'speak' for anyone but themselves.

Liberals and conservatives both dream foolishly that their voter base is aligned with them politically in their respective philosophies. Baloney. The poor vote Democratic because it's their best link to free money. The rich vote Republican because it's THEIR best bet to *keeping* their money. The middle class vote for whomever they think will screw them *LESS*. Ideology is a very tiny part of it.

 

[tlatchaw]

Oooh. You're good (if a bit cynical)