|
PsychoInternetHawk posted:I'm not sure if they're trying to spin it to the public, or if Fox is really interested in Benghazi gaining traction anywhere else. That's why I think the whole Ricks flap can be traced back to just how badly things went for the right-wing on Election Night. Because Fox News (along with the usual crew) kept promising conservative America a Romney victory. They weren't being even the remotest bit objective, or trying to present to Republican viewers the possibility that their guy might lose. Nope, they kept feeding the echo chamber what it wanted to hear: Romney was leading in every swing state, several traditionally blue states were leaning Romney, people were tired of Obama, blah blah blah. And when it backfired on them, they, along with everyone else in the right-wing bubble (except maybe the numbers wonks that told Rove he was a loving idiot on camera) were absolutely shocked. Sure, some people still stick to the stories that help them sleep at night (Obummer stole the election, he promised free stuff, voter fraud, etc.), but I'm pretty sure a lot of people just woke up and realized that the "fair and balanced" network (along with others, like Limbaugh) had been lying to them this whole time. Which is why you now see Republican politicians attacking the conservative entertainers like Rush and Fox News, because the spectacular failing of the conservative media outlets has seriously damaged not only their individual brands, but the brand of the Republican party as a whole. That's why I think the whole Ricks thing has caused Fox News to go into a collective snit, because at this point their credibility among the conservative base has been seriously damaged by the Election Night results. So as a result, they're going to be hypersensitive whenever someone points out they're full of partisan poo poo for quite a while yet. Because the Election Night scars are still fresh. 
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 06:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:That's why I think the whole Ricks flap can be traced back to just how badly things went for the right-wing on Election Night. Because Fox News (along with the usual crew) kept promising conservative America a Romney victory. They weren't being even the remotest bit objective, or trying to present to Republican viewers the possibility that their guy might lose. Nope, they kept feeding the echo chamber what it wanted to hear: Romney was leading in every swing state, several traditionally blue states were leaning Romney, people were tired of Obama, blah blah blah. I really hope you're right. But FOX News' grip is going to last for quite a while still. They may very well be clever enough to scale back the crazy until they build up some credibility again. I know plenty of people (20-somethings) whose opinions still come straight from FOX News. They've been convinced that all non-Fox media is liberally biased and lying to them. As long as Murdoch and his boys know when and where to bend the truth, they'll be around and in power for years to come.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 07:19
|
|
|
Kiwi Bigtree posted:I think its more that "black president" was a yard stick for racial progress for a long time, so the second we got a black president the Republicans wanted to officially declare "racism is over." You hit the nail on the head here. They don't see electing Obama for two terms as a benchmark for racial tolerance in America, but as proof that racism obviously isn't a big deal anymore. To republicans, racism is nothing but an excuse liberals use to explain why minorities aren't getting ahead in America. Now that we just re-elected a black president, all claims of "racism" are now null and void. White people can say whatever bigoted poo poo they feel like and can't be called out on it, because racism officially no longer exists.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 08:18
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Glenn Beck is mentally ill, look at how creepy and maniacal he is as he dances around what he wants to imply here: All I can think watching this video is "God, what a loving coward you are." If you're going to be that guy saying poo poo about how white culture is superior then be that loving guy. He may be hateful and lovely but at least that guy is genuinely lovely. Glen Beck is either scum who doesn't believe that poo poo or scum who really does and knows how abhorrent it makes him seem and knows that tip toeing around it is necessary. That "I'm just wondering..." bullshit makes me madder than explicit racism because for some reason people accept it as serious discourse instead of writing it off as the racist poo poo it actually is. If you have a polarizing position either state it and bear the consequences or gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 10:01
|
|
|
swampland posted:Glen Beck is either scum who doesn't believe that poo poo or scum who really does and knows how abhorrent it makes him seem and knows that tip toeing around it is necessary. That "I'm just wondering..." bullshit makes me madder than explicit racism because for some reason people accept it as serious discourse instead of writing it off as the racist poo poo it actually is. If you have a polarizing position either state it and bear the consequences or gently caress off. He lives in a world where the most biased description of him you'll find in the mainstream media is "conservative commentator". There is absolutely no pressure on him to explain himself, other than liberal bloggers, and that single extremely weak Catie Couric interview.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 11:30
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:He lives in a world where the most biased description of him you'll find in the mainstream media is "conservative commentator". There is absolutely no pressure on him to explain himself, other than liberal bloggers, and that single extremely weak Catie Couric interview. I think that is what frustrates me the most. It would be so easy to challenge and expose that hack, as seen in that interview where the most basic questions fluster him. I mean if actually having to explain your positions requires so much delicate wording and denial maybe they're not actually positions anyone rational would agree with. I wish Glen Beck just constantly had a Greek chorus in the background singing "But what does it mean?" that he had to legally respond to every time he spoke.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 11:52
|
|
|
Glenn Beck is a shock jock and putting on an act because it's good money. However, he's never been terribly clever - so it wouldn't surprise me if he started believing his own bullshit. I don't think of what he does as being anything other than histrionic over-acted bullshit. He is one soundboard of fart noises away from just being his old morning zoo self. Edit - If you want proof he's just a morning zoo shock jock, you don't need to go far, really: Spacedad fucked around with this message at 11:55 on Nov 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 11:52
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:What did he say? Basically a lot of mean-spirited "Haha, this is so bad. I'm gonna use it for my bumper music all month and talk about how lovely Bob Dylan is." stuff. Spacedad posted:Edit - If you want proof he's just a morning zoo shock jock, you don't need to go far, really: Hell, I'd buy it just to be able to say I own a jar of Glenn Beck's pee and I'm not afraid to use it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 12:52
|
|
|
Kiwi Bigtree posted:Because Fox News is a money-making scheme more than it is a power-structuring scheme. For eight years it was both, but that time has passed. They want dumb old white people to buy gold stocks and lovely life insurance. Given the choice between continuing to milk the wealthy and ignorant, or actually controlling public policy, they are sticking with the milking. swampland posted:All I can think watching this video is "God, what a loving coward you are." If you're going to be that guy saying poo poo about how white culture is superior then be that loving guy. He may be hateful and lovely but at least that guy is genuinely lovely. Glen Beck is either scum who doesn't believe that poo poo or scum who really does and knows how abhorrent it makes him seem and knows that tip toeing around it is necessary. That "I'm just wondering..." bullshit makes me madder than explicit racism because for some reason people accept it as serious discourse instead of writing it off as the racist poo poo it actually is. If you have a polarizing position either state it and bear the consequences or gently caress off. Same here. It's getting to the point where I actually wish some conservative rear end in a top hat whould finally just call Obama a "friend of the family" on national TV just so we could finally get it out in the open and they could be branded as the racist, bigoted assholes they really are.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 16:10
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:All I can see is 'Being John Malkovich'
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 16:32
|
|
|
fade5 posted:Same here. It's getting to the point where I actually wish some conservative rear end in a top hat whould finally just call Obama a "friend of the family" on national TV just so we could finally get it out in the open and they could be branded as the racist, bigoted assholes they really are. Wouldn't happen that way, just like how a bunch of senators saying horrible poo poo about women/rape didn't lead to a big epiphany about how misogynistic the party is; it was just "a few bad apples" that got thrown out of office.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 16:44
|
|
|
fade5 posted:Same here. It's getting to the point where I actually wish some conservative rear end in a top hat whould finally just call Obama a "friend of the family" on national TV just so we could finally get it out in the open and they could be branded as the racist, bigoted assholes they really are. We'll have to settle for Blah in the mean time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 17:07
|
|
|
Sandra Fluke is among the people nominated to be Time's Person of the Year and predictably, the far right is losing its goddamn mind over it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 17:23
|
|
|
Ballz posted:Sandra Fluke is among the people nominated to be Time's Person of the Year and predictably, the far right is losing its goddamn mind over it. I'm glad they are past pretending they disagreed with Rush Limbaugh's slut and prostitute comments.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 17:32
|
|
|
Chitin posted:Wouldn't happen that way, just like how a bunch of senators saying horrible poo poo about women/rape didn't lead to a big epiphany about how misogynistic the party is; it was just "a few bad apples" that got thrown out of office.  Plus, it might actually bring a discussion about racial discrimination back into the media, at least for a little while, and remnid people that, yes, it still exists. 
fade5 fucked around with this message at 17:50 on Nov 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 17:47
|
|
|
Radish posted:I'm glad they are past pretending they disagreed with Rush Limbaugh's slut and prostitute comments. Along with comparing her to Hitler.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 18:22
|
|
|
Chitin posted:Wouldn't happen that way, just like how a bunch of senators saying horrible poo poo about women/rape didn't lead to a big epiphany about how misogynistic the party is; it was just "a few bad apples" that got thrown out of office. Interestingly enough, American Conservative parties have been intellectually bankrupt in this way since the old Federalist Party became defunct. The rise of the Jacksonian Democrats and the gradual extension of universal white manhood suffrage created a situation where conservatives could no longer run on a platform that explicitly said only certain people (e.g. the gentry, wealthy people, property owners, aristocrats) had the right to rule. It simply stopped being a viable philosophy to run on explicitly. Conservative successors like the Whig party and the postbellum Democratic party ran on aristocratic platforms, but with language and policy programs that submitted philosophically to the radical democratic paradigm. White Supremacy was obviously a more lasting force for conservative politics than aristocracy, but eventually it too had to be submerged. Conservatives today still have to conceal their aristocratic and paternalist philosophy with abstract dogwhistles: restricted suffrage or citizenship with educational requirements or tests, voter ID laws and other election restrictions, restricted access to birth control, dismantling the social safety net, pro-monopoly economic policies, reduction or elimination of taxes on wealth and capital, villification and destruction of labor unions, and on and on. Part of the problem for the GOP and its allies is that they have so many contradictory planks in their platform and they have no real apparent ideology linking it all together. They won't run on the explicit platform of white supremacy or aristocratic dominion (though the Tea Party edges very close) because those things are still largely unpalatable in our relatively radical democracy. This renders much of what they do run on philosophically and intellectually incoherent. If they were to resubmit the axiom that only certain people have the right to rule, and explicitly exerted their paternalist and aristocratic intellectual heritage, I think the conservative program would make a lot more sense. Obviously they would still be shitbags, but at least we could have an honest intellectual debate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 18:37
|
|
|
Rush Limbaugh literally just said that the only way to get the woman vote is if enough women get married. Because if their big strong man is providing for them (Oh and I suppose telling them how they should vote) then they can just stay at home and never worry about women's rights or the world around them. Dear lord, he really thinks the perfect scenario is that every woman in the States should be exactly like Michelle Bachman. This misogynist pit is so deep I don't think the man can see the sun anymore. Edit: vvv- Figuratively speaking. Afterall, I'm sure they think their loving obedient, inferior, housewives have to go outside sometime in order to buy groceries or do their banking. That Irish Gal fucked around with this message at 19:58 on Nov 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 19:32
|
|
|
That Irish Guy posted:Rush Limbaugh literally just said that the only way to get the woman vote is if enough women get married. Because if their big strong man is providing for them (Oh and I suppose telling them how they should vote) then they can just stay at home and never worry about women's rights or the world around them. Dear lord, he really thinks the perfect scenario is that every woman in the States should be exactly like Michelle Bachman. But... Michelle Bachman doesn't stay at home.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 19:36
|
|
|
That Irish Guy posted:Rush Limbaugh literally just said that the only way to get the woman vote is if enough women get married. Because if their big strong man is providing for them (Oh and I suppose telling them how they should vote) then they can just stay at home and never worry about women's rights or the world around them. Dear lord, he really thinks the perfect scenario is that every woman in the States should be exactly like Michelle Bachman. They still believe that a married woman can simply retire to domestic duties and raising children. Most families, mine included need that 2nd income to maintain their standard of living. The idea of the doting wife cooking dinner and raising kids while dad is off working is obsolete. Both partners have jobs to provide for the family and if I told my wife how to vote she would rightly tell me to go gently caress myself (though we both vote generally the same way; Dem when merited or Socialist/Green  ).If they want to bring back the 1 income household they would need to vastly increase wages which would mean less profits for our glorious job creators to suck from our labor. These guys are so out of touch with modern society... It's simply amazing to behold. Nuclearmonkee fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Nov 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 19:39
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:They still believe that a married woman can simply retire to domestic duties and raising children. Most families, mine included need that 2nd income to maintain their standard of living. The idea of the doting wife cooking dinner and raising kids while dad is off working is obsolete. Both partners have jobs to provide for the family and if I told my wife how to vote she would rightly tell me to go gently caress myself (though we both vote generally the same way; Dem when merited or Socialist/Green It is indeed a sheer marvel. How on earth have these cockroaches lasted so long, by making it a bloody loving ~feature~ of their party by saying "Hey, you don't deserve to be an independent, self sufficient human being, instead why don't you go leech off someone with superior genitalia? It is your place after all." I'm just glad that they're being left behind, along with such other brilliant idea makers that brought you trephination or blood letting. That Irish Gal fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Nov 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 19:43
|
|
|
I'm not a liar, I just say a lot of things that aren't intended to be true.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 20:21
|
|
|
Forgall posted:But... Michelle Bachman doesn't stay at home. It's OK because she's submissive to this guy. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 20:35
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:It's OK because she's submissive to this guy. Did he swallow Val Kilmer or something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 20:36
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:It's OK because she's submissive to this guy. The number of DSLs among Male Republicans is fascinating. I mean, check out this fella  (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 20:44
|
|
|
The Brown Menace posted:Did he swallow Val Kilmer or something. probably only about six inches of him.  Marcus bachmann has to be the most obviously closeted individual I have ever witnessed. the guy just oozes fabulousness from his pores, but he won't ever leave that closet he is so comfortable in. It is really very sad when you think about it for too long. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 20:48
|
|
|
Sword of Chomsky posted:Marcus bachmann has to be the most obviously closeted individual I have ever witnessed. No, what about Lindsey Graham?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 20:53
|
|
|
Ballz posted:Sandra Fluke is among the people nominated to be Time's Person of the Year and predictably, the far right is losing its goddamn mind over it. Man I hope she wins. The contraception debate should have been settled years ago.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:02
|
|
|
She pretty much does deserve it. She touched off the whole wave of bellyaching about women's health issues that eventually led to Democrats keeping the Senate and undoubtedly contributed to Republicans' inability to stop putting their feet in their mouths.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:03
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:She pretty much does deserve it. She touched off the whole wave of bellyaching about women's health issues that eventually led to Democrats keeping the Senate and undoubtedly contributed to Republicans' inability to stop putting their feet in their mouths. I really think she inadvertantly came up with the new Democrat strategy for campaigns to come. For too long we let Republicans shout basic talking points and just nodded said "well, we disagree." Forcing Republicans to get into the horrifying specifics of their world view is essentially ballot poison for them. We should be doing this for every tax debate. Force them to explain WHY they think the consequences of cutting social benefits is good for society.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:16
|
|
|
Kiwi Bigtree posted:I really think she inadvertantly came up with the new Democrat strategy for campaigns to come. For too long we let Republicans shout basic talking points and just nodded said "well, we disagree." Forcing Republicans to get into the horrifying specifics of their world view is essentially ballot poison for them. "Job creators. I will not elaborate." This is the answer you will get.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:12
|
|
|
Nimmy posted:"Job creators. I will not elaborate." This is the answer you will get. Yeah and that did not work much for Romney either
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:20
|
|
|
Kiwi Bigtree posted:Yeah and that did not work much for Romney either It got him 47% of the vote. Not too long ago it got them a majority.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:20
|
|
|
Nimmy posted:"Job creators. I will not elaborate." This is the answer you will get. You would think, but the echo chamber is absolutely full of "gently caress them, they don't vote for us anyway". So asking for specifics, every time, and getting dozens, hundreds of "gently caress women, they don't vote for us" "gently caress latinos, they don't vote for us" "gently caress blacks, they are the real racists who don't vote for us". Even if people dodge 9 times out of ten, or 99 times out of a hundred, there will still be dozens or hundreds of "gently caress everybody who isn't already rich, white and old" quotes to go around. That, and you can count on some delightfully tonedeaf racialism, about which of the various brown brothers is a 'natural demographic' for the Republican party. And people will still have to have high dollar fundraisers, and they will still need to tell their randian supermen financiers that they are the only people doing any loving work around here, and there will probably be a lot more busboys with iphones in coming years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:23
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:You would think, but the echo chamber is absolutely full of "gently caress them, they don't vote for us anyway". So asking for specifics, every time, and getting dozens, hundreds of "gently caress women, they don't vote for us" "gently caress latinos, they don't vote for us" "gently caress blacks, they are the real racists who don't vote for us". This. It is a PR war of attrition. The democrats need to understand that to win they have to get the GOP to tell us what it really thinks. the best way to do that is to put people like Sandra Fluk right in their faces. Give them a target and then hand them a microphone. most of them are so filled with spite and rage that they can't help themselves.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:34
|
|
|
Does anyone have a solid, comprehensive summary link debunking the Benghazi poo poo? I'm so loving sick of people I know mentioning it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2012 00:18
|
|
|
Some clown put on  while I was in the gym today. I was wearing headphones so I couldn't hear the audio, which made what I saw a bit surreal. On Cavuto, he showed Obama at a press conference with a quote from the president in text below saying "the middle class can't afford a tax hike right now." Then they interviewed two small business owners, with the text below saying "middle class Americans respond to President's tax hike plan" or something. How completely sucked into the hivemind does one have to be to not see such a bald-faced lie?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2012 00:34
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Does anyone have a solid, comprehensive summary link debunking the Benghazi poo poo? Not that a shithead would believe.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2012 00:36
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Does anyone have a solid, comprehensive summary link debunking the Benghazi poo poo? I'm so loving sick of people I know mentioning it. It's impossible, the only way to fight pee pee is with doo doo and the only way to block doo doo is with pee pee and that plays right into their hands. I think they've really got Obama this time!
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2012 00:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
SedanChair posted:Not that a shithead would believe. It is fast becoming the same type of tinfoil nonsense that is no easier to debunk than chemtrails, FEMA camps, or a lot of the witch hunt stuff the Republicans went after Clinton on. And when Benghazi finally gets played out, they'll find some new scandal to pin on Obama. As they say, you can't reason some one out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. Obama is a murderous Islamo-Stalin-Hitler^3 and they'll just latch on to what ever is the next "proof" of that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2012 00:43
|
|