« By Their Fruits, Ye Shall Know Who's Right | Main | Socialism Is Everywhere »

October 29, 2008

Comments

Rep. Todd Akin of Missouri says "This election is a referendum on socialism." I really wonder why at this point, when everyone expects McCain to lose, the Republicans are doing their best to make sure Obama has a mandate for liberalism far more extreme than anything he's suggested in the campaign or than anyone sane thinks he actually wants to implement. Maybe they can start saying it's a referendum on single-payer health care.

A demagogue-like president that has fanatical supporters coming to power during an economic crisis with a complicit media. What could possibly go wrong!

That was fabulous.
Is Todd Akin running this year? My credit card is still out from throwing money at King's opponent, whose name I've already forgotten.

Regarding the "complicit media", 2 reporters at Poltico explained why their coverage appeared biased (even to one reporter's mother). It is difficult to cover the race with an outward appearance of balance when one campaign is simply being run much worse than the other.

It is difficult to cover the race with an outward appearance of balance when one campaign is simply being run much worse than the other.

Yes, if one VP candidate blanks on what news sources she reads every day and can't name more than one court case she disagrees with, it is not the duty of the media to present her as qualified or present "balanced" coverage.....

Where do these morons come from, and how do they get elected to congress?

Whoa, I'm no McCain-Palin fan, but the media's coverage of Obama has been strange.

Wait. Let me get this straight. The media is biased because it doesn't go full tilt into investigations about Obama's alleged drug dealer?! Or that the low point of the campaign season was going after Joe the Plumber for "speaking truth to power"?! Last time I checked, "speaking truth to power" generally involves, you know, actually speaking truth; hence the name. Refresh my memory. Which part of Joe's story was actually "the truth"?

You do realize this is the network that wanted to present "The Path to 9/11" as having a high level of authenticity and being based on the findings in the 9/11 Commission Report.

Color me unimpressed.

Is this a different LT Nixon? The old one didn't seem to be into blatant trolling and derailing.

A demagogue-like president that has fanatical supporters coming to power during an economic crisis^H^H^H^H^H^Hdownturn with a complicit media. What could possibly go wrong!

Well, last time he invaded Iraq.

I'm with KC. I can't say I'm likely to agree with LTNixon on too much, but heretofore LTNixon always seemed reasonable. That piece LTNixon linked is garbage. After literally pages of saying nothing, two alleged examples of bias are presented: (1) Obama's drug use in grad school has not been extensively examined, while Cindy McCain's drug use has been; and (2) the press went too far trying to figure out who Joe The Plumber was. The first is just silly: by all reports, Obama didn't use drugs in grad school, but as an undergrad; he admitted that almost fifteen years ago in his first book; and the New York Times had a whole team of investigative reporters dig up what they could, resulting in a front page expose of Not Much during the primaries. Cindy McCain's drug use has hardly been a constant refrain, but it does come up when her biography is discussed, usually with great sympathy, because it's one of ths few interesting things anyone knows about her private life (she can't really discuss their courtship because of the chronology, so what's left is a touching if somewhat odd adoption story, some rather boring charity work, and the drugs). If the press wanted to "get" her, there's always her father's mob ties his criminal record, and her decision to cut off her half-sister, whose existence her public biography has at times denied, immediately upon their father's death, although before that her father had been supporting her half-sister financially. And while there certainly some excesses on Joe The Plumber, it was the McCain campaign that triggered a national firestofm by making this guy the icon of their candidacy in the third and last debate, referring to him some two dozen times. If they'd vetted him, if they'd been ready to explain to the press who the heck this guy was, maybe the press wouldn't have gone off like a pack of baying hounds. And those were the only two examples Malone mentioned. Weak stuff, in a bloviating, aggrieved and unconvincing opinion column that LTNixon apparently thinks proves something.

LT Nixon: A demagogue-like president [with] fanatical supporters...

My first reaction was that this comment was trolling in an effort to distract from the point of the main post. But it seemed so much to be embodying the behavior that the post was about that it surely had to be a joke -- even if one that fell flat for lack of the grain of truth that would make exaggeration funny.

But LT's response to the criticism of the 'complicit media' passage seems to indicate that he doesn't intend it as a joke at all.

If that's the case, then it has to be asked:

How, specifically, is Obama "demagogue-like"?

In what ways have his supporters shown themselves to be fanatical?

Or, LT, you could just quit digging. Start anew on a thread where you have something more up to your usual standard to contribute.

A demagogue-like president that has fanatical supporters coming to power during an economic crisis with a complicit media. What could possibly go wrong!

Fortunately for us all, LT, McCain appears to be losing rather than "coming to power," so the question you pose is rather moot.

LT Nixon: Whoa, I'm no McCain-Palin fan, but the media's coverage of Obama has been strange.

Yeah, it's weird how they haven't just been making crap up about Obama like they did about Gore, or repeating lying Republican attacks on Obama like they did about Kerry. You don't have to be a McCain-Palin fan to think it's strange to see the media not just going along with the Republican campaign.

KCinDC: Is this a different LT Nixon? The old one didn't seem to be into blatant trolling and derailing.

Perhaps he's trying to take up DaveC's mantle?

I really enjoyed voting against King, but until he manages to pull a Bachmann and embarrass the district with a bunch of negative media attention he's not likely to lose. I haven't seen or heard a single radio or TV ad from Hubler and most voters here in the district don't know anything about King other than his party affiliation.

"Is Todd Akin running this year? "

phoebe, don't bother, he is a lock to win re-election. But Judy Baker still has a chance (down by 5 pts) so if you really feel like throwing money around, throw some her way.

King needs his own off-Broadway play (his character and lines are already written). There may be congresshumans more stupid that King (MAY be) but for cravenness combined with publicity-hogging, he gives everyone else a run for their money.

A Lurch To The Left

I see the headline and involuntarily burst out singing, "And then a step to the ri-i-i-i-ight..." Let's do the time warp!

This is kind if off subject, but relates a little:

I was watching an ad on TV and up until the clsing staement at the end i could not tell who the ad was for. The tone was nasty and sarcastic but the content was all stuff that seemed good to me. It ran something like this: "Chris Gregoire represents her dononrs. She got lots of money from unions. The unions got raises and more days off. That's right! More days off and raises for the unions!" (And I'm listneing to this and trying to figure out if it is a pro Gregoire ad or an anti one) Tthen finally the give awaw "Gregoire will take you money and give it to the unions"

Oh. A Rossi ad. He thinks it isw bad for people to get raises and days off.

Which is my point and how this comment relates to the discussion. Much of the recent rhetoric from the right is stuff that only sounds bad if you are a complete ignoramus or on the right yourself. Redistribute the wealth? Sounds good to me! Socialism? Sounds good to me! The return of FDR? Hey I'm ready! The other stuff, the world is ending and leftists are facist stuff is so oer the top that only the complete nuts will believe it. It shows how out of tou ch the Republican party is that they think their arguments are going to be presuasive to anyone outside their buble.

To me the shameful thing about this elelction isn't that swo many Republican politicians are resorting to really nasty disrespexgful dishonest jingoistic rhetoric. To me the shameful thing is that that so many Republican voters who are not right wing nuts, not haters, not given to rhetorical excess themselves are still voting for their depraved, corrupt party and its slimy, dishonest politicians.

I see the headline and involuntarily burst out singing, "And then a step to the ri-i-i-i-ight..." Let's do the time warp!

And it wasn't even Eric who posted this. I'm expecting ObWi will soon have Title Police who will make certain that all titles have significance in a pop musical way.

A demagogue-like president that has fanatical supporters coming to power during an economic crisis with a complicit media. What could possibly go wrong!

Well, it's kinda what happened in 2004, and we're still here... !

A demagogue-like president that has fanatical supporters coming to power during an economic crisis with a complicit media. What could possibly go wrong!

LT, are you referring to McCain, who is the only major candidate demagoguing anything? Aren't the fanatical supporters all for Palin? Isn't McCain's support more tepid?

And it wasn't even Eric who posted this. I'm expecting ObWi will soon have Title Police who will make certain that all titles have significance in a pop musical way.

(swinging ObWi night stick in Title Policeman's Uniform)

Nice comment ya got there (No) Free Lunch.

Wouldn't want anything to happen to it. We don't cotton to troublemakers questionin our title laws around these parts, hear?

We don't cotton to troublemakers questionin our title laws around these parts, hear?

Yes, sir. I didn't mean nothin' by it though, honest, officer.

Whoa, I'm no McCain-Palin fan, but the media's coverage of Obama has been strange.

How strange that the present campaign makes Malone feel ashamed to be a journalist, while he seems perfectly sanguine about the eight years that the press was busy sucking Bush's cnck.

the press went too far trying to figure out who Joe The Plumber was

How dare they expose that poor, shy man to the glare of publicity!

(Apologies for contributing to the derail, but it seems to be too late.)

Is this a different LT Nixon? The old one didn't seem to be into blatant trolling and derailing.

Aww, c'mon. Trolling would be attacking the poster or commenter and derailing would be talking about something way off-topic. This post is about Obama, and I talked about Obama.

Trolling is also responding to a post with a completely untrue and evidence-free, non-joking, over-the-top smear of the "your side is just the same, even worse" variety.

So, LT, since you regard this as a normal, on-topic, within-bounds post, let's see some support for your assertions.

How, specifically, is Obama "demagogue-like"?

In what ways have his supporters shown themselves to be fanatical?

Or you could just stop digging.

Fanatical.

Sorry

Demagogue.

Fanatical.

Demagogue.

huh ?

Wait, saying that the GOP doesn't own the faith issues is demagoguing?

That's...that's...so circular.

Party X demagogues religion. Party Y says, hey, that's not right. You down own that issue, and demagoguing it is wrong.

LT concludes: Party Y is demagoguing by pointing that out?

As for the kids singing, come on. That's fanatacism?

Have you ever seen Jesus Camp?

If not google it and read up.

huh ?

I'm guessing that it is the quotation: "We're going to keep on praising together. I am confident that we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth." that is a problem, but I await LT Nixon's clarification.

LT Nixon,

I have a couple of questions - the first is, my understanding of the term "demagoguery" (*see note below) is that it refers not just to a politician speaking to an audience in a stylistic language they prefer or telling them things they want to hear, but additionally it carries the connotation of whipping the audience into an high pitched emotional state, appealing to their baser motives, and/or inspiring them to act in ways which are derogatory or detrimental to the interests of a targeted group (often but not always a minority of some sort or another). In what way does this CNN report match that definition, as you see it?

My second question is, as you see it, which political party has worked the hardest to educate voters who regularly attend organized church services into thinking that it is wrong to vote for a candidate who does not share their faith? Do you see this as being in any way relevant to the way that candidates today talk to such audiences? Where does the responsibility lie for breaking this pattern insofar as it would be a net public good to do so?


note the Wikipedia definition of Demagoguery, which I don't see as canonical, but is IMHO reasonable place to start if this turns into a definitional argument:

Demagogy (also demagoguery) (Ancient Greek δημαγωγία, from δῆμος dēmos "people" and ἄγειν agein "to lead") refers to a political strategy for obtaining and gaining political power by appealing to the popular prejudices, emotions, fears and expectations of the public — typically via impassioned rhetoric and propaganda, and often using nationalist or populist themes.


Why haven't they surfaced his Mau Mau ties? His father was Kenyan!!! It's foreign, it's scary, it's now. Take the gloves off.

Sweet baby Jesus. Whoever said LT Nixon was feverishly auditioning for the part of DaveC in the new TLC series, "When ObWi Conservatives Lose the Plot" wasn't kidding ("h/t Gateway Pundit"--AWESOME.)

Also, backing up TLT re: "demagogue" (*snicker*), a young gentleman named Enigo Montoya let a message for ya...

My sincere apologies -- I had forgotten that LT Nixon is not a conservative; he's a Republican who smokes pot and watches South Park libertarian.

(Please also note that my tongue is firmly planted in cheek--LT, feel free to paint this proud Canuckistanian social democrat red and call him 'Mao'. And welcome back to Jonestown. ;-))

a Republican who smokes pot
I smoke meth, it's less likely to show up on a piss test.

I smoke aluminum.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad