The Ugly Conservative

[happybrew]

We've all heard about the ugly American. There is, within our own country, such a thing as the ugly Conservative. We know that Americans are good, noble, generous (insert multiple, numerous positive adjectives here) people. Yet, there is always someone overseas that would make us embarrassed. I've seen 'em. Conservatives, are also good, noble, generous, loving, honest, and fair individuals. Every now and then, however, we run into the "ugly conservative" who makes the rest of us embarrassed to be lumped together with people of that sort. When you run into the "ugly conservative", then please try to remember that we are not all like that. And if for some reason you think we are all like that (in particular, myself, well you're probably the "ugly liberal", and as a conservative, I will try to remember that not all of you are like that.


happybrew

[1pump]

Good point. :smile:

[STGRule]

That's why labels are so stupid. Nobody fits. You can't possibly divide all the people of the US into 2 (or 3 or 4) political parties. You run the gamet from mindless drones who just check all the R's or all the D's (by the way these scare me more than any other) to anarchists. I honestly think that most normal people can think for themselves. There is no such thing as "One size fits all".

[Straydog]

I agree!

I do though wonder why so many conservatives rally around the the most vocal and ugly ones such as Michael Savage, Rush, Lars, etc. etc...?

[Hoosier Daddy]

Funny, I'm fairly conservative, and I sure don't rally around those guys...

Good post HB. It really does take all kinds. Besides, without a liberal viewpoint or two, I would never know who is wrong! :grin: Just kidding gang. I think I'm like most people, part of both. I think most thinking people do keep an open mind, to some extent.

[pdxkevin]

I agree!

I do though wonder why so many liberals rally around the the most vocal and ugly ones such as Michael Moore, Martin Sheen, Dianne Feinstein, The LA Times, etc. etc...?

[Steelhead Hound]

I'll agree with that aswell,
But I don't rally around those people. Michael Moore made a good film thats why I like him. Not just because of his political views, and some of there views I don't agree with.

[ 10-07-2003, 08:27 AM: Message edited by: Steelhead Hound ]

[Straydog]

Originally posted by Hoosier Daddy:
[QB] Funny, I'm fairly conservative, and I sure don't rally around those guys...

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">HHmm....... are you suggesting it is the liberals that are making them succesful and so widely syndicated through out the radio world??? :whazzup:

[Straydog]

Originally posted by pdxkevin:

I do though wonder why so many liberals rally around the the most vocal and ugly ones such as Michael Moore, Martin Sheen, Dianne Feinstein, The LA Times, etc. etc...?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">PDX,

Can you provide me with the AM radio stations where I can hear these people on a daily basis?

As a fiscal conservative and a social moderate, I would sure welcome hearing them on a daily basis as I can the people I listed.

[Swamp Puppy]

Originally posted by Steelhead Hound:
Michael Moore made a good film thats why I like him.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">not trying to be argumentative here, but just for curiosities sake, are his films as full of lopsided statistics and oneside commentary as his book? i read 'Stupid White Men' and eventhough i have a fairly open mind on many subjects, the way he presented his "evidence" on many topics was almost too much to bear. if i hadn't been on a cross country flight with nothing else to read but airline magazines, i probably would have tossed it in the nearest trash bin.

Originally posted by pdxkevin:
I agree!

I do though wonder why so many liberals rally around the the most vocal and ugly ones such as Michael Moore, Martin Sheen, Dianne Feinstein, The LA Times, etc. etc...?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Had to get your digs in huh Kevin?
You may not agree with their opinion but at least they never have wished a deadly disease on someone that didn't share their opinion.
Michael Savage, whom I'm sure many of you conservatives just love, did that very thing to a caller on his TV show and his show was promptly cancelled.You'll never hear Michael Moore,Martin Sheen or Dianne Feinstein do that.
Why not quote more noted and educated conservatives like George Will or William F. Buckley who are just as conservative as probably most of you but they don't feel the need to spew venom like some of the talk show guys.
If you insist on following the talk show hacks then how about Michael Medvid(sp?) who seems to be able to get his point across without the hate?
I really don't understand why there can be so much hate and gut reactions for someone who simply has a different political opinion than you.
I disagree strongly with Bush but I do not hate him and wish him ill will!
BTW good topic happybrew [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

[ 10-07-2003, 10:04 AM: Message edited by: Stew ]

[Old dog]

Stew, thanks for your post. Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only sports fisherman who disagrees with junior regarding his environmental policies. I wonder why sports fishermen, who value clean water and habitat restoration, would ever vote for this administration. Anyway, it's just one old guy's opinion, and the last I heard we are still free to voice our opinions on these things. Old Dog

[El-Kabong]

[ 10-07-2003, 10:48 AM: Message edited by: El-Kabong ]

[CATCH AND EAT]

I wonder why you don't hear many "liberal" voices on talk radio? Hmmmm.... seems to me there is Tom Lykes, Howard Stern, Bill Henry... Just the folks I want to be like. How about Bill Gallager.....?

Seems that baloney goes both ways for both liberals and conservatives. Ya take what ya want from these bobble heads and try to make sense out of it. I use to listen to some of these folks from both sides of the straight line. Found they all depressed me with gloom and doom. Much better ways to spend my time than listen to pundents all day long. Music sooths the soul, not what new tax can we think of today or who is hiding in the oval office closet.

Hey Stew, is your favorite TV program the Capitol Gang? "Moooooorrrrrrr-tonnnnn what says you?" :grin: Almost as funny as the cartoon network.

Bernie I don't listen to talk radio and FYI Howard Stern and Leykis are not liberal or Demcratic party mouthpieces like Rush,Lars and Savage are for the right wing. Stern and Leykis do shock radio and no one is safe from what little I have heard from them.
Conservative hate mongers are everywhere on the radio though! They would gladly do away with the 1st Amendment if they could...especially guys like Michael Savage. I have heard that radio pundits like Rush and O'Reilley actually recieve daily briefings and talking points from the GOP national committee to bring up on their shows.
Oh I forgot to mention those pillars of virtue Ollie North and G Gordon Liddy.

[DanS]

He tells it like it is

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">He tells it like it is according to Bill O'Reilley. Just like the rest of us.

Catch and Eat posted:
"So Shane, if you don't listen to these folks then how can you judge them to be anti-1st ammendment people and hate mongers? From what others say?"
Okay Bernie then tell me what is these guys say? I've listened to them enough though to know where they are coming from.
As far as Sharpton and Jackson, is that the best you can do Bernie?...don't care much for either one of them and they sure don't speak for me or the Democratic party.
I don't need a bunch of talking heads to tell me what to think or how to vote. On the other hand I have read many posts on this LIG board that mimic each other.It all sounds so much alike that it's sickening. So where do these critics of the Clintons,Feinstein,Boxer,Kennedy et al. get their info from? Do they all just form an opinion on their own?
I get my opinion from checking the facts not from the radio or TV.
O'Reilley tells it like it is? Yeah sure and I have a bridge I want to sell you too.

[ 10-07-2003, 06:08 PM: Message edited by: Stew ]

[Tanner]

Originally posted by Old Dog

Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only sports fisherman who disagrees with junior regarding his environmental policies. I wonder why sports fishermen, who value clean water and habitat restoration, would ever vote for this administration.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Old Dog,
I as a Sportsfisherman and Lover of the outdoors voted for Bush because I know it is not a perfect world and I cannot choose a candidate solely on one position. The fact is I voted for him because I felt my pocketbook could not take any more tax and waste nonsense. In the climate we live in now, people are hundreds of times more aware (and concerned) with environmental issues. I don't think the country is going to let the government go to far when it comes to allow the destruction of our environment. Regardless of what we think this is still a country run for the people by the people. If ya don't believe me go to China, or Cuba or, or, or, or.

Stew,
Come on now. Anyone that is paying any attention at all can hear all kinds of hatred spewing out of the communists in Hollywood. Read up on what Johnny Depp has been up to lately. I'm glad he moved to France and he will never get another dime of my money. Most conservatives that work in Hollywood have to keep their beliefs in the closet for fear of being black balled.

I have heard that radio pundits like Rush and O'Reilley actually recieve daily briefings and talking points from the GOP national committee to bring up on their shows.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I have heard that there is a Loch Ness Monster.

Stew, you and I need to firm up a date for fishing. We could have some very inspired discussions. :tongue: :grin: Just kidding, I don't wanna talk politics when I am fishing.

[CATCH AND EAT]

Stew, how much for the bridge because I believe everything you say. Boy that was funny. :tongue: I think many of us are able to form our own opinions whether they sound alike or not. If you are looking for an air freshener for politics Shane you will be looking for a long time. More likely to sell that bridge of yours.

Believe it or good buddy I have been known to vote for a Demo-cracker once in a while. Voted for Ron Wyden a couple of times. Agree with him a lot with exception to him shoving the Ru482 deally though. Other than that I feel he does a fine job and is pretty level headed. One of the few in "my opinion" from Oregon that is trying to do some good. I am sure there are a few others on the Dem side but I try not to follow them real closely. Got the same opinion on Republicans in Oregon. A few good ones and the rest....... :depressed:

[happybrew]

Originally posted by Straydog:
I agree!

I do though wonder why so many conservatives rally around the the most vocal and ugly ones such as Michael Savage, Rush, Lars, etc. etc...?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I think Savage is ugly. Lars, I have a lot of respect for, although that respect went down a few notches when he substituted for Savage. I have heard Lars screw up simple math before, and he sometimes takes positions I disagree with, but overall he's a good guy. Rush I liked when Clinton was in office, mainly for all the funny Clinton songs, but now he bores me. I haven't met anyone yet who rallies around Michael Savage. It must be media hype to generate controversy and sell advertising, which is what it's all about anyway.

happybrew

[happybrew]

Originally posted by Hoosier Daddy:
Funny, I'm fairly conservative, and I sure don't rally around those guys...

Good post HB. It really does take all kinds. Besides, without a liberal viewpoint or two, I would never know who is wrong! :grin:

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Exactly! My thesaurus lists "liberal" as a synonym for "mistaken" and "error". :shocked: And Michael Savage is a synonym for... oops, they don't have bad words in my thesaurus.

happybrew

[happybrew]

Originally posted by pdxkevin:
I agree!

I do though wonder why so many liberals rally around the the most vocal and ugly ones such as Michael Moore, Martin Sheen, Dianne Feinstein, The LA Times, etc. etc...?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Yeah, I think Moore and Feinstein are ugly, but Sheen, nah. The funny thing about Sheen, though, is he derives his views from his Catholicism, and states that he's against abortion personally, but doesn't want to legislate it. But then he's personally against the School of the Americas and it's successor, but he has no problem with legislation against that. Quite inconsistent. If he's against elements of our foreign policy because of his religious views, he should be equally against elements of our domestic policy because of his religious views.

happybrew

[happybrew]

Originally posted by Straydog:
[HHmm....... are you suggesting it is the liberals that are making them succesful and so widely syndicated through out the radio world??? :whazzup: [/QB]

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">In part, yeah. Controversy raises ratings. Were it not for all the backlash, these guys wouldn't have made it big. The one's who don't generate as much controversy, but may present better arguments, like Laura Ingraham end up on latenight talk radio, where there's not as big an audience. Controversy sells, and without a backlash, there's no controversy.

happybrew

Tanner posted:
Stew, you and I need to firm up a date for fishing. We could have some very inspired discussions.Just kidding, I don't wanna talk politics when I am fishing.
Sounds good to me Tanner! We can bad mouth Bernie instead

[BrionLutz]

PDXKevin,

Remember Alec Baldwin saying, on the Conan O'Brien show, during the Clinton impeachment trial, that the head of the trial, Henry Hyde and his family, should be "stoned to death!".

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">That kind of distortion (by you, not Baldwin) is probably why we have the "Ugly Conservative" syndrome.

Baldwin pointed out that Hyde was an admitted adulterer who claimed evangelical beliefs. Baldwin pointed out, correctly, that Hyde's own beliefs would condemn him to "stoning" by his religious followers.

Basically that Hyde was a total hypocrite who, while using the government to force his fringe religious beliefs on others, disobeyed them himself. While he called down the "wrath of God" on those who disobeyed his religious "laws" he dodged similar judgement.

Your characterization of Martin Sheen is another example. He's a quiet, well spoken, concerned guy and doesn't engage in any of the character assasination stuff that you do in criticizing him.

Senator Feinstein, same issue, moderate Democrat.

LA Times, large conservative media conglomerate The Tribune Company out of Chicago.

For ugly conservatives, how about Pat Robertson. Republican presidential candidate and fund raiser, welcomed to the Republican Party debates and functions, rallying for Bin Laden as a "doing God's will" on 911 because US was "sinful"? Praying that moderate US Supreme Court justices will die?

Brion

Brion Lutz posted:
"For ugly conservatives, how about Pat Robertson. Republican presidential candidate and fund raiser, welcomed to the Republican Party debates and functions, rallying for Bin Laden as a "doing God's will" on 911 because US was "sinful"? Praying that moderate US Supreme Court justices will die?"

Don't forget Robertson lied about his military record also :shocked:

[happybrew]

This isn't going to turn into an "ugly liberal" thing is it?

happybrew

[lingslayer]

Originally post by Brion Lutz

Senator Feinstein, same issue, moderate Democrat.




Your idea of moderate?,... Huh?!?


LA Times, large conservative media conglomerate The Tribune Company out of Chicago.

Brion

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">They may be owned by a large "conservative media conglomerate" Brion, but they know how to sell papers in a market as liberal and diverse as LA. That requires a liberal spin to most editorials and a liberal angle on most news.

Neither may not be not as rabid as you're used to, but far from conservative, or even moderate from what I've seen.

Jamie

[Stratocaster]

This isn't going to turn into an "ugly liberal" thing is it?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Its headin that way, negative, negative.

[DanS]

lings got a point..........the LA Times is looking for one thing, to make scratch for their conservative ownership group. You don't write the same stuff to sell papers in Chicago as you do in Los Angeles. News articles, maybe, but not the editorial pages and columnists.

[pdxkevin]

Originally posted by BrionLutz:
That kind of distortion (by you, not Baldwin) is probably why we have the "Ugly Conservative" syndrome...

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">.
Distrotion?! Even CNN comments on it!

Originally posted by CNN
"Baldwin raises eyebrows with Hyde outburst
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Variety reports that an outburst against House Judiciary Chairman Henry Hyde by Alec Baldwin on "Late Night with Conan O'Brien" has annoyed members of Congress and Hollywood's top lobbyist, who called the statement "so off base as to boggle the mind." On the show, Baldwin said Hyde and his family would be stoned to death in other countries. "We would stone (Hyde) to death, and we would go to their homes, and we'd kill their wives and their children," said Baldwin, according to a transcript printed in the New York Post. Hyde is the Illinois Republican who chairs the committee that voted to send articles of impeachment against President Clinton to the House of Representatives..."

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Just in case you missed that:
"We would stone (Hyde) to death, and we would go to their homes, and we'd kill their wives and their children," said Baldwin, according to a transcript printed in the New York Post.

Given time I might even be able to track down the audio or video for you too.

So let's see... hmmm which is closer to the actual statement... mine or yours? hmm... Looks like yours is the rose color glasses distortion.

[pdxkevin]

Originally posted by Straydog:
Can you provide me with the AM radio stations where I can hear these people on a daily basis?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">So all the FM outlets, Major TV news programs, Major news papers and NPR aren't enough? Why limit it to a single media? The majority of people in the US do not get all their news from AM talk radio so why limit it?

[pdxkevin]

Originally posted by Stew:
Had to get your digs in huh Kevin?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Digs? not intentionally as such. More as a point that both sides have their 'spokes people' who are out there. Both sides have people who spout hate and inflamitory things. Remember Alec Baldwin saying, on the Conan O'Brien show, during the Clinton impeachment trial, that the head of the trial, Henry Hyde and his family, should be "stoned to death!". Does this mean that everyone who says they are a liberal obviously must folow this statement too? No. Just as when Savage said what he said doesn't mean that every conservative follow that beleif either.

Originally posted by Stew:
Why not quote more noted and educated conservatives like George Will or William F. Buckley who are just as conservative as probably most of you but they don't feel the need to spew venom like some of the talk show guys.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">When did I quote Micheal Savage? Rush? talk about taking digs

Originally posted by Stew:
I really don't understand why there can be so much hate and gut reactions for someone who simply has a different political opinion than you.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Exactly!

Please find the quote were I wished anyone harm because of their political view. The only people I remember wishing harm come to them are those who harmed children.

Please do not throw blanket statements over me like that. It is in correct and offensive.

[lost_sailor]

Originally posted by Old dog:
Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only sports fisherman who disagrees with junior regarding his environmental policies.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">You're not!

[BrionLutz]

lingslayer,

They may be owned by a large "conservative media conglomerate" Brion, but they know how to sell papers in a market as liberal and diverse as LA.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Not "may be owned", LA Times is owned and operated by large conservative conglomerate that control it's editorial board.

As far as LA being liberal...you mean the one that elected Republican Riordan as mayor?

So it seems PDX and you are wrong on both levels in your example.

It was interesting listening to the conservative media distance itself from the "ugly conservative" Limbaugh over his attack on McNabb for being black.

Even more interesting is that "ugly conservatives" are not really conservatives in the Teddy Roosevelt-John McCain mold but really fringe right wingers in the Robertson-Limbaugh mold.

If one considers Franklin Roosevelt the eptiome of Liberal and Teddy Roosevelt the epitome of Conservative, Feinstein is certainly a moderate by that real world standard.

Brion

[CATCH AND EAT]

So Shane, if you don't listen to these folks then how can you judge them to be anti-1st ammendment people and hate mongers? From what others say?

I've never listen to Ollie or Liddy. Don't care to either so I cannot pass any judgement on them. As far as Rush, use to listen and like about 85 % of what he said. Now, pretty much boring as far as I am concerned. O'Rielly. Have listened to his programs before. Got to say I like him but don't want a diet of him. He tells it like it is and that is why folks can't stand him. I agree with him maybe 85-90% of the time. But I quit listening to him about 6 months ago.
Lars, have met the man personally. Very nice fellow and is sincere. However don't care for his radio program. Agree with him on Katz wholeheartedly though.

As far as the hate issue Shane, better look into the liberal pundits too. Mouth pieces like Jesse Jackson and Sharpton are a poor representation of the liberal agenda. What about the NOW gang? Really great folks in charge of that group of folks. What should be an empowering organization for good pushes not much more than garbage views on the American people. Why on earth do people continue to bow down to these folks fleecing their pockets? And why does Ted Kennedy continually get re-elected?(probably just because like Strom Thurmound) Okay, not a good example. There is good and bad in both parties. I AGREE!!!! That is why we have supposed moderates on both sides of the fence.

I am probably slightly to the right of modrate but please don't push me to the RUSH right. I am not there baby.

So, unless ya'all listen to these folks from either side don't just repeat what you've heard. Form your own real opinion based on what you know and have learned. Not what Stew, Catch And Eat, Lost Sailor, or Happy Brew tell ya. We all may be out in left field...I mean right field.

[2LEYS]

Limbaugh over his attack on McNabb for being black.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Come on Brion. He did not attack him for being black.

[roadsend]

"If one considers Franklin Roosevelt the eptiome of Liberal and Teddy Roosevelt the epitome of Conservative, Feinstein is certainly a moderate by that real world standard."

How do you figure? Look at her positions on social and constitutional issues.

[lingslayer]

The conservative ownership of the LA times wants sales and profits Brion. They will put up with liberal editorials to get them. Just like the ownership of the Register Guard prints what sells in Eugene.

As far as ol' gun-grabbing Diane,... Teddy wouldn't have dared. He was moe of a constitutional moderate IMO. His political career didn't blossom in San Francisco either.

Go ahead and spin it if you want. Like I said, they may not be as rabid as you'd like, but they are way left of moderate.

Jamie

[Hoosier Daddy]

Originally posted by Straydog:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Originally posted by Hoosier Daddy:
[QB] Funny, I'm fairly conservative, and I sure don't rally around those guys...

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">HHmm....... are you suggesting it is the liberals that are making them succesful and so widely syndicated through out the radio world??? :whazzup: </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">No Stray, I'm suggesting exactly what I said: that not all "conservatives" listen to that kind of garbage.
And as a matter of fact, I have heard a lot of folks who call themselves "liberals" say that they listen to Rush et al. Not sure why, I guess it gives them anti-conservative fodder or something.

[Straydog]

Fair enough Hoosier.

I guess my confusion came from the fact that I did not say "all" conservatives. I said "so many" conservatives.

If one listens to the callers to these shows, I think it more than fair to say that the majority are in agreement with the divisive hate mongers and therefore, "many" conservatives rally around and provide the listenting audience needed to maintain the ratings needed to keep these people on the air.

As for the other posters that have attempted to compare these talk radio hosts to "hollywood", a particular actor or even a newspaper, those are not valid comparisons. I do not hear Martin Sheen on prime time radio on a daily basis. I do not hear the soundtracks of movies on prime time radio on a daily basis.

These radio talking heads are on at prime times of the day and only because they have a listening audience that makes it profitable for the stations to run them at prime times. Since most of what these people spew is ugly conservatism, I find it a bit scarey that there are "so many" conservatives that seemingly agree with them.

I listen to Lars on a hit and miss basis. Used to listen to Rush but can't take more than about 2 minutes any more. I have listened to Savage just enough to learn what the hoop-la was about. I listen when I do so that I can stay on top of what those I usually oppose are thinking and saying. When possible, I avoid any and all sponsors that support these programs. I have also told businesses that I am avoiding their stores because they sponsor such programs.

[ 10-08-2003, 07:49 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[Hogback]

If you stray to far left or right you will fall off the edge. I've listened to most of the talking heads and have heard instances from from each where ideology overcame reality. It seems the agenda is more important than truth.

[ 10-08-2003, 07:45 AM: Message edited by: Hogback ]

[CATCH AND EAT]

Originally posted by Stew:
Tanner posted:
Stew, you and I need to firm up a date for fishing. We could have some very inspired discussions.Just kidding, I don't wanna talk politics when I am fishing.
Sounds good to me Tanner! We can bad mouth Bernie instead

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Now really Stew. Shame on ya. :grin: I've been bad mouthed by the best of them. :grin: ....and the worst. Just check Tanners net handles. The bail has a way of getting away from him at times. Fishing with Stew would be fun but stay away from mentioning Ronnie and Nancy. He gets a bit uptight and starts to squirm. :shocked:

[ 10-08-2003, 07:55 AM: Message edited by: CATCH AND EAT ]

[CATCH AND EAT]

Originally posted by Straydog:
Fair enough Hoosier.
These radio talking heads are on at prime times of the day and only because they have a listening audience that makes it profitable for the stations to run them at prime times.

When possible, I avoid any and all sponsors that support these programs. I have also told businesses that I am avoiding their stores because they sponsor such programs.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">It's called capitalism Stray. You know how to make money and when the American Public is the most gulible (both liberal and Consertives in the ugly fashion you describe). People are grasping to ideologies to hold on to. Most papers do not report the inner workings of governments and their policies whereas talk radio "can" provide those assessments. (when they are not involve in retoric)

As far as not dealing with sponsors that support conservative talking heads or liberal yakers that's your choice alone Stray. Just wonder what other products you could avoid if you did your research.....you know, to stay consistent and such with your philosophy.

[ 10-08-2003, 08:18 AM: Message edited by: CATCH AND EAT ]

[Straydog]

Originally posted by CATCH AND EAT:
It's called capitalism Stray. You know how to make money and when the American Public is the most gulible (both liberal and Consertives in the ugly fashion you describe). People are grasping to ideologies to hold on to. Most papers do not report the inner workings of governments and their policies whereas talk radio "can" provide those assessments. (when they are not involve in retoric)

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Absolutley Catch. This takes us back to my original post. If there were not "so many" conservatives rallying around the talking heads, (ie. demand) they would not be on the air.

Further, your comments about newspapers further support my opinion that comparing newspapers to talk radio can not be substaniated.

[Straydog]

Originally posted by CATCH AND EAT:
Just wonder what other products you could avoid if you did your research.....you know, to stay consistent and such with your philosophy.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Probably lots. And there might be lots I do avoid but are unkown to you. This is a thread about ugly conservatives and has taken a turn towards the media.

Your point? :whazzup:

[ 10-08-2003, 09:14 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[CATCH AND EAT]

Stray, I was not the one to bring up the media per say. Far as my point, just trying to keep you honest with your philosophy of telling business and product manufacturers why you do not purchase from them (ie because of your political, moral or ethical obsessions).

AS far as the thread being about ugly conservatives I think there is also equal time allowed for the ugly liberals????? Just a thought.

[ 10-08-2003, 10:27 AM: Message edited by: CATCH AND EAT ]

[Straydog]

Originally posted by CATCH AND EAT:
Stray, I was not the one to bring up the media per say. Far as my point, just trying to keep you honest with your philosophy of telling business and product manufacturers why you do not purchase from them (ie because of your political, moral or ethical obsessions).

AS far as the thread being about ugly conservatives I think there is also equal time allowed for the ugly liberals????? Just a thought.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Catch,

"obsessions"? Well, what ever. :grin:
I guess "obsession" could hold also true for some peoples need to include liberals in the conversation given the title of the thread is simply "The Ugly Conservative".

[ 10-08-2003, 10:40 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[BrionLutz]

Roadsend,

Look at her positions on social and constitutional issues.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">OK...did you have an issue in mind? Feinstein is well respected by her Republican co-workers in the Senate, moderate record.

The only thing "extreme" about Feinstein is the right wing's claim that she is an extremist.

Brion

[CATCH AND EAT]

Come on Straydog. You of all people would have argued vehemitly if the title were pointed at the "ugly Liberal" right? Sure ya would have. You would have interjected thoughts about the ugly conservative and how they ruined this country. Or would you have ignored the post all together.

As far as "obsession", poor choice of a word. No ill intent was meant. How about legitimized boycott against conflicting political ideaologies?

[roadsend]

Brion
"OK...did you have an issue in mind?"

She is, when compared to the two Roosevelts, way out to the left on the issues of abortion and gun control.

[pdxkevin]

Originally posted by Straydog:
...If one listens to the callers to these shows, I think it more than fair to say that the majority are in agreement with the divisive hate mongers and therefore, "many" conservatives rally around and provide the listenting audience needed to maintain the ratings needed to keep these people on the air...

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">.
Drawing that conclusion may not be accurate. We do not know what the true number of callers beleive and what ratio the call screener allows through to the host. Simply because the majority of callers put on the air have a view which leans the same as the host does not mean that they are in the majority of those who call in nor of those who listen.

I highly doubt that the vast majority of any group follows exactly the same beleifs that the most outspoken of the group espouse. This goes for all sides. It is frustrating to hear people, from either side, accuse the other of blindly following all the beleifs of the aforementioned outspoken individuals when they agree with one of the beleifs.

[BrionLutz]

Roadsend,

She is, when compared to the two Roosevelts, way out to the left on the issues of abortion and gun control.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I think your point proves you wrong. Majority of the public supports gun control and a woman's right to choose so that makes Feinstein mainstream.

That you characterize mainstream views as "way out to the left" should tell you that your perspective is what is off.

It's OK to have fringe positions but it's not intellectually honest to claim they are mainstream when they are not and then characterize those who disagree with your minority views as being "extremists".

Brion

Another good one Mr. Lutz! Where do you come up with this stuff?

[ 10-09-2003, 09:10 PM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Straydog]

Originally posted by CATCH AND EAT:
Come on Straydog. You of all people would have argued vehemitly if the title were pointed at the "ugly Liberal" right? Sure ya would have. You would have interjected thoughts about the ugly conservative and how they ruined this country. Or would you have ignored the post all together.

As far as "obsession", poor choice of a word. No ill intent was meant. How about legitimized boycott against conflicting political ideaologies?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">A few weeks ago, yes, I probably would have argued. Now I most likely would have ignored it. I am training to be the kinder, gentler Dog.

"Legitimized boycott against conflicting politcal ideaologies" sounds good!! :grin:

[ 10-09-2003, 08:48 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[roadsend]

Brion
The comparison, as previously stated, was to the two Roosevelts as per the original posting referred to:
"If one considers Franklin Roosevelt the eptiome of Liberal and Teddy Roosevelt the epitome of Conservative, Feinstein is certainly a moderate by that real world standard."
Compared to both Roosevelts on these subjects, she is far left.

The original comparison to the Roosevelts notwithstanding, regarding your comment:
"I think your point proves you wrong. Majority of the public supports gun control and a woman's right to choose so that makes Feinstein mainstream."
A quick internet search reveals that feinstein supports partial birth abortion, a position clearly left of even today's mainstream. Her gun control position is also extreme.

The extremism espoused by today's Democrats, such as Feinstein and those even worse than her, in these and other matters brings shame to the great and somewhat less than great Democrats of our past. It is why this nearly lifelong union member (and nearly two decade long shop steward)now votes Republican, even if I sometimes have to hold my nose to do so. Many of the folks in my workplace do likewise. We no longer have a home in the Democrat party.

[BrionLutz]

Roadsend,

The comparison, as previously stated, was to the two Roosevelts as per the original posting referred to. Compared to both Roosevelts on these subjects, she is far left.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Huh?

In his day, FDR was considered a radical "communist" by the right wing media.

Feinstein is much more mainstream in her day than the "radical" FDR was in his.

Her environmental policies would be right in line with TR's.

In fact, today, TR would condemned by the Republican right (he was in his day also) for his environmental, anti-monopoly and pro-labor policies.

You mentioned her pro-choice and pro-gun control stands and both of those are mainstream for all US voters, not just Democrats.

Feinstein is a moderate, if not conservative, Democrat. She is certainly a dictionary liberal but by no definition or action could she legitimately be called an "extremist".

That's similar to the Republicans labeling Dean as a "leftist". The guy is moderate to conservative Democrat by the record. Vermont is not a very radical place.

The only thing that is extremist is the right wing labeling system which, as you saw, requires a unique language system.

Brion

[roadsend]

Brion
You asked for specific issues. I gave you specific issues.
In comparison to the Roosevelts, she is way to the left as is the vast majority of today's Democrat party.

[Straydog]

Drawing that conclusion may not be accurate. We do not know what the true number of callers beleive and what ratio the call screener allows through to the host. Simply because the majority of callers put on the air have a view which leans the same as the host does not mean that they are in the majority of those who call in nor of those who listen.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">This makes some sense and is certainly true that no one knows what is in the heads of all of the listeners.

However, one criteria I use beyond which callers I hear on the air, is the nature of the local businesses I hear advertising during the show.

As noted someplace earlier, most of my listening time goes to Lars and that is hit and miss in my car between stops. I am finding more and more stores that cater to a conservative market advertising on So. Oregon stations during Lar's show. I very much know the attitude of this target market and it most certainly supports my belief that most people listening to conservative radio are indeed conservative.

Advertising marketers are pretty good at hitting their targets and advertisers are pretty adament that their advertising dollars are hitting the right people. Guns stores don't advertise to liberal audiences, it is not a good use of advertising dollars.

[skahorse]

BrionLutz:

OK...did you have an issue in mind? Feinstein is well respected by her Republican co-workers in the Senate, moderate record.

The only thing "extreme" about Feinstein is the right wing's claim that she is an extremist.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">These 2 statements seem to contradict each other...? The right respects her... But, they claim she is an extremist.... Do they respect her extremism?


BrionLutz:

Feinstein is a moderate, if not conservative, Democrat. She is certainly a dictionary liberal but by no definition or action could she legitimately be called an "extremist".

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Another contradiction evident... Also, I think the only thing you are proving Brion is how EXTREME you are. To claim Ms. Feinstein is a moderate is putting you in the .001 percent of the liberal fringe, borderline... socialist? marxist, maybe?