The thing that pops into my mind when thinking about the Far Right and obnoxiousness is Limbaugh's joke:
Columnist Molly Ivins reported (Arizona Republic 10/17/93) this incident from Limbaugh's TV show--"Here is a Limbaugh joke: Everyone knows the Clintons have a cat. Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is a White House dog?" And he puts up a picture of Chelsea Clinton. Chelsea Clinton is 13 years old.
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1895
So, we've got Limbaugh, O'Reilly, etc. on one side and Franken, Moore etc on the other. Is the Left really as obnoxious as the Right? Or not?
Originally posted by AThousandYoungWho in the hell is spending time reading crap that Molly Ivins wrote 12 years ago???? The Left can never be as obnoxious as the Right because the Left has no definition for obnoxious.
The thing that pops into my mind when thinking about the Far Right and obnoxiousness is Limbaugh's joke:
[b]Columnist Molly Ivins reported (Arizona Republic 10/17/93) this incident from Limbaugh's TV show--"Here is a Limbaugh joke: Everyone knows the Clintons have a cat. Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is a White House dog? ...[text shortened]... side and Franken, Moore etc on the other. Is the Left really as obnoxious as the Right? Or not?
Originally posted by AThousandYoungNot as obnoxious, but Moore approaches the limit. And Chris Mathews is pretty annoying too. I don't have a problem with Franken though.
The thing that pops into my mind when thinking about the Far Right and obnoxiousness is Limbaugh's joke:
[b]Columnist Molly Ivins reported (Arizona Republic 10/17/93) this incident from Limbaugh's TV show--"Here is a Limbaugh joke: Everyone knows the Clintons have a cat. Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is a White House dog? ...[text shortened]... side and Franken, Moore etc on the other. Is the Left really as obnoxious as the Right? Or not?
Originally posted by PullhardIf he was more objective people wouldnt get the message. He is using the same tactics modern media uses on everyone else. Sensationalism and bias. Good on him i say.
Michael Moore could do so much more for the world if he looked up the definition of "objectivity". I like what he is trying to do, but his extremism sucks out his credibility.
I used to think not. Then I began discussing economics with some communists. They were every bit as annoying as the Austrian school Libertarians.
Still if it's the Republican Right that you're talking about, then no. Even if the Far Left is annoying at least deep down they care. The Far Republican Right would just as soon blow your knee cap off with a shotgun as give you change for the pay phone.
Originally posted by Amauroteum, where does that leave Clinton and Gore? didn't their kids go to private school in D.C.? are there any congressmen with kids in public D.C. schools?
Michael Moore is on the Far Left? Since when did someone who sends his kids to private school merit that qualification? He's a talented phony, nothing more, nothing less.
Originally posted by RedmikeThat just gives you a sense of the sorry state US politics is in when someone who is really a centrist is described as "far left." That's how far to the right the pendulum has swung in this country. Someone who is really from the far left would send them into a state of apoplexy.
Moore, Clinton and Gore can't possibly be described as far left.
Originally posted by rwingettThis lengthy and complex essay starts with the EU and then takes on US Populism. It suggests that both the far right and the far left are out of touch with the electorate, that they know that, and that they deliberately manipulate what they believe to be public opinion...
That just gives you a sense of the sorry state US politics is in when someone who is really a centrist is described as "far left." That's how far to the right the pendulum has swung in this country. Someone who is really from the far left would send them into a state of apoplexy.
http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/0000000CABCA.htm
"...In the Sixties, critics of populism pointed the finger at 'hard hats' and 'materialist' working people. Today in the USA, such attitudes are expressed through terms like 'Nascar Dads', 'Valley Girls, 'Joe six-pack' or 'rednecks'. Lakoff claims that Bush's popularity with the Nascar dads is due to their common identification with strict father values. The Old Cold War thesis of the 'authoritarian working class' has been recycled to helps liberals rationalise their sense of isolation from everyday society. The pathological roots of backward attitudes is to be found in the poor quality of parenting experienced by Lakoff's stereotype conservative.
In the UK, Nascar dads have a different name. They are dismissed as 'chavs', 'white van men', 'Worcester Women' or 'tabloid readers'. Since these are people who cannot be mobilised for progressive causes, the best course of action is to try to isolate them and minimise their influence upon society.
...democracy only exists when people are prepared to make their voices heard."
1 edit
Originally posted by widgetSo the USA is run by a bunch of chavs? Jesus & Herakleitos held hands and wept.
This lengthy and complex essay starts with the EU and then takes on US Populism. It suggests that both the far right and the far left are out of touch with the electorate, that they know that, and that they deliberately manipulate what they believe to be public opinion...
http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/0000000CABCA.htm
"...In the Sixties, crit ...[text shortened]... pon society.
...democracy only exists when people are prepared to make their voices heard."
Originally posted by Bosse de NageNo... apparently the UK is populated by chavs! Neds, etc...
So the USA is run by a bunch of chavs? Jesus & Herakleitos held hands and wept.
The Excited States is populated by rednecks, etc.... Valley Girls & Boys...
Reading the finely thought-out print:
it is a moneyed elite who manipulate them and actually run the transglobal corporate conspiracy.