Why are Democrats throwing pies at opponents?

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Classic Republican red herring argument!!!!

Lone nutter goes off and tosses pies and suddenly it's "Democrats throw pies!" but the entire Republican political elite back Tom Delay as he breaks a half dozen finance laws and he's just a lone bad apple? Funny, the Republican Party just loved pigging down Delay's dirty and illegal money and when it was exposed that he was a law breaking criminal the Party still backed him. They even went so far as to purge the house ethics committee of anyone who would investogate Tom Delay's many criminal acts.

It wasn't until after Delay's corruption and illegal activities were exposed in the media that the party finally gave him up. Now, they're like buzzards circling his dying political career while they try to paint Delay as one bad apple when the Republican leadership knew about and supported the criminal activities the whole time. They just didn't care if the law was broken as long as the money kept coming in.

Let's see his first conviction please before we go frothing at the mouth. I mean I've hated the guy for years, but you are tarring people with a pretty broad brush.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Oerdin
The damn Republicans even went so far as to change the rules of the house (basically you have to pass a special law to do this) so that their criminally tainted boss could retain power.

This isn't one bad apple this is the corruption which is the Republican Party.

They actually just changed the Republican rules in the house so that he could retain his post. The Dems btw have never had a rule like that. I guess they were just thinking ahead.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs
"Use cream, not violence."

Use cream, violently.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Oerdin

I have to agree. Ann Coulter, Micheal Moore, and Rum Limbaugh are worthless hacks.

Hear hear!

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Regarding the OP and 'trend' for members of the left to resort to methods gauche (recall also the variety of misdeeds during the election cycle), I would submit the hysteria is coming from the slow creeping realization that not only are conservative views being more widely adopted but moreover leftish views are being more widely dismissed.

In the marketplace of ideas it appear more and more left views are in the 'on clearance' bin and in the 'going out of business' stores.



From the LA Times of all sources.

COMMENTARY
Why the Liberals Can't Keep Air America From Spiraling In


COMMENTARY


By Brian C. Anderson
The liberal Air America Radio, just past its first birthday, has probably enjoyed more free publicity than any enterprise in recent history. But don't believe the hype: Air America's left-wing answer to conservative talk radio is failing, just as previous efforts to find liberal Rush Limbaughs have failed.

Wait a second, you say, didn't I read that Air America has expanded to more than 50 markets? That's true, but let's put things in perspective: Conservative pundit and former Reagan official William J. Bennett's morning talk show, launched at the same time as Air America, reaches nearly 124 markets, including 18 of the top 20, joining the growing ranks of successful right-of-center talk programs (Limbaugh is still the ratings leader, drawing more than 15 million listeners a week).

And look at Air America's ratings: They're pitifully weak, even in places where you would think they'd be strong. WLIB, its flagship in New York City, has sunk to 24th in the metro area Arbitron ratings — worse than the all-Caribbean format it replaced, notes the Radio Blogger. In the liberal meccas of San Francisco and Los Angeles, Air America is doing lousier still.

So why do liberals fare so poorly on air? Some on the left say it's because liberals are, well, smarter and can't convey their sophisticated ideas to the rubes who listen to talk radio. Former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo, whose own stint as a talk-show host was a ratings disaster, gave canonical expression to this self-serving view. Conservatives "write their messages with crayons," he maintained. "We use fine-point quills."

Yet even if we were to grant the premise that conservative talk radio can sometimes be crudely simplistic — a tough charge to make stick against, say, one-time philosophy professor Bennett or Clarence Thomas' former law clerk Laura Ingraham — how can anyone plausibly believe the right has a monopoly on misleading argument? Moreover, talk-show fans aren't dummies. Industry surveys show that talk-radio fans vote in greater percentages than the general public, tend to be college-educated and read more magazines and newspapers than the average American.

Successful talk radio is conservative for three reasons:

• Entertainment value. The top conservative hosts put on snazzy, frequently humorous shows. Kathleen Hall Jamieson, dean of the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg School for Communication, observes: "The parody, the asides, the self-effacing humor, the bluster are all part of the packaging that makes the political message palatable." Besides, the triumph of political correctness on the left makes it hard for on-air liberals to lighten things up without offending anyone.

• Fragmentation of the potential audience. 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.

• Liberal bias in the old media. That's what birthed talk radio in the first place. People turn to it to help right the imbalance. Political scientist William Mayer, writing in the Public Interest, recently observed that liberals don't need talk radio because they've got the big three networks, most national and local daily newspapers and NPR.

Unable to prosper in the medium, liberals have taken to denouncing talk radio as a threat to democracy. Liberal political columnist Hendrik Hertzberg, writing in the New Yorker, is typically venomous. Conservative talk radio represents "vicious, untreated political sewage" and "niche entertainment for the spiritually unattractive," Hertzberg sneers.

If some liberals had their way, Congress would regulate political talk radio out of existence. Their logic is that scrapping Air America would be no loss if it also meant getting Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and Bennett off the air.

To accomplish this, New York Democratic Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey has proposed reviving the Fairness Doctrine to protect "diversity of view," and John Kerry recently sent out some signals that he too thought that might be a good idea.

Under the old Fairness Doctrine, phased out by Ronald Reagan's FCC in the late '80s, any station that broadcast a political opinion had to give equal time to opposing views. A station running, say, Hannity's show, would also have to broadcast a left-wing competitor, even if it had no listeners.

Pre-Reagan, talk radio in today's sense simply didn't exist. What station could risk it? But people listen to conservative talk because they want to, not because the post-Fairness Doctrine regulatory regime forces them to. To claim that "diversity of view" is lacking in the era of blogs and cable news, moreover, is downright silly. Complaints about fairness are really about driving out conservative viewpoints.

Sure, talk radio is partisan, sometimes overheated. But it's also a source of argument and information. Together with Fox News and the blogosphere, it has given the right a chance to break through the liberal monoculture and be heard. For that, anyone who supports spirited public debate should be grateful.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Sikander

Let's see his first conviction please before we go frothing at the mouth. I mean I've hated the guy for years, but you are tarring people with a pretty broad brush.

That's another favorite FFZ style tactic. When you lose the arguement you claim the other side is froathing at the mouth.

I guess if facts aren't on your side then you have to take lame tactics like that. I'll I've said is Delay is a crook (he'll go to jail and you know it) and that the entire Republican leadership knew he was a crook but didn't care as long as he kept bringing in the dirty money. They were all sucking down his dirty money.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Sikander

They actually just changed the Republican rules in the house so that he could retain his post. The Dems btw have never had a rule like that. I guess they were just thinking ahead.

I was wrong about this bit and so are you. There are only one set of house rules and the majority party effectively gets to make them since you only need 50% plus one vote to approve them. The Republicans instituted this "if they are indicted then they're out" rule to show how clean they'd be in power. I guess that one didn't work out for them.

[SpencerH]

What would've been funny is if she had pulled out a gun and shot the SOB's.

[chequita guevara]

The purpose of pieing someone is to take away their dignity, not shut them up.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

And in taking away someone's dignity attempt to disrupt the flow of ideas and discredit them. Its still all about trying to prevent the message from occurring.


Yay censorship = yay leftish wackos.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Oerdin
That's another favorite FFZ style tactic. When you lose the arguement you claim the other side is froathing at the mouth.

To be fair, it's not a monopoly of FFZ, or of the right

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
And in taking away someone's dignity attempt to disrupt the flow of ideas and discredit them. Its still all about trying to prevent the message from occurring.


Yay censorship = yay leftish wackos.

I think it's more of a statement about the message. If making a statement about the message prevents it's flow then so be it.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Why can't liberal ideas find the creative marketing hook that will allow them to gain mass appeal?

Who's Hot vs. who's Not


NOT (On the decline)

Print

LA Times
NY Times
WaPo
Boston Globe

Network

ABC News
NBC News
CBS News

Cable
CNN

Radio
Air America

HOT (Contrast to signs of the times - On the Rise)

Cable

Fox News

Radio

All flavors of conservative talk Radio

Blogs

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I think it's more of a statement about the message. If making a statement about the message prevents it's flow then so be it.

Which is so symptomatic of why the left continues to decline. By holding itself as sole authority to be judge and jury what is worthy of airing for public consumption and what is not the left continues to wallow in decline. The cocksure smugness and intolerance shown by these factions (and same to be said for right wing wackjobs as well) does the movement no good whatsoever.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
Why can't liberal ideas find the creative marketing hook that will allow them to gain mass appeal?

Moore is very effective.

Apparently, he's the only major liberal talking head (that I know from my side of the pond, at least) that has taken the "raving lunatic" course which allowed such success to the Limbaughs or Coulters.