If You Build It, They Wont Come

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=88113

WE WENT DOWN THIS ROAD WITH AIR AMERICA AND AIR AMERICA LOST ITS ASS. NO ONE WANTS TO LISTEN TO THE MIND DROOL OF THE USUAL SUSPECTS, NOT EVEN LIBERALS.

 

[DeeZire]

Political consultant Dick Morris explains: "Large percentages of liberals are black and Hispanic, and they now have their own specialized entertainment radio outlets, which they aren't likely to leave for liberal talk radio." The potential audience for Air America or similar ventures is thus pretty small - white liberals, basically. And they've already got NPR.

My take on talk radio is that it is brainwashing, in that the presentation of facts is selective, out of context, or nonexistent. If we consider that conservatism is based on a restricted world view and liberalism is based on an inclusive world view, then it's easy to see why the premise of talk radio would not fly in the liberal camp.

One aspect of the liberal POV that is gaining ground is the Daily Show, so if we look at the presentation of the liberal agenda in a broader sense, it's entirely possible that it is gaining ground. (NPR has supposedly picked up a larger audience, but that could be due to the election cycle.)

Another aspect is demographic. Talk radio plays to an older audience, who will soon be dead, while the Daily Show plays to a younger audience, who will (hopefully) usher in a new era of enlightenment in our ignorance-ravaged culture. Polling data on issues like gay marriage support this claim.

 

[Boxlicker101]

My take on talk radio is that it is brainwashing, in that the presentation of facts is selective, out of context, or nonexistent. If we consider that conservatism is based on a restricted world view and liberalism is based on an inclusive world view, then it's easy to see why the premise of talk radio would not fly in the liberal camp.

One aspect of the liberal POV that is gaining ground is the Daily Show, so if we look at the presentation of the liberal agenda in a broader sense, it's entirely possible that it is gaining ground. (NPR has supposedly picked up a larger audience, but that could be due to the election cycle.)

Another aspect is demographic. Talk radio plays to an older audience, who will soon be dead, while the Daily Show plays to a younger audience, who will (hopefully) usher in a new era of enlightenment in our ignorance-ravaged culture. Polling data on issues like gay marriage support this claim.

Political talk radio is going to be restrictive, regardless of the viewpoint of the talker. Neither Al Franken nor Rush Limbaugh is going to present both sides of a question. The Daily Show is prety biased also. During the election, they were constantly lampooning Rep. candidates but, if they mentione them at all, they said how wonderful the Dems. were.

 

[DeeZire]

Political talk radio is going to be restrictive, regardless of the viewpoint of the talker. Neither Al Franken nor Rush Limbaugh is going to present both sides of a question.

That was my point. Liberals like to make fact-based decisions while conservatives seem content to base their decisions on denial and ignorance. Science is an example of that. Science is ignored by conservatives because it threatens their ideology, while Liberals embrace science because it's part of their fact-based decision making process.

Because of this dynamic, only the fringes of the liberal crowd are drawn to left wing talk radio, while the one-sided format fits perfectly with the conservative mindset. The problem with rightwing talk radio is that it is obscuring the issues. Hate speech is not conducive to problem solving.

The line blurs with something like the Daily Show, where hate speech is perceived by the right while satire is perceived by the left. At least the Daily Show presents both sides of the issues when catching politicians from both parties in their acts of hypocrisy. I don't have cable, but my favorite Daily Show moment was back-to-back clips of Bill O-Rielly; first railing against the parents of the Spears girl for letting her become pregnant while underage, and then absolving Sarah Palin of the same responsibility when her daughter got pregnant. I'd say that's a pretty fair presentation of both sides of the issue.

(ETA: In my advance state of C.R.S - can't remember shit - I couldn't recall Bill O'Reilly's name, so I Googled "Fox" and "Blowhard" and guess who came up at the very top of the list?)

 

[Carnevil9]

......If we consider that conservatism is based on a restricted world view and liberalism is based on an inclusive world view, then it's easy to see why the premise of talk radio would not fly in the liberal camp.....

....Liberals like to make fact-based decisions while conservatives seem content to base their decisions on denial and ignorance......

Well, somebody seems to have a bit of a prejudice going here, don't they?

 

[amicus]

The presumption must be that anyone (except the deaf, blind and dumb), will just tag along with the statement concerning conservative talk radio show hosts.

The fundamental premise of right wing talk radio is the Constitution of the United States and wrestling with a moral system that has eroded with the progressive liberal activism over the past half century.

In the meantime, liberal exponents, such as Deezire, carry the cross of an old religion, as old in fact, as history itself, that of communal living and communal ethics, all of which are out of place in this Republic.

The left has a handfull of core issues, all locked into 19th century ethics and thoughtl and they haven't even the faintest clue of what to do with their new found relativistic morality.

The chickens have come home to roost, rooted in the feminist movement that goes back a century. Those chickens are abortion, gay rights, equal rights for women, and universal medical care, mainly used by women.

The feminists are fundamentally passive, except with their mouths, and anything masculine or assertive is alien to them. Further, since a free market is a competive market, where the best succeed and since women perform at only about sixty percent as the male in similar jobs (they are either at the doctor's office, out with cramps, or bumbling around with a big belly), thus, out with a free market and in with a communal effort and onsite daycare.

Those are the issues, along with second amendment rights, that you will hear discussed on right wing talk radio, which Deezire would know if she ever cared to listen.

I have had a couple pleasant experiences in the past few days, three late teens girls reported they are reading Ayn Rand and the thing they point out, is how accurate Ms. Rand described the 'second handers', the socialists, in her novels written in the late 1940's.

If just the sheer volume of words, even well chosen words, was the determining factor in deciding issues, the left would win, hands down, every time. But people, even her on this forum, are learning that words without meaning are just that...without meaning, bluster, like a preacher on the pulpit, exhorting his flock on to greater faith and belief. Problem is...the left has nothing to believe in, no foundation to build on, save faith and can only expound more voraciously when called out.

Amicus...

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Liberals cant compete for the advertising dollars. If the government gives liberals half of the broadcasting time they still wont attract an audience large enough to pay the bills with the ad revenue they generate.

I mean, the liberal message is GIMME YOUR MONEY AND NO ONE GETS HURT and YOU TOIL AND SWEAT AND EARN YOUR DAILY BREAD, AND WE'LL EAT IT.

 

[Boxlicker101]

That was my point. Liberals like to make fact-based decisions while conservatives seem content to base their decisions on denial and ignorance. Science is an example of that. Science is ignored by conservatives because it threatens their ideology, while Liberals embrace science because it's part of their fact-based decision making process.

Some Cons. do follow superstition in some of their beliefs, while Liberals tend to follow Science in those specific topics. This would include Evolution vs Creationism and birth control methods. In other matters, Libs. blindly follow their own beliefs and opinions in the face of overwhelming proof hat they are wrong. Cons. tend to look at the facts and are persuaded by them.

Affirmative Action is a good example of this. Outreach in allocation of hiring, promotions, places in graduate schools, etc. is perfectly alright. However, when the allocations degenerate to set asides and quotas, that's another matter, and actually constitutes racial or gender discrimination. Libs. seem to be under the impression that all white persons are raised in affluent suburbs while all minorities are raised in dire poverty. There are so many exceptions to these rules that they are not even rules.

Bussing for the purpose of racial parity is not a bad idea, but the actual benefits are minimal. They are definitely not worth the expense of operating, maintaining and garaging the vehicles, nor are they worth the upheaval that enforced bussing requires of the students actually involved. Few, if anybody actually benefit by being bussed to school on the other side of town, and nobody wants this to happen to them, but most Libs. are all for the idea.

Because of this dynamic, only the fringes of the liberal crowd are drawn to left wing talk radio, while the one-sided format fits perfectly with the conservative mindset. The problem with rightwing talk radio is that it is obscuring the issues. Hate speech is not conducive to problem solving.

Relatively speaking, hardly anybody actually listens to talk radio. If somebody brags that they attract a million listeners, that is only one third of 1% of the potential audience.

The line blurs with something like the Daily Show, where hate speech is perceived by the right while satire is perceived by the left. At least the Daily Show presents both sides of the issues when catching politicians from both parties in their acts of hypocrisy. I don't have cable, but my favorite Daily Show moment was back-to-back clips of Bill O-Rielly; first railing against the parents of the Spears girl for letting her become pregnant while underage, and then absolving Sarah Palin of the same responsibility when her daughter got pregnant. I'd say that's a pretty fair presentation of both sides of the issue.

(ETA: In my advance state of C.R.S - can't remember shit - I couldn't recall Bill O'Reilly's name, so I Googled "Fox" and "Blowhard" and guess who came up at the very top of the list?)

Hate speech is protected by the First Amendment, even though some Libs. here have expressed a desire to make it illegal. Cons. do not want to make it illegal because any law against it would be a violation of the Constitutional rights of the speaker.

I seldom watch The Daily Show or Letterman or similar TV shows. When I have, especially during the recent election, the performers were constantly making fun of the Republican candidates, including such things as falsely attributing quotes to them or quoting them out of context or misquoting them to make them look foolish. If they said anything about the Dems, it was to compliment them or make them look noble and right in every regard. They were EXTREMELY one-sided but, even so, nobody is calling on them to "be fair."

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

BOX

Libbies subscribe to the Free Lunch Mythos

 

[DeeZire]

BOX

Libbies subscribe to the Free Lunch Mythos

As opposed to free-marketers, who subscribe to the "screw them out of their lunch, and their house" mythos.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

DEE ZIRE

I dont sort people like you do.

I know employers who dont give a crap how much money you make so long as you make them money. And I know employers who squeeze people like toothpaste and throw them away.

I met the same people when I worked for government. Some administrators try and fuck the clients out of benefits so they can use the money for Hawaii seminars. Other administrators move mountains to help people.

 

[xssve]

Bullshit, all you do is sort, or maybe you mean you just sort them differently.

Conservatives just take somebody else's lunch money and call it "good business".

"The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure." --Thomas Jefferson to Lafayette, 1823. ME 15:491

conservatives have fought tooth and claw against digital bandwidth because it would signal the end of their attempt to corner the market in radio broadcasting.

As it stands currently, without regulation of the airwaves, the one with the most powerful transmitter wins, that's why the airwaves are regulated, and they're monopolized largely thanks to Michael Powell's deregulatory efforts - forget about advertising revenue, you have to be able to buy into the franchise to begin with, and with limited supply, this naturally place any real grassroots broadcasting at a distinct disadvantage to astroturfers.

In short, the airwaves are a common resource, regulated at public expense to prevent the tragedy of the commons, but this has been manipulated by the neo-cons in order to establish a cartel, which they could not have done without tampering with, and distorting the market, so save the speeches, and compete like you actually have a spine.

 

[xssve]

Here's the kicker: I

nstead, McDowell alleged, Democrats will try to disguise their efforts in the name of localism, diversity or network neutrality.

Corporations are hot to divide up the internet into channels so they can charge for bandwidth like they do in Radio and Television Broadcasting: if bandwidth is functionally unlimited for all practical purposes, one has to compete on content, rather than playing on the fears of a captive audience.

Ironically, a free market is what conservatives appear to hate and fear more than anything: they know just enough about supply and demand to know that if you can control supply, you can raise prices by creating an artificial shortage, and that that is much easier and more profitable than having to increase quality and lower prices through through capital investment, you know, capitalism. They seem to feel that the world owes them a fat profit margin and protected market share - it's doesn't, and we don't.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

XSSVE

Pish Posh!

I still say you dont understand conservatism.

Anarchists and totalitarians are the opposite extremes. Conservatives cluster on the right side of the center, and liberals cluster on the left side of the center. Libertarians are to the right of conservatives, socialists are to the left of liberals.

There is ample room on the AM and FM broadcast bands for diverse views. I know 2 kids who made a 5 watt FM station into THUNDER 105 FM, and sold it to Clear Channel for a nice piece of change.

Thats the point. The market wanted THUNDER 105. It does not want AIR AMERICA and totalitarian nonsense.

 

[xssve]

Conservatism(tm) is just a brand, and I say if you're going to make an ass out of yourself shilling for corporate you should get paid for it.

That's capitalism.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

XSSVE

Bullshit, youre fucking clueless and too lazy to find out.

 

[xssve]

This is exactly the sort of thing DeeZire is saying, you make pronouncements, but you don't back it up, and that is bullshit.

You see, I go by what you do, not just what you say.

That much of the "conservative" agenda comes out of right wing think tanks and is designed to promote corporate and other special interests exclusively, is well documented, as is Rush Limbaugh's presence in markets where in fact he doesn't sell, or that he persists in his "99% accurate claim" - print has different standards, and when he published his book, he had to print a disclaimer that in fact his audience believes him to be "99% correct" in opinion polls, which has nothing to do with factual accuracy - which is what he tries to pass it off as on air.

I could tear his shit up without even straining myself - it's too easy because it's simply not true for the most part, but lazy asses like you who just like hearing their prejudices justified think this is "logic" - it's not, it's repetitive propaganda.

You are too clueless and lazy to find that out, I do my due diligence, you just hear what you want to hear, you're nothing but a fucking tool, you're just too stupid to know it.

He didn't last on TV for example, where there are alternatives besides the oldies station or Christian broadcasting - my Dad has listened to afternoon radio as long as I can remember, and he'd listen to it Rush or no Rush.

He's not too popular on the web either, i.e., where he can't cut his critics off and then monologue his way out of it.

Bottom line is, in spite of all the claims to be entertainment or whatever, it's political speech, plain and simple.

 

[DeeZire]

Xssve - nice posts, but I think you underestimate JBJ. My take on the guy is that he's well-read, informed, and an excellent wordsmith. I suspect he, like Ami, is just stirring up shit because it gets his adrenalin going - which is one way for an old man to turn back the clock and feel young again.

In spite of that, thanks for chiming in with your analysis. Threads like this make me realize it's fruitless trying to make a point with some people, but it can be interesting and informative for lurkers who are on the fence and still have an open mind.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

DEE ZIRE

The point is to make people examine what they believe, to force them to defend their positions. I learn a lot more from my enemies than I do my friends.

 

[DeeZire]

DEE ZIRE

The point is to make people examine what they believe, to force them to defend their positions. I learn a lot more from my enemies than I do my friends.

That's because you have chosen the right enemies. All I've learned from my enemies is that global warming is a hoax, and the free market can do no wrong. Oh, and that poor people can all join the middle class if they really want to - which is an impossibility with a static unemployment rate of 5%. (We're talking the good old days, before Bush's free market economy handed us our impending 10% unemployment rate.)

(Okay, I did learn that nuclear waste disposal is viable with the latest technology - but don't tell anyone I've switched sides.)

 

[Selena_Kitt]

....

I just wanted to threadjack to say that's a great story title - Limewire Girl!

 

[trysail]

...All I've learned from my enemies is that global warming is a hoax...

[ written as he was flying over the Sahara ]

"It is remarkable to think that these treeless desert lands were, half a million years ago, humid tropical forest lands, with now-extinct primates and a rich diversity of plants and animals— a far cry from the impoverished biota that populates the interior of northwestern Africa today.

If the reader is wondering what happened to the rainforest, the unsurprising answer is... global climate change. It is not a new phenomenon: climate change is the rule, not the exception. And climate change was the rule long before humankind came to dominate our earth or to infuse our atmosphere with greenhouse gases. Climate change, extinction, and speciation have been acting in concert for many millenia. Past climate changes in the climate of northern Africa certainly caused local extinction pulses. These have been well documented by paleontologist Scott Wing, who has written of the Koobi Fora flora and fauna— a now vanished humid tropical world in northern Africa."

Bruce M. Beehler, Ph.D.
"Lost Worlds: Adventures In The Tropical Rainforest"
p. 201
Yale University Press
New Haven, 2008

( Dr. Beehler is vice-president of Conservation International )

 

[DeeZire]

I just wanted to threadjack to say that's a great story title - Limewire Girl!

Thanks, SK. I wrote it after getting in trouble here on the boards for railing against people who advocate music piracy. The only trouble is, I chickened out and rewrote the ending of the story, having grown quite fond of the Limewire girl in question.

Thanks Trysail for reaffirming my newfound awareness of the true cause of global warming - which is...nothing. It does give me a sense of relief every time I see your green type reassuring me that we can go on burning coal indefinitely without having to worry about dooming future generations to a hellish life of year-round forest fires, plant and animal extinctions, and rising coastal waters. So now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go turn up the heat, which would be a lot easier than putting on a sweater. I mean, isn't that my right as an American? Screw the rest of the world.

 

[amicus]

What? You didn't include Trysail among the 'old men'?

What a sophomoric and pedestrian way to criticize ideas the differ from your mindset.

Had you a focused mind at all you could easily discover the truth concerning climate change and then follow the trail back to the environmental activists of the mid 20th century who first screamed 'global cooling' and now have reversed to 'global warming', all rooted in their hatred of modern industrial man.

You treat 'pro life' advocates in the same manner while you scream 'killing babies is just fine with me!'

And your advocacy of gay rights, someone should tell you that same sex encounters don't make babies and as a result, if nature dictates, should go extinct within a generation.

Your other big boom, you want to conscript doctors and nurses into government service and dictate what care patients receive, even though that system has failed miserably in every society that has attempted it.

This truly phoney crap about, 'saving the planet!', no logging, no mining, no drilling, no building homes or shopping malls, not about saving the planet at all, just expressing your hatred of modern industrial society and man in specific.

One of the problems I face in my magnum opus novel when I take over the world, is where to place all you livid liberals. I think the kindest thing would be a zoo like enclosure where normal, real people, could go to visit and see just how you would manage in a pristine environment with no modern improvements.

No TP for you kid!

Amicus...

 

[DeeZire]

Really Ami, you should stick to movie reviews. Imprisoning people you don't like is what Hitler did, and it reflects poorly on your credibility when you advocate such behavior. You claim to be a man of lofty ideals, but, in fact, you prove yourself to be nothing but a caveman. Have you considered auditioning for the Geico commercial gig?