2901

Whether one attributes it to the Tea Party or not, there has been a distinct rightward drift in the GOP over the last two elections; moderates getting ousted in the primaries for being RINOs and so forth. I compare the 2008 GOP presidential hopefuls with the 2012 gang and, well, maybe it’s just me, but it seems like there was a whole lot more stupid-crazy on display this year than 4 years ago.

[Ron Paul, of course, is an eternal Child of the Night who can only be vanquished by a Belmont.]

Of the people you listed, only the first is actually a politician with any real power (besides star power!). And more to the point, OWS hasn’t been “Astroturfed” the way the Tea Party has by, e.g., the Koch brothers and their “Americans for Prosperity” PAC. For better or for worse, OWS is simply a sideshow with no real clout.

And I say that as an aging liberal who’s depressed we can’t stand toe-to-toe against our right-wing counterparts; we are, quite simply, badly outgunned. One of the sad ironies of modern American politics is that the party which is supposedly all about individual freedom is so good at marching in lock-step with one another; while the party which is supposedly about working together for the collective good is doing such a piss-poor job of it.

I know you threw “influential” in there, knowing that no one on the left has anywhere the numbers to be as influential as Limbaugh.

Well, duh - the point is not that there are no crazies in the Left (there are); it’s that the Left’s crazies don’t have nearly the level of influence over the Dems that the Right’s crazies have over the GOP. AFAICT, neither you nor any of the conservative-leaning Qt3 contingent have really disputed this; you’ve all just danced around the notion that it matters. It’s the same blinkered ideology which leads someone to conclude that “Citizens United” was a good idea: “If you ignore the inevitable unintended consequences, it all works out great!”

False equivalence is still false, no matter how hard you conga that party line.

2902

Pssh, what are you talking about? Gallup’s clearly the most accurate pollster of this election cycle, so it’s both true that unemployment has dropped and Romney will win the election anyway!

2903

I don’t actually admit that. I don’t have an opinion on it, as I’ve seen maybe ten minutes of Olbermann? Once? He was mad at someone about something. Maddow? Maybe a minute or two. She seemed happy. The rest of the network? No idea, never watched (“I don’t even own a TV!”). I’m just leaving that alone for the sake of argument.

I’d have to go dig up the numbers, which I can’t really do right now, but my recollection is that MSNBC has fewer than a million viewers each night (or maybe just over?), that Fox has two to three times that, and that Limbaugh’s radio show reaches many millions of people. The wider point is that the overall conservative network of television, radio, and interrnet is much larger and has a much wider (har) audience than the liberal equivalents. Hell, there is no liberal equivalent to the radio folks, period. Air America crashed and burned (and if Scuzz is saying they were just washed up hippies, well…).

Show me a Democratic politician who’s had to apologize for crossing a liberal pundit. Because that’s happened with Limbaugh.

So the only difference between someone like Limbaugh and someone like Maddow is the level of success. Class warfare rears its ugly head once again!

Maybe next you ask what a Czar is and why Obama has so many of them. I think that’d really complete the act.

2904

This is amazing. One could argue that the standards for mere good citizenship do not require paying more taxes than the legal minimum, but for a presidential candidate I would expect a higher standard. Not only is Romney rich beyond the means of almost every American, but he has Cayman accounts to shield himself from taxes, took advantage of the 401(k) system to shield himself from taxes, and now has this sweetheart trust fund that gives him the tax advantage of the Mormon church to continue to avoid paying his fair share.

For those who didn’t read the article, Romney set up a fund that pays him an annuity off the top, and whatever is left after 15 years will go to the Mormon church. Since the trust pays Romney first, that means the reality is that the money will mostly go to Romney, very little to the church, and he avoids the already low capital gains tax on the money.

I guess there’s a reason he wouldn’t release his tax returns. Props to Bloomberg for getting this out through the Freedom of Information Act.

2905

I watched that interview with Pelosi and I agree with you that she is pretty devisive. I don’t watch Fox or MSNBC

2906

Maybe the party that you think is “marching in lock-step with one another” is actually “working together for the collective good.” Just a thought.

2907

Maybe if they were remotely interested in individual rights beyond “if you’re poor fuck you!”

Its your right to be poor/sick/whatever. Its not your right to have the government leave you the fuck alone. Unless its taxes.

2908

Ah yes, there was an crime committed. Instantly, because someone who was further left than the moderate right did this, it reflects on millions (who DID condemn it!).

…So, let’s talk about the Banker’s crisis and the trillions it’s cost the country, shall we?

2909

That’s right: People were only opposed to the rape because it was someone on the left who committed it.

I don’t know why I bother listening to you anymore.

2910

You never bothered listening in the first place.

Keep burning what you think are straw men, though.

2911

Who here in NH is going to see or wants to see Obama and Clinton Sunday in Concord?
PM me if interested, I have link to get an eticket.

2912

Well, you should check it out sometime. Unless you are already sold on the “the other guys are terrible, evil people who want to destroy the country”, you may find it to be somewhat uncomfortable. But again, maybe some folks don’t even notice that kind of thing. Certainly, we’ve seen folks post up stories here, which had really ridiculous headlines on them.

For instance, tonight I had it on and the Ed show was on… The headline for the show, “The president takes the high road on the stump while Mitt Romney goes back back to his regular desperate campaign of deceit.”

I’d have to go dig up the numbers, which I can’t really do right now, but my recollection is that MSNBC has fewer than a million viewers each night (or maybe just over?), that Fox has two to three times that, and that Limbaugh’s radio show reaches many millions of people. The wider point is that the overall conservative network of television, radio, and interrnet is much larger and has a much wider (har) audience than the liberal equivalents. Hell, there is no liberal equivalent to the radio folks, period.

But don’t we also need to consider the other huge number of sources of vitriol from the left? I mean, hell, we can just look at the articles that various folks post here. Certainly those folks have influence, right? What about someone like Krugman? His column is read by millions, I would guess. Or various left wing internet outlets?

It’s kind of silly for folks here, who obviously focus their own media consumption on exactly the types of politically partisan, inflamatory coverage, could possibly argue that those exact same sources somehow don’t count.

Air America crashed and burned (and if Scuzz is saying they were just washed up hippies, well…).

Heh, ya, it kind of had the vibe of a college radio station, or something that someone was running out of their garage.

I listened to them, but I think maybe I was one of only like 1000 people who did. I also listened to them online, because they only actually existed in like 3 “real” radio markets.

2913

Republican, Democrat, or other, there’s a good chance watching cable news channels – even those that support your candidate – will make you angry, stressed, and unhappy. I suggest avoiding them all at all costs.

2914

She’s one of the few Democrats who really goes there, yeah.

But don’t we also need to consider the other huge number of sources of vitriol from the left? I mean, hell, we can just look at the articles that various folks post here. Certainly those folks have influence, right? What about someone like Krugman? His column is read by millions, I would guess. Or various left wing internet outlets?

“Some guy on the internet” or “some magazine no one reads” aren’t exactly influential. Krugman, Atrios, and Kos are the only online left guys with a followership of note.

2915

If you consider Krugman to be as “vitriolic” as the mainstream right-wing media and politicians whose standard mode of discourse is the use of eliminationist rhetoric (crosshairs, anyone?) then you are completely fucking high.

(Using Coulter quotes is like shooting fish in a barrel. Can the woman go a week without calling for liberals to be murdered?)

EDIT: removed the Hal Turner stuff. In retrospect, it’s sort of the right-wing equivalent of the Worker’s World Daily or whatever they’re called.

2916

Ya, I think we actually covered this topic previously. I don’t really think that folks are ACTUALLY suggesting that you kill people in those statements, but that’s not really the point. I find those statements offensive, for the reasons I laid out previously… certainly, you will not find me defending them.

However, it does not change the fact that the left wing talking heads engage in the exact same type of demonization of those that they perceive to be “the enemy”. They would never use things like hunting terminology or symbology, because it would not resonate with their target audience. The phraseology that they choose to engage in is different, due to the people they are trying to talk to.

But the demonization of the right that they engage to is exactly the same, in terms of its effect on politics. It’s designed to dehumanize the opposition, to prevent any kind of rational discourse. You can’t talk to the opposition, because they are evil, terrible people. Thus, their ideas… ALL of their ideas… are terrible. They are utterly without merit, and engaging them with any other purpose besides their destruction is only going to result in you somehow being tricked, or corrupted.

It’s not healthy. It doesn’t lead to good things. It’s zealotry.

2917

Rush and Ann appear to realize it’s a shtick, but near as I can tell Savage is deadly serious.

But the demonization of the right that they engage to is exactly the same, in terms of its effect on politics.

Link to a left-winger with a notable following claiming that right-wingers should be rounded up and killed. You might be able to find one; can you find one doing it for years and years? Can you find one that’s really respected by elected officials like Limbaugh?

2918

We will?

2919

Less boringly, the unskewed polls prediction is goddamn hilarious. Romney gets 53.5% and 359 electoral votes.

Near as I can tell that would be Gallup’s most recent +5 Romney margin with Romney winning something like 90% of the undecideds. Obama only wins Washington state by 2 points and loses Ohio by 8.

The dude apparently doesn’t believe in the concept of a confidence interval:

This projection is expected to be spot-on accurate for predicting the outcome in all 50 states and the District of Columbia and close to the actual popular vote.

2920

They think PA will go red? Hahaahahahhaha. I’m from there and it hasn’t turned red since I began voting in 1992.