to conservative wanting "substantive debate"

[yurbud]

A guy posted this on yahoo's Ann Coulter board, and it was too ironic to ignore:

m14__shootr
(posted on Ann Coulter discussion board)

"Until there is real open mindedness and real substantive debate, we are doomed to be a divided country."

When you;re ready for suhc a thing, let us fascists know. -We're- waiting.

http://news.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?action=m&board=37447170&tid=ucacwoodwarddoeswashington&sid=37447170&mid=982">posted here

Yurbud response:

Your statement is ironic given that President Bush and Dick Cheney only speak to hand picked audiences with a tightly controlled script.

Republicans set up a whole cable network where name-calling and personal attacks take the place of substantive debate, as is the case on most of commercial talk radio where conservative voices have the microphone and rather than have a substantive debate, they simply repeat Grover Norquist's and the White House's talking points, and mock or call a traitor anyone who disagrees with them. They go so far as to have a weekly meeting to coordinate their talking points:
http://www.commonwealinstitute.org/information.html#weekly

Fox went so far in this direction that they wanted their own reporters to change the findings of a report on growth hormones in milk and got a court ruling in their favor saying news organizations have no obligation to tell the truth.

These sources have so little regard for substance, that a study of Fox viewers compared to other commercial networks found that far more of them held false beliefs about the war in Iraq like that Saddam really had the dreaded WMD, had something to do with 9/11 (which Bush himself was forced to admit publicly including in the presidential debates), and that most of world supported our war in Iraq when the overwhelming majority didn't including opinion polls in most of our allies who sent troops.

You can see the study here:
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:y3mBJCObArYJ:www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Ira q/Media_10_02_03_Report.pdf+fox+iraq+misperceptions&hl=en

Or read a brief article on it here:
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/special_packages/iraq/6918170.htm

In the same study, the audiences of NPR/PBS had the most accurate perceptions of the war and world opinion probably because they focus on facts and when they have people on they let them finish their thought, and ask logical, polite follow up questions, and let them answer those too.

Conservatives hate Bill Moyers, but if you watch his show or read his transcripts, he has had top GOP strategists on like Richard Viguerie and Grover Norquist, asks them fair question and listens to their answers. I know more about what these top GOP strategists believe from that show that talk radio fans who often don't even know their names or role in the party.

Here's the transcript of one Norquist appearance on that show:
http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_norquist.html

Here's Viguerie:
http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/viguerie.html

Moyers primary sin seems to be that he contacted these guys to get the big picture of what conservatives are doing, rather than talk to the designated spokesmen about the talking points of the day.

Now conservative politicians want to change PBS and make it more like Fox--the professional wrestling of TV News.

Yesterday, the chairman of the judiciary shut down a hearing called by democrats on abuses under the Patriot Act before most of the witnesses could be called, rather than hear then dispute their testimony.

The current leadership of the GOP doesn't want open and honest debate because that could lead to people to more than one conclusion. You can convince me war is needed sometimes, that a certain tax might need to be repealed, or that a government function is better left to the private sector, but if we have a real debate, some small percentage of the time conservatives might come to non-conservative conclusions (maybe it's good to have public fireman, policemen, and schools). That's why debate has been replaced by infomercials, literally like those video press releases, and less obviously by having a tightly controlled message insulated from real debate.

Terms like fascist and nazi got thrown around too much for decades, but they are technically correct in the case of the Bush administration and his lockstep allies in Congress. Do some research on the definition of fascism, including their relationship to business and religion, and decide for yourself.

Part I of Yahoo post
http://news.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?action=m&board=37447170&tid=ucacwoodwarddoeswashington&sid=37447170&mid=1014
Part II of Yahoo post
http://post.news.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?action=m&board=37447170&tid=ucacwoodwarddoeswashington&sid=37447170&mid=1016&n=1

Also at:






Hillbilly Hitler art:

[RandomKoolzip]

1. Nice!

Great post. I'm bookmarking this the next time some freeper tries to hand me that bullshit about "balanced" coverage in the media, or, god help us, the "liberal media."

[Webster Green]

2. You shredded him!

Excellent job!

[yurbud]

3. oddly, I got a couple of rec's, but no replies

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog: