Letters to the Editor
Cocktailhag
Published Letters: 483
-
Projection Warning
[Read the article: "Great American Hypocrites: Toppling the Big Myths of Republican Politics"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Why is it that every time a right-winger draws a picture for us, it turns out to be a horrifying, Dorian Gray-like self-portrait?
Haters? Liberals? Now, not that any person is without hate, although the first glaring fallacy here is lumping the many into the one. E pluribus unum in reverse.
In general, whatever "hate" I see in liberals is directed at individuals for their deeds, regardless of who they are. We don't hate Bush, we just hate liars. We don't hate Cheney, we just hate sociopathic thieves. And so on.
The right, particularly in its current, depleted and desperate state, has nothing left to offer but hate, and this hate is naturally directed at entire groups, real or imagined, regardless of any actual transgression. Of course, such generalized hate therefore becomes bigotry, but here are the targets I see:
1) Muslims
2) Immigrants
3) Gays
4) Poor people (especially if black, e.g. New Orleans)
5) Liberals (never to be engaged for their ideas, natch)
-
Give What You Get
[Read the article: Is it "contradictory" to decry the right's tactics while insisting on their equal application?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As the Fool points out, so-called ad hominem attacks are, if true, certainly fair game. I myself would never run for political office, nor attempt to smear others in the media, for the simple reason that I wouldn't want my personal life, which would inevitably be examined since I'm liberal, to distract from, and thereby discredit, my message. The fact that fascists like predatory O'Rielly and drug-addled Limbaugh, not to mention wide-stance Craig and whoremonger Vitter suffer no such compunctions is because they know that the media will cover for them until the sun rises in the West, since they so fervently embrace others not following in their footsteps.
Bludgeoning "family values" McCain for his adultery and gold-digging, therefore, is only fair turnabout, and ought to make the senile nincompoop, for once, try and defend his ad hoc, ever-changing "policies." For democracy, what could be better?
Further, what kind of blindness (deafness, actually...) could possibly make righties think McCain, who repeatedly has shown he doesn't know Shiite from Shinola, seem "manly?" Has anyone heard his voice? Every time he opens his mouth, a purse falls out. He may be "determined to win" in Iraq, further evidence of tragic senility for 70% of Americans, but on the telephone, I'm sure everyone thinks he's Grandma.
In a debate between irrational chirping lies and nonsense from McCain, and sound sane policies spoken from someone who actually sounds like a grown-up man, like Obama, even MoDo will have to notice the difference.
-
Comforting the Comfortable
[Read the article: The harmony between the Right and the media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For a long time I have wondered what has driven the media so far to the right, even under a despised, hostile buffoon like Bush. I used to think Reagan's sunny personality and persistent, though hardy widespread, (another righty myth... rarely did he top 60%) popularity had some thing to do with it.
Glenn, and many other commenters have hit on part of the reason; the fact that in a shrinking and entertainment-oriented media landscape, the few left who have platforms are only in it for the celebrity and money, and know little and care less what happens to the hoi polloi. Hence Gibson's disturbing and factually absurd tantrum about capital gains taxes. Did he just make a pile on something and have to cough up? Charlie, I know your accountants just got done, but please.... The "ordinary Americans," that simple, docile lot you presume to represent, were utterly dumbfounded, and probably revolted.
The5thW hit on something probably even more important, writing that the purpose of TV is "to deliver uncritical consumers to advertisers, particularly political advertisers." Clearly the obscene amounts of advertising dollars that flow to these silly, bloated, infotainment outfits during political seasons is tempting bait, but that might not be the real reason. After all, when the Bushist right now commands barely more than a quarter of the market, and trails badly in fundraising, wouldn't venal pragmatism, and potential stock price, dictate that one move a tad left?
Not really. On some level, crossing the right is just too terrifying for any media conglomerate to contemplate, and not just because they fear richly deserved antitrust action and much greater scrutiny of their broadcast licenses under Democratic government.
I think they literally fear the people on the right, and for good reason. At the top end, they operate like the mafia, ruthlessly punishing enemies and lavishly rewarding friends, and purging dissenters with sadistic abandon, glorying in their power to harm. At the bottom end, their blind, propaganda-addled followers, fed a steady diet of bloodlust, are frankly, scary.
The left, on the other hand, has an artist or two at the top end, who might make a documentary or sing a song, and at the bottom have a hippie or two who can no longer even have a sit-in or protest without being corralled and marginalized.
It's pathetic, especially when things have gotten so far out of whack that the revenues, customers, and future of these media whores are now in jeopardy, that they can't see the forest for the trees.
As the chorus of boos last night show, their timorous coddling of a dying and discredited movement is, paradoxically, causing their downfall.
-
Reading List
[Read the article: The harmony between the Right and the media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thanks, LWM; I'll add it to my reading list. The Zenger case was a critical part of my journalism studies, and back then its lessons were considered important. That was 25 years ago; what in heaven's name do they consider important now?
-
Can We Have Some Rules?
[Read the article: The harmony between the Right and the media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]No member in good standing should ever mention anything about Joe Lieberman's tiny, shriveled and bologna colored genitalia.
Any mention of Shooter (!) and onanism, particularly if followed by a rapturous endorsement thereof by the troll in question, is punishable by brickbats and shrewish reminders forever.
Although no one should be expected to observe a "Family Hour," everyone should so some respect for the dinner hour, by avoiding such subjects.
Pedinska and I will be hosting monthly "Ewww Award" ceremonies for all violators.