|
ThirdPartyView posted:Santorum/Bachmann 2016 would be the dream ballot... poo poo, we could run Bernie Sanders and still win against those two. Right...? 
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 07:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:05 |
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:
Not really, our probably most right wing PM in history (Howard) did a huge firearm reform that was, and is, very popular with the vast majority of people. The only people I seem to see that are against it are the gun nuts who think the massacre that caused this crackdown (Port Arthur) was a Government inside job.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 07:31
|
|
|
I'm so glad we're in the same corner as a barely functioning government (Somalia) on so many issues.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 07:41
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:So we've seen the rate at which Republicans have descended into craziness over the last few years. What's it going to be like in another 4-6 years? Are they going to become even more extreme, or will they hit a wall of some sort? It depends a lot on how 2014 goes, which will be the first time the Teabaggers are up for reelection. It'll be a real uphill battle for Democrats. But I have no idea when or how the right wing media would go sane. The behavior that turns off voters actually gets viewers and listeners, so they'll be with us a while. Moderation doesnt make money. hen there's the problem that new right wing politicians aren't the ones will have had their views shaped by Fox and AM radio.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 07:51
|
|
|
I'm still shaking my head at the knowledge that the man who owns Fox News has called for more gun control. Ailes must have literally shat his pants when he saw that tweet. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 08:10
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:I'm still shaking my head at the knowledge that the man who owns Fox News has called for more gun control. Ailes must have literally shat his pants when he saw that tweet. It's not surprising. Murdoch might not technically be Australian any more, but he did spend half his life here. I can only speak anecdotally, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find even a hardcore conservative here who thought America's gun laws were anything other than batshit crazy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 08:22
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:I'm still shaking my head at the knowledge that the man who owns Fox News has called for more gun control. Ailes must have literally shat his pants when he saw that tweet. Here's a secret: In most cases, social issues are for the conservative hoi polloi.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 12:30
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:I'm still shaking my head at the knowledge that the man who owns Fox News has called for more gun control. Ailes must have literally shat his pants when he saw that tweet. It's a very typical reaction for an Australian. Another right-wing Australian actually dropped an  on that post:
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 13:14
|
|
|
On All in the Family one time, Archie Bunker delivered an editorial advocating for mandatory gun possession on all passenger flights. Guns would be handed out at boarding and collected at deboarding. It was played up for great laughs as the idiotic premise it is and now conservative pundits are unironicaly suggesting this very thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 15:20
|
|
|
Vladimir Poutine posted:It's a very typical reaction for an Australian. Another right-wing Australian actually dropped an  Well played, well played.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 15:23
|
|
|
I should clarify that it's not so much I'm surprised that Murdoch holds those views, because after all he is a person who's spent most of his life living and working in a couple of different countries that have pretty strict gun control laws. It's more that I'm surprised that he would tweet that, knowing full well his right-wing propaganda machine here in the USA holds a view so opposite as to be actively hostile to the message their boss was tweeting. That's why I think Ailes must have drat near had a coronary when he saw the guy who gives him his marching orders tweet a variation on "we need to have stricter gun control laws", because it's the complete opposite of what his talking heads are routinely spouting. And Turnbull was right on the money; if Murdoch directed Ailes to change Fox News' message about gun control overnight, you would suddenly see a rash of Republican politicians clamoring for more stringent gun controls. Of course, you'd also see Fox News' ratings go into the toilet as their conservative audience abandons them in droves, which is why it'll never happen. Sydney Bottocks fucked around with this message at 15:33 on Dec 16, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 15:29
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:On All in the Family one time, Archie Bunker delivered an editorial advocating for mandatory gun possession on all passenger flights. Guns would be handed out at boarding and collected at deboarding. It was played up for great laughs as the idiotic premise it is and now conservative pundits are unironicaly suggesting this very thing. All in the Family was the ultimate ideological mirror. For every liberal who tittered at Norman Lear's rapier-like parody of a troglodyte conservative, a sulking Joe Sixpack nodded along with Archie Bunker.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 15:34
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:On All in the Family one time, Archie Bunker delivered an editorial advocating for mandatory gun possession on all passenger flights. Guns would be handed out at boarding and collected at deboarding. It was played up for great laughs as the idiotic premise it is and now conservative pundits are unironicaly suggesting this very thing. You know what we need more of in an aluminum tube filled with jet fuel flying at 30,000 feet? Guns.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 15:48
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:I should clarify that it's not so much I'm surprised that Murdoch holds those views, because after all he is a person who's spent most of his life living and working in a couple of different countries that have pretty strict gun control laws. It's more that I'm surprised that he would tweet that, knowing full well his right-wing propaganda machine here in the USA holds a view so opposite as to be actively hostile to the message their boss was tweeting. That's why I think Ailes must have drat near had a coronary when he saw the guy who gives him his marching orders tweet a variation on "we need to have stricter gun control laws", because it's the complete opposite of what his talking heads are routinely spouting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 16:31
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I'm not entirely convinced Ailes would listen to him at this point. There was a good article written last year about Ailes, his relationship with Murdoch, and the history of him at FOX News, and it seems like Ailes has more power at the network now than Murdoch does. Ultimately Murdoch doesn't care about the Republican Party other than that they are working towards his interests of making more money. Well, we have to keep in mind that Ailes may run the network, but Murdoch owns it, and Ailes and everyone else there ultimately serves at Murdoch's pleasure. If Murdoch suddenly woke up one day and decided that Fox News was going to make MSNBC look like The Joe McCarthy Celebration Station, there wouldn't be much Ailes could do about it beyond resigning in protest. With that said, of course nothing remotely like that is ever going to happen, for precisely the reason you stated. You're 1000% correct in that Murdoch is perfectly happy to let Fox News be what it is as long as it makes him money, and random tweets aside, Murdoch knows that if his network's talking heads suddenly started advocating for more stringent gun laws, it'd be the beginning of the end for Fox News. Hell, as it is, Fox News has already been catching flak from the ultra-hardcore conservative base for stuff like Kristol saying we should raise taxes on the rich, Hannity's "evolved" views on immigration, and of course not immediately reporting that Obama "stole" the election on Election Night; with people saying that FN isn't "conservative enough" and considering them to be a bunch of RINOs and so forth. If they suddenly took a pro-gun control stance, it'd send their ratings into a tailspin from which it would never recover, and Murdoch certainly knows that. That's what made his tweet all the more baffling, because he has to know that rival news organizations are going to gleefully use it against them, especially at a time when Fox News (and its' pandering to conservatives) is coming under a lot of attack from both the left and the right as being one of the biggest reasons why Republicans did so badly on Election Night.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 17:13
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:
Literally all Fox News would have to do to avoid ratings drops is to heavily imply that the gun control measures would keep all those minorities from having guns.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 17:21
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:With that said, of course nothing remotely like that is ever going to happen, for precisely the reason you stated. You're 1000% correct in that Murdoch is perfectly happy to let Fox News be what it is as long as it makes him money, and random tweets aside, Murdoch knows that if his network's talking heads suddenly started advocating for more stringent gun laws, it'd be the beginning of the end for Fox News. I am reminded that after the second presidential debate in this last campaign, Fox News deleted an entire 4 minute answer from Romney on gun control from its transcript, citing "audio gap", where Romney said, among other things: Mitt Romney posted:We, of course, don’t want to have automatic weapons, and that’s already illegal in this country to have automatic weapons. It was left as "audio gap" overnight until the story started to blow up on blogs, then it was quickly and unceremoniously added back in without any acknowledgment of error. Don't wanna hurt Romney with the gun wingnuts now!
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 17:23
|
|
|
Twisted Perspective posted:Chear up. It's the Dominionists next!
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 18:58
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:Literally all Fox News would have to do to avoid ratings drops is to heavily imply that the gun control measures would keep all those minorities from having guns. Honestly, that's the talking point people need to use. Not the racist one, but the classic Conservative argument of "Well, if you aren't doing anything illegal, then why are you worried about <subject>?" "Well, if you're a law-abiding gun owner, then why do you need to worry about tighter gun control? Or better background checks?"
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 19:40
|
|
|
Boywhiz88 posted:Honestly, that's the talking point people need to use. Not the racist one, but the classic Conservative argument of "Well, if you aren't doing anything illegal, then why are you worried about <subject>?" Nope. Because anything that may make anything more difficult for a 50 year old white male is inherently unconstitutional, didn't you know? Harder to buy compensatory semi-automatic assault rifles? Unconstitutional. Invading search histories that may uncover infidelity and/or sexual deviancy? Unconstitutional. Denying medical insurance coverage of viagra? Unconstitutional. Meanwhile, chain gangs in AZ? Constitutional! Racial profiling? Constitutional! You don't understand the right, Boywhiz88.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 19:58
|
|
|
Pander posted:
Wait. The right or the Right? Aren't I better off for it anyway? Heh. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 21:51
|
|
|
Boywhiz88 posted:Wait. The right or the Right? Aren't I better off for it anyway? Heh. Tough question! To be ignorant of them is to perhaps live a happier life, not knowing what horrors lurk in the hearts of Right Wingers. But then to know them is to understand the reality of our current situation, which is fairly frightening. So, is ignorance bliss, or would you rather know? Speaking of this specifically, I've found most people who are block labeled "undecided voters" have no idea how truly depraved the Republican party is these days. They're no doubt thinking of a Republican party that ceased to exist 30 or so years ago, which I'll agree was not that bad at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 22:54
|
|
|
I'm reading through the gun control discussion thread and though I don't have a link to any video or anything, a couple of posters have commented that even some of the conservative Sunday discussion panelists on Fox News were calling for increased gun controls, so I dunno what the gently caress anymore. I've been in bed most of the day due to a nasty cold, so maybe this is all just part of a Nyquil-induced fever dream. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 08:55
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:I am reminded that after the second presidential debate in this last campaign, Fox News deleted an entire 4 minute answer from Romney on gun control from its transcript, citing "audio gap", where Romney said, among other things: IIRC it was found that all the other networks had the same audio gap in their transcription for a while, so it's more likely that the transcribing service made the error and all of the networks pulled from the same source.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 16:33
|
|
|
Joe Scarborough is now pro gun-control. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/ns/msnbc-morning_joe/#50222624
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 16:37
|
|
|
Brigadier Sockface posted:Joe Scarborough is now pro gun-control. So how soon until he is crucified by the rest of the Republican media universe?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 16:48
|
|
|
the2ndgenesis posted:So how soon until he is crucified by the rest of the Republican media universe? Isn't he already a RINO since he's on MSNBC?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 16:50
|
|
|
Brigadier Sockface posted:Joe Scarborough is now pro gun-control. And that's one hell of a speach.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 16:51
|
|
|
the2ndgenesis posted:So how soon until he is crucified by the rest of the Republican media universe? I don't think he can do too much more damage to himself in the Conservative Media bubble- he already has basically zero credibility with those people since he's on that goddamn pinko network, so why hold back anything?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 17:01
|
|
|
the2ndgenesis posted:So how soon until he is crucified by the rest of the Republican media universe? He writes for Politico so probably never. But at least it's nice to see him pretend to give half a poo poo when some well-off white children are killed. Apparently that's what it takes to get things done here that are considered politically impossible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 17:26
|
|
|
Brigadier Sockface posted:Joe Scarborough is now pro gun-control. At the end he mentions high-capacity assault rifles. So yes, he's likely now for some form of restriction on types of weapons, but also feels that games/movies/guns are completely equal players in cause/effect.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 17:55
|
|
|
Whoever was filling in for Glenn Beck on today's radio show brought up the idea that public schools be policed by armed "security personnel" who'd be trained to handle violent intruders, since of course gun control in any way shape or form cannot be a valid solution. He then went on to critique the federal government for being incompetent with guns and said that he'd much rather protect himself with his own personal firearm. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 18:16
|
|
|
Happy_Misanthrope posted:Actually spent the majority of the speech railing against video games and movies, seemed to me. Are you suggesting that the glorification of violence in American culture does not have an effect on the mentally unstable?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 18:31
|
|
|
I had my local AM guy's show for approximately 30 seconds before he suggested that the principal's office should be located by the front entrance of the school and that the principal should be armed and that this would stop any spree killings. For fucks sake, really? For bonus Conservative Fantasy points, he conveyed this opinion in the form of an anecdote about how tough and manly his principal was in high school and remarking how he never would have let something like this happen. Check and mate, gun control Libtards 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 18:31
|
|
|
Posturing has never killed anyone.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 18:44
|
|
|
At some point one or more principals/teachers will have to come out and say "gently caress you, I don't want anything to do with guns" right? Right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 18:48
|
|
|
"Tommy Henson, to the principal's concrete bunker. Tommy Henson, to the principal's concrete bunker. Please wait by the machine gun encampment until the principal calls you in. Do hurry, we will only disable the minefield for 5 minutes."
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 18:52
|
|
|
Twisted Perspective posted:I'd bet on Rick Santorum. I did read a story recently that if it hadn't been for vote rigging in the primaries he would have won the nomination for 2012 instead of Mitt Romney.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 18:52
|
|
|
Urban Space Cowboy posted:Seriously, now? Seems to me Santorum wasn't especially strong, he just was the last Not-Romney standing. Could you track down that story again, please? I'll give it a try. It was in the election thread so it may take some time. Edit: Here we go: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/10/27/gop-rigging-elections-for-romney/ The last paragraph of the article states that once the votes were corrected Santorum would have won. quote:Examining the final vote tally, it is clear: Romney did not win the Republican nomination at all. Twisted Perspective fucked around with this message at 19:03 on Dec 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 18:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:05 |
|
|
Local shithead on AM 1520 in OKC wants armed police in elementary schools. I don't really have a problem with this, but it is a funny message to send to parents. We will pay for guns to protect your precious child, but not for teachers or new books.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 19:11
|
|
