The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

Alex · 09-08-2009, 09:26 AM

That last confuses me. Are you saying that Obama started the stories of death panels, Nazi-ism, Kenyan citizenship, etc., so that he'd be able to discount Glenn Beck et al. as kooks?

Or are you saying that they're just focusing on the kooks so that they can ignore the non-kooks? I'm willing to meet you halfway on that one. Kooks make for better TV so they will get more than their share of coverage. That said, conservatives (at this moment, liberals last year) can't expect to much pity over being represented by morons in the media when millions of conservatives put them in that position of leadership. If they really don't want to be represented by Rush Limbaugh (best of the bunch), O'Reilly, or Beck, then it would be easy to jetison them. But if Obama was friendly with terrorists simply because he was once on a committee with Ayers then certainly the same guilt by association must exist when 15 million people a day (made up number, don't want to look it up) consume the rantings of the mentioned three.

And generally, all it would take is a little bit of vetting on your part to filter out most of the BS you end up passing on that then makes it so much harder to take you seriously sometimes.

I try to be equal opportunity in this regard (and do spend a lot of time actually looking things up, but I enjoy that anyway)

09-08-2009, 09:26 AM	#11
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	That last confuses me. Are you saying that Obama started the stories of death panels, Nazi-ism, Kenyan citizenship, etc., so that he'd be able to discount Glenn Beck et al. as kooks? Or are you saying that they're just focusing on the kooks so that they can ignore the non-kooks? I'm willing to meet you halfway on that one. Kooks make for better TV so they will get more than their share of coverage. That said, conservatives (at this moment, liberals last year) can't expect to much pity over being represented by morons in the media when millions of conservatives put them in that position of leadership. If they really don't want to be represented by Rush Limbaugh (best of the bunch), O'Reilly, or Beck, then it would be easy to jetison them. But if Obama was friendly with terrorists simply because he was once on a committee with Ayers then certainly the same guilt by association must exist when 15 million people a day (made up number, don't want to look it up) consume the rantings of the mentioned three. And generally, all it would take is a little bit of vetting on your part to filter out most of the BS you end up passing on that then makes it so much harder to take you seriously sometimes. I try to be equal opportunity in this regard (and do spend a lot of time actually looking things up, but I enjoy that anyway)
	Submit to Quotes