 |
New Civilization News: Things Get Personal |
Category: Politics 23 comments 23 Oct 2004 @ 12:53 by shawa : Exactly.That is why we of the rest of the beautiful world (I live in Europe) - follow events with some anxiety. 23 Oct 2004 @ 16:42 by ov : CBC plug You all are probably tired of hearing this but {link:www.cbc.ca/listen/index.html|CBC radio One} is imho an example of what AM talk radio should be like. The radio hosts, almost all of them women, will politely ask questions that uncover falsehoods but once a contrary position to their own has been clearly stated they politely thank the guest for being on the show and don't voice any snide comments or give any indication that there was anything wrong with the guests opinion. Very professional. They are not totally unbiased however because when they have guests with enlightened points of view you can tell that the hosts are happy because they'll occasionally let a little friendly laugh slip out. 23 Oct 2004 @ 17:12 by jstarrs : Jazz... ...once again, you're bringing roots reporting without hysterics & with damn pertinent questions! Bless you, man! ps. May I also put this one up on that forum? &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& May the Protector Gods be with you! ---Ol' Skullcap 23 Oct 2004 @ 17:32 by Quinty @68.226.90.181 : Scary and very interesting We all know the history of the phrase "politically correct." it was leftists who first applied this to other leftists who were attempting to be lefter than thou. That no one could be further to the left that they or more "correct" in their views. Coulter is the same on the right: attempting to be as far over to the right as she can. "No one can be further right!" She seems to cry: and will outright all rightwing comers. Well, then look at the face of American fascism, 21st Century style. Coulter believes Joe McCarthy was merely a victim of Communist mud, ie, Liberals. And what a success the right has had with demonizing that word: "liberal." No one dare speak its name, like pedophilia or canabalism. Is Coulter off her hinges? I think that in the manner she violently flings herself at any expression of dissent is certainly unhinged. But, as we can see, from that AM radio show you described, Richard, there is an audience for all that. There is a following. Yeah, things are a little scary. And now with Sinclair and that Pay per View TV company which won't allow Fahrenheit 911 to appear before the election the far right is more emboldened. If Kerry wins the election one of the first things I hope he does is return the Fairness Doctrine. That, if you are not American, is a rule which forces an equal amount of time for each side on the airwaves, since the air, in the US, belongs to the people. And, yes, I have been in conversations where the issue of which candidate "appeared more presidential" was what seemed to matter most. 23 Oct 2004 @ 21:01 by vaxen : Examine... for a moment, if you will, the RTA (The Russel Trust Association aka Skull and Bones) as well as the 'Hegelian Dialectic.' Elections in AmeriKKKa (KKK=Kadosh, Kadosh, Kadosh)? You have GOT to be kidding jazzolog? Nice piece (Coulter), though...thanks. http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/ http://www.cpl.net/~carville/ann_coulter-lingerie.jpg Now, in all honesty, how could any apple pie eating, honest Abe thinking, shooting coon and moonshine drinking, red blooded AmeeeeriKKKan man not want a little 'piece' of that action? You tell me. 23 Oct 2004 @ 22:45 by Quinty @68.226.90.181 : Frankly I think the head was attached to another body, but perhaps I'm a conspiracy monger. And Photoshop wasn't brought into play. If lingerie ran the world then Coulter might get my vote. But then, there's much more going on, isn't there? Though I don't think Skull and Bones is an integral part of any conspiracy: too easy a choice, there. A basic error in logic is to believe that because something is possible it is true. Like the number of angels you can put on a pinhead. Pinheads? No, not Coulter. That is if you can look above the basic demarcation line there, and get back to serious business. (Women may take exception to all this sexist nonsence, but it does keep the world turining, doesn't it?) PS - I just temporarily looked upon the scene at FOX. They were jubillantly giving the election to Bush, state by contested state. Yes, an intersting election. Do you think all the corruption which is emerging may have been there for many an election season? Long before it was raised up from the mud? After all, didn't Daley give it to Kennedy in 60? Yes, interesting and novel times. 23 Oct 2004 @ 22:52 by vaxen : HaHaHa... Well said Sir Quinty! Skull and Bones is actually an old 'German' order. Actually it is the Russell Trust Association, and associates of the associates, that one must 'eagle eye' in session. I think you're probably correct in the head on another body observation. Yes the 'Elections' here are a farce en toto. I think any real American kid knows that. And, of course, the propaganda machine is owned by whom? ;) There is something rotten in Denmark and it is'nt the Queen. 24 Oct 2004 @ 00:20 by vibrani : Coulter YUCK! She's a one woman Republican and Bush show. 25 Oct 2004 @ 11:03 by dempstress : Airtime..... well, as an ex radio and TV journalist in the UK, once an election has been announced here any broadcast coverage at all has to be SCRUPULOUSLY balanced. This can cause controversy as there is a sort of accepted understanding of which of the parties this applies to.....for example the Monster Raving Loony Party is not expected to be given equal airtime with the two main parties (damn shame in my view: they're far more entertaining). The next election may also raise issues over the Liberal Democrats, for long the relatively small third party but looking better by the day as many people become disillusioned with Blair's support for Bush in Iraq and the Conservatives continue to fail to shine. It can be a real headache for the broadcasters, although please note that it doesn't apply to the press, who can be and are as partisan as they please. 25 Oct 2004 @ 17:33 by Quinty @68.226.90.181 : Our superficial mass media Here, in the USA, we have what's known as "balance" and "objectivity" regarding news coverage. This, as Bob Edwards of National Public Radio recently explained it, means that one guest tells the truth and in the name of balance and fairness another guest is allowed to lie about it. This happens all the time in our corporate entertainment driven mass media, which constantly looks at the bottom line. And the news on mainstream sources tends to be superficial. We still have something like 50 or 60 % of the American people who believe that Saddam was linked to 9/11 and al Qaeda. Somebody is not doing his or her job. I like, by the way, the Guardian and the Independent. And in print sources see nothing wrong with expressing a slant. That would be far better, I think, than fudging under the cover of being "objective." And if one sides lies more often than the other, let the chips fall where they may. Even if liars accuse the truth tellers of bias. 25 Oct 2004 @ 19:07 by ov : There is a link Saddam, 9/11 and al Qaeda are all under the supervision of the CIA. {link:www.abstinencetour2004.com/bellaback.html| abstinence in 2004 -- No Bush -- No Dick} 25 Oct 2004 @ 23:18 by Quinty @68.226.90.181 : That's good news I was afraid things were getting out of hand. Now if the CIA could only infiltrate the White House...... 26 Oct 2004 @ 08:34 by dempstress : 400 TONNES!! Someone's managed to nick 400 TONNES of high explosive from a known Iraqi military complex without anyone noticing??! No-one thought to keep an eye on it then? Oh yes, and in go the Black Watch. Thanks guys. 26 Oct 2004 @ 09:46 by jazzolog : Let's Not Exaggerate It's only 380 tons, Ms. Journalism...not 400 with two exclamation points. For a moment you had me feeling a jot less safe and secure. I'm sure that stuff is around here somewhere...and Tony's new troops will be smashing at finding it and saving the day. It's probably waylaid in some London Post Office. 26 Oct 2004 @ 09:48 by dempstress : PS Those Americans who responded to the Guardian's recent Clark County email initiative with extreme but inventive invective (and you a supposedly christian country too) which included refering to Brits as "&*^^%$ tea drinking £*()+""!, please note a report out today that claims drinking tea, especially green tea, can prevent altzheimers. Coffee has no effect. Could one of you guys please inform the White House? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ No beneficial effect, you mean. I have a feeling our need for a slap in the face from a cup of joe to get us going in the morning does contribute to the Alzheimer's. ---Java Jivester 26 Oct 2004 @ 09:51 by dempstress : Wouldn't be at all surprised if some of it ended up in London......or Washington, or New York, or......... 27 Oct 2004 @ 16:51 by shawa : Or Spain :-( 27 Jun 2007 @ 16:22 by Daniel E.Rhoades @76.181.149.172 : ann I think shes hot!!!!!!!!! 28 Jun 2007 @ 08:31 by jazzolog : Yeah, Mr. Rhoades, So I Hear I like this anecdote from Rolling Stone~~~ "When a reference to 'my friend Ann Coulter' -- the leggy conservative has been a frequent guest on (Bill) Maher's program -- elicited a round of boos from the audience, Maher shot back, 'I know, I know. But she's different when she's coming.'" http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11128590/bill_maher_a_man_for_our_time/print For a review and video clip of Ann's appearance Tuesday on Hardball, which drew a phonecall from Elizabeth Edwards, go here~~~ http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_richard__070627_watch_ann_coulter_sq.htm 28 Jun 2007 @ 23:09 by Quinty @72.195.137.102 : Too skinny I think the photo above is as real as Coulter. (I mean, compare them, the talking Coulter on screen and the wish fulfillment above. After all, what is Coulter all about? Anything for a buck, right? Not that she's a whore, except, perhaps, a whore for herself? Always up for sale?) Coultergeist, as Keith Olbermann calls her, is like the kid next door who likes to use cow pies as frisbees and lobs them across the yard into your lap. (As you sit there calmly drinking a tall chilled evening glass listening to the birds serenade the sunset.) The spouse may say, "He only wants attention, ignore him." But sooner or later the pile of cow pies in your lap becomes too heavy, smelly, and generally noisome. And acknowledging the kid's presence ultimately becomes necessary. That's what Elizabeth Edwards did. And in a very decent manner. Though god did the pundocracy ever spin this! 29 Jun 2007 @ 08:16 by jazzolog : Coulter's Ass Costs Money I don't do much YouTube but I guess that has to change: so much going on at that site. I was struck during the video, which must have been just a small segment of the whole TV program, by Ann's strange replies that Elizabeth's challenge was meant to make her stop writing books. How could anyone be so warped as to make that out of the objections...which were roundly supported by an applauding, shouting outdoor audience surrounding Coulter? I decided the woman, like most rightwingers, program themselves to be focused totally on the main purpose, which on this occasion was to advertise the book that's just going into paperback I gather. She must be on a book tour and so was seeing the Edwards challenge in that light. Neverthless interpreting the Edwards challenge as meaning to curb her freedom of speech looked nuts. Does she need the reminder about crying out a bogus FIRE in a crowded auditorium? 29 Jun 2007 @ 16:07 by Quinty @72.195.137.102 : You obviously don’t listen to rightwing radio, where that kind of logic is common. And has become more common, alas, with the ascendancy of the far right under Bush. And in today's Truthout there’s piece on how Bush’s foreign policy is geared to his belief in Armageddon, or the Rapture, or some such. Now the right is all up in arms over the possibility the Democrats will bring the Fairness Doctrine back. Employing the obvious argument that it would impinge on their free speech. If the right truly were concerned with “free speech” they would welcome opposing points of view. And a variety of opinion. Which is what the Fairness Doctrine attempts to provide. But the right has a virtual stranglehold on the radio airwaves and they are not about to give that up. They will go down fighting. True, some of the rightwing talk jocks would lose their jobs, but it wouldn’t be the government that takes them but their corporate sponsors searching for increased profit. For corporate sponsorship is what determines who’s on the air, not the realm of ideas. The decisions are market oriented, with no relationship to free speech or the search for truth. Though the right would argue that the free market reflects public opinion. Since I like to sometimes listen to “talk radio” I wish there were something else on the air other than the far right. So that I wouldn’t be so familiar with the slash and burn logic of a Coultergeist. And that’s here in New England, on the Massachusetts border, close to the heart of the progressive east. There is nothing on the radio here but the far right, the bottom crawling right, the Christian right, the really weird and wacko right and the truly American fascist right. I salute you, Richard, for taking a simple step for preserving your sanity by not listening. (That is, if you don't ever succumb to curiosity? If you do, beware: it has been known to drive a sane and sensible man mad in less than five minutes.) 29 Jun 2007 @ 19:03 by jazzolog : Winning A War of Liberty Over Liberalism I did listen to Hannity a couple times, as described in the entry here. My wife raised an interesting point about Coulter this afternoon. She said what if this woman were fat and ugly, instead of leggy and blonde? Would anyone listen to her fascist bitch comments? Who would they be? Of course there were fat, ugly Nazi bitches eventually, but let's not get ahead of our story. (No one illustrated ugly Nazis better than Paul's father...which you know if you are wise enough to buy a Quintanilla calendar each year.) Other entries in Politics 1 Jul 2010 @ 02:21: PHILIPPINES’ NEW PRESIDENT: AKBAR OR NERO? 4 Jun 2010 @ 08:30: SCUTTLE EU NOW, BEFORE 4TH REICH OPTION AWAKENS! 17 Nov 2008 @ 10:11: My 'story' I just uploaded to change.gov 8 Nov 2008 @ 16:06: A Boy Named Sue and the False American Dream 7 Nov 2008 @ 16:01: No He Can't... 6 Nov 2008 @ 09:16: History is NOW 5 Nov 2008 @ 16:58: Obamas World - Africa and the World beyond Poverty !? - but how? - what world? 5 Nov 2008 @ 14:02: Proud to be An American 26 Oct 2008 @ 15:26: Systemic Intelligence: How to teach Systemic Thinking effectively 26 Oct 2008 @ 10:27: OBAMA IS AMERICA’S MAN OF THE HOUR
|
23 Oct 2004 @ 11:31, by Richard Carlson