PDA

View Full Version : General Politics The Death of Policy in the American Electorate


'Hamas' Jenkins
09-08-2008, 06:53 PM
I watched this debate (which was included as an extra on the "Manufacturing Consent" DVD) last night. It is between Noam Chomsky and William F. Buckley in 1969 over the justness of the Vietnam War, the role of America and other countries and their colonialist (later termed imperialist tactics) and what role, if any the US should play in subverting Democratically-elected regimes that don't agree with their politics.

It's sad and pathetic that you can't get anything of substance like this on television any more. Instead, a "red meat" speech by Rudy Giuliani that is supposed to be the Republican's key note is a hackneyed attempt at a Triumph routine with the Democrats playing the butt of the joke. Meanwhile, a progressive show like "Real Time" seems more interested in discussing the feasibility of Sarah Palin's giving birth to her son than the issues of the campaign.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Dt-GUAxmxdk&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Dt-GUAxmxdk&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Cannibal
09-08-2008, 07:02 PM
I'll take the time to view it at some point. I have however read that William F. Buckley couldn't stand Rush, Hannity and O' Reilly. He agreed with some of their opinions, but hated the shouting down, lies, subtle propaganda etc. He believes that the views should be able to sell themselves.

kcfanintitanhell
09-08-2008, 07:09 PM
He believes that the views should be able to sell themselves.

Amen.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-08-2008, 07:13 PM
I'll take the time to view it at some point. I have however read that William F. Buckley couldn't stand Rush, Hannity and O' Reilly. He agreed with some of their opinions, but hated the shouting down, lies, subtle propaganda etc. He believes that the views should be able to sell themselves.

Well, he's a propagandist himself, and he propagates plenty of lies and outright distortions in this excerpt and he was also prone to shouting down (he called Gore Vidal a queer and threatened to physically assault him on national TV).

I do think that his ideas were based in principle rather than electoral convenience, but for the most part that is like the pot calling the kettle black.

Cannibal
09-08-2008, 07:18 PM
Well, he's a propagandist himself, and he propagates plenty of lies and outright distortions in this excerpt and he was also prone to shouting down (he called Gore Vidal a queer and threatened to physically assault him on national TV).

I do think that his ideas were based in principle rather than electoral convenience, but for the most part that is like the pot calling the kettle black.

I guess I'll have to look into that. I admit, that I do not know much about him except that he was a big figure in the Right Wing movement and I have not read much of his work.

Direckshun
09-08-2008, 10:26 PM
I don't know. It makes twisted sense. If your campaign CANNOT WIN on the issues, which I truly believe the Republican Party can't right now because it's candidate is fundamentally weak going up against a formidable Democrat (not to mention the country is leaning left right now after the Bush administration), you muddy the waters. You distract people from those issues.

Instead of confronting Obama on healthcare, McCain knows he will lose that debate.

So he calls him elitist and watches the waters stir.

Then he goes back to base politics -- let's rot out government spending! -- and pretends as if that's the most significant issue affecting Americans today.

RJ
09-08-2008, 10:44 PM
If William F Buckley got himself a TV gig today he would be cancelled within a month.

I always liked that guy, he was really smart.

Was he an elitist?

Direckshun
09-08-2008, 10:49 PM
If William F Buckley got himself a TV gig today he would be cancelled within a month.

I always liked that guy, he was really smart.

Was he an elitist?

He was conservative, so who cares.

Friendo
09-08-2008, 10:51 PM
If William F Buckley got himself a TV gig today he would be cancelled within a month.

I always liked that guy, he was really smart.

Was he an elitist?

um, like this guy? http://www.georgewbushstore.com/200-6000.htm

Jenson71
09-08-2008, 11:29 PM
If William F Buckley got himself a TV gig today he would be cancelled within a month.

I always liked that guy, he was really smart.

Was he an elitist?

He did have a TV show on PBS for over 30 years.

He was very smart. He was a thoughtful, intellectual conservative who was not afraid of debating with some of the giant intellectuals of the left.

I think anyone who can appreciate the moderation that a more conservative force and a more liberal force create in our democratic, pluralistic society can appreciate Buckley and likewise, his 'opponents' like Chomsky and Galbraith.

HolmeZz
09-09-2008, 12:30 AM
I kinda liked Buckley and I think there'd be more good conservative commentators like him today if the Republicans hadn't gone and made demonizing intellectuals part of the party platform. That's why you've seen the rise of idiots in conservative media like Rush and Hannity. It's a lot easier to push an agenda when you're dealing with stupid people than to do it while trying to provoke actual thought.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-09-2008, 12:40 AM
I kinda liked Buckley and I think there'd be more good conservative commentators like him today if the Republicans hadn't gone and made demonizing intellectuals part of the party platform. That's why you've seen the rise of idiots in conservative media like Rush and Hannity. It's a lot easier to push an agenda when you're dealing with stupid people than to do it while trying to provoke actual thought.

This.

Jenson71
09-09-2008, 12:58 AM
Reading John Morrow's A History of Political Thought when, once again, Plato has something to say to us:

" pays no regard to the welfare of its object, but catches fools with the bait of ephemeral pleasure and tricks them into holding it in the highest esteem . . . . Now I call this sort of thing pandering and I declare that it is dishonorable . . . because it makes pleasure its aim instead of good, and I maintain that it is merely a knack and not an art because it has no rational account to give of the nature of the various things that it offers." From [I]Gorgias.

This "it" is the culture of the demagogues - who were "ingratiating themselves to the least enlightened and most numerous members of the citizen body by pandering to their partial and narrow conception of their own self-interest" (Morrow).

I think we can recognize our media today, and therefore, our main link to our government leaders, as well as the main parties themselves, is largely populated by 21st century demagogues and have greatly contributed to, as Hamas calls it, this "the Death of Policy."

Ultra Peanut
09-09-2008, 05:14 AM
I don't know. It makes twisted sense. If your campaign CANNOT WIN on the issues, which I truly believe the Republican Party can't right now because it's candidate is fundamentally weak going up against a formidable Democrat (not to mention the country is leaning left right now after the Bush administration), you muddy the waters. You distract people from those issues.Honestly, the problem is that this is such an EFFECTIVE tactic in the first place. If people had the capability of recognizing when they were being blindfolded and spun around like they were about to hit a piņata, it wouldn't be a big deal when politicians resorted to this sort of aimless, obfuscatory garbage. Now, as things stand, why present plans for your leadership when you can get votes (or at least fire your base up) by blatantly lying about your opponent, questioning his love for America, and calling him an arugula-eating elitist.

Apparently, all it takes for a "phenomenal" speech these days is to cloak yourself in the phrase "hockey mom" (GOD BLESS HOCKY) while repeating tired bullshit about how your opponent looks down on "us normal people."

Friendo
09-09-2008, 06:01 AM
Honestly, the problem is that this is such an EFFECTIVE tactic in the first place. If people had the capability of recognizing when they were being blindfolded and spun around like they were about to hit a piņata, it wouldn't be a big deal when politicians resorted to this sort of aimless, obfuscatory garbage. Now, as things stand, why present plans for your leadership when you can get votes (or at least fire your base up) by blatantly lying about your opponent, questioning his love for America, and calling him an arugula-eating elitist.

Apparently, all it takes for a "phenomenal" speech these days is to cloak yourself in the phrase "hockey mom" (GOD BLESS HOCKY) while repeating tired bullshit about how your opponent looks down on "us normal people."

which is why you don't bring a knife to a gunfight. I honestly don't think the Dems can win if they don't fight that battle for the Middle.

Ultra Peanut
09-09-2008, 06:42 AM
which is why you don't bring a knife to a gunfight. I honestly don't think the Dems can win if they don't fight that battle for the Middle.It's called the rope-a-dope. It's beautiful, and it will continue to be beautiful.

Friendo
09-09-2008, 07:24 AM
It's called the rope-a-dope. It's beautiful, and it will continue to be beautiful.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DefCmUsCPs

Ultra Peanut
09-09-2008, 07:47 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DefCmUsCPsMuhammad Ali: SECRET MUSLIM?!?!?!?!

Baby Lee
09-09-2008, 08:28 AM
I don't know. It makes twisted sense. If your campaign CANNOT WIN on the issues, which I truly believe the Republican Party can't right now because it's candidate is fundamentally weak going up against a formidable Democrat (not to mention the country is leaning left right now after the Bush administration), you muddy the waters. You distract people from those issues.

Instead of confronting Obama on healthcare, McCain knows he will lose that debate.

So he calls him elitist and watches the waters stir.

Then he goes back to base politics -- let's rot out government spending! -- and pretends as if that's the most significant issue affecting Americans today.

The DNC case on healthcare is the equivalent of "Croyle and Huard aren't winning, may as well try Thigpen!!"
Only the stakes are a lot larger than a FB game.

Ultra Peanut
09-09-2008, 08:32 AM
The DNC case on healthcare is the equivalent of "Croyle and Huard aren't winning, may as well try Thigpen!!"
Only the stakes are a lot larger than a FB game.No. More like, "Let's try [College Stud] over Thigpen."

But private health care has just been so darned cost-effective and efficient for the country as a whole that I can see why those on the right would like to cling to it (bitterly).

J Diddy
09-09-2008, 08:34 AM
The DNC case on healthcare is the equivalent of "Croyle and Huard aren't winning, may as well try Thigpen!!"
Only the stakes are a lot larger than a FB game.


Mccain winning will be the equivalent of starting thigpen

patteeu
09-09-2008, 09:09 AM
I kinda liked Buckley and I think there'd be more good conservative commentators like him today if the Republicans hadn't gone and made demonizing intellectuals part of the party platform. That's why you've seen the rise of idiots in conservative media like Rush and Hannity. It's a lot easier to push an agenda when you're dealing with stupid people than to do it while trying to provoke actual thought.

:bong:

What demonization of intellectuals are you talking about? Perhaps you're confusing the haughtiness of John Kerry or the mysticism of Al Gore with intellectualism. :shrug:

patteeu
09-09-2008, 09:10 AM
This.

Ditto

J Diddy
09-09-2008, 09:38 AM
:bong:

What demonization of intellectuals are you talking about? Perhaps you're confusing the haughtiness of John Kerry or the mysticism of Al Gore with intellectualism. :shrug:



well there's no confusing anything bush with intellectualism

HolmeZz
09-09-2008, 12:32 PM
:bong:

What demonization of intellectuals are you talking about? Perhaps you're confusing the haughtiness of John Kerry or the mysticism of Al Gore with intellectualism. :shrug:

Nope, I'm talking about your party which has made an art form out of belittling academic achievement. They've attempted to turn an Ivy League Education into something that should be scoffed at while trying to portray people with degrees from those schools as 'elite' and 'out of touch'(unless they're a Republican of course). They've convinced their base that being intelligent means they don't have as much in common with you and that they believe they're better than you, all in the name of keeping the electorate as dumb as possible. That's how you can get away with having a convention where you mock an Ivy League Education and laugh at the idea of doing work within your community.

banyon
09-09-2008, 02:50 PM
The DNC case on healthcare is the equivalent of "Croyle and Huard aren't winning, may as well try Thigpen!!"
Only the stakes are a lot larger than a FB game.

But the RNC case is just to not have a QB and run the triple option.

patteeu
09-09-2008, 03:08 PM
Nope, I'm talking about your party which has made an art form out of belittling academic achievement. They've attempted to turn an Ivy League Education into something that should be scoffed at while trying to portray people with degrees from those schools as 'elite' and 'out of touch'(unless they're a Republican of course). They've convinced their base that being intelligent means they don't have as much in common with you and that they believe they're better than you, all in the name of keeping the electorate as dumb as possible. That's how you can get away with having a convention where you mock an Ivy League Education and laugh at the idea of doing work within your community.

I think you're misreading things quite a bit. There's no more of that among Republicans than there is among democrats.

And they're laughing about the work Obama did as a communist organizer not about the idea of doing work within it.

HolmeZz
09-09-2008, 03:22 PM
And they're laughing about the work Obama did as a communist organizer not about the idea of doing work within it.

Don't be a clown.

<embed FlashVars='videoId=184095' src='http://www.thedailyshow.com/sitewide/video_player/view/default/swf.jhtml' quality='high' bgcolor='#cccccc' width='332' height='316' name='comedy_central_player' align='middle' allowScriptAccess='always' allownetworking='external' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer'></embed>

J Diddy
09-09-2008, 03:26 PM
I think you're misreading things quite a bit. There's no more of that among Republicans than there is among democrats.

And they're laughing about the work Obama did as a communist organizer not about the idea of doing work within it.

er, that would be community, and the fact that you discredit an entire group of people who's trying to make their communities stronger is repulsive

patteeu
09-09-2008, 06:31 PM
er, that would be community, and the fact that you discredit an entire group of people who's trying to make their communities stronger is repulsive

I'm repulsed by your attraction to those activities.

patteeu
09-09-2008, 06:36 PM
Don't be a clown.



Give up the bullshit about Republicans being the anti-intellectual party. Demagoguery and populist appeals are rampant in both parties.

VAChief
09-09-2008, 06:42 PM
Don't be a clown.

<embed FlashVars='videoId=184095' src='http://www.thedailyshow.com/sitewide/video_player/view/default/swf.jhtml' quality='high' bgcolor='#cccccc' width='332' height='316' name='comedy_central_player' align='middle' allowScriptAccess='always' allownetworking='external' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer'></embed>

That is some funny s**t!ROFLROFLROFL

***SPRAYER
09-09-2008, 06:51 PM
Hey Hamas, or whatever the frig you want to call yourself...

Has the McCain/Palin camp sent 3 dozen thugs to Chicago to dig up dirt on B.O.? You got 3 dozen B.O. operatives in Alaska trying to dig up something--- anything --- on this lady. Guess what? The MSM is there with them. That's right, NBC, the LA Times, the Washington Post...

You guys are a joke. You're candidate is dead in the water.

Enjoy the ride as you are flushed down into the toilet --- ONCE AGAIN --- back into your sewer.

VAChief
09-09-2008, 07:20 PM
Hey Hamas, or whatever the frig you want to call yourself...

Has the McCain/Palin camp sent 3 dozen thugs to Chicago to dig up dirt on B.O.? You got 3 dozen B.O. operatives in Alaska trying to dig up something--- anything --- on this lady. Guess what? The MSM is there with them. That's right, NBC, the LA Times, the Washington Post...

You guys are a joke. You're candidate is dead in the water.

Enjoy the ride as you are flushed down into the toilet --- ONCE AGAIN --- back into your sewer.

Please don't be so naive to think that they haven't...and Biden too I'm sure.

Personally I could care less whether she got knocked up before she eloped or if Bristol forgot to use a glove. I just want to know if she will ever answer an f'n question without an earpiece. I have no problems with a lady in the WH, but it looks like they are treating her as if she can't handle it. I mean if she can't handle Larry King then WTF!

***SPRAYER
09-10-2008, 05:37 AM
it looks like they are treating her as if she can't handle it.

Get ready to lose--- AGAIN.