I suppose intelligent discourse really is dead.

[kellinator]

scarcrest reports that certain parties have not taken well to the Lone Star Iconoclast's endorsement of John Kerry.

"In the past, when individuals disagreed with an editorial, they would write a letter to the editor politely expressing a different point of view in contrast to the views of the publishers, which we have usually published.... The new mode of operation, I am told, is that when a newspaper prints an editorial of which some sectors might disagree, the focus is now upon how to run the newspaper out of business.... Unfortunately, for the Iconoclast and its publishers there have been threats — big ones including physical harm.

...Next time you hear a Republican crowing about how the Republicans are the party of values, I want you to think about the values of threatening and harrassing newspaper employees who aren't even on the editorial staff. I want to you think about the values of trying to silence those who disagree with you, rather than offering articulate reasoning as to why you disagree. And then I want you to think about what kind of values they're really selling you.

Yes, I agree: I am rude and condescending when it comes to politics. In return, I put up with rude and condescending comments from many of my circle, because it's only fair. But I have never threatened those of opposing viewpoints with physical harm (well, maybe alanator, but he was goading me while I was drunk). If these people are willing to do so, you might want to ask yourself exactly what they're afraid of.

If I make it through the next month without losing my fucking mind, it'll be a fucking miracle.

Comments

[richardf8]

That's the thing. They're thugs. I know many republicans who are not thugs themselves, but alas, the party comprises thugs, and the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Ann Coulter actively recruit thugs. And so the party is overrun by thugs.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

If I were a Republican myself, I would be infuriated at the co-opting of the party by, as you very accurately put it, thugs.

I heard a Republican get angry a few years ago because of the perception that Republicans are racist. I told her, "As long as your party allows Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms to do the talking for so much of that party, well, you'll just have to deal with that."

[ariedana.livejournal.com]

Oh, but Kelly, didn't you get the memo? We're the ones with the "liberal media" who's singlehandedly propelling Kerry into office without giving Bush a chance to defend his poor self. We're the ones spreading the lies about hidden microphones at debates (have yet to hear a decent explanation of that bulge in Bush's jacket) and impending drafts and all sorts of things that can't be true, because Bush has always been upfront and honest in the past. Right?

[dwivian]

easy answer to the 'bulge'.

I have a pic of me in a suit jacket with a nearly identical bulge. As soon as I saw it, I knew what had happened. He's wearing an overstarched shirt, and stretched out his arms. The folds in the back of his shirt unfolded and locked open, making a tent. It's why you get medium starch, and "unglue" them before putting on the shirt in the first place.

As to the media -- it's still slightly left of center, but not by much. It's all about getting the advertising dollars, and too far either way means you sacrifice your income for your message. The mainstream media wants the cash, first, then the message gets out. Lately, that means a move towards the center is happening, if nothing else than by a shift in ownership recognition of where the money is.

All I need is all the money, and you'll see the press being disprectful of center, and boy won't that be fun!

[ariedana.livejournal.com]

I would like to believe the "starch crease" explanation, but the placement is just a little bit off for me to completely buy that. And I've never been a conspiracy theorist by any means. I also think it was slightly foolhardy for the White House to say that Bush wasn't wearing a bulletproof vest that night, since that's information that could be kind of useful for any sniper in the planning stages.

Frankly, I think that the "liberal bias" in the media is BS, for two reasons. One is that I've spent enough time reading viewer email and listening to phone calls to know that people are scrutinizing our coverage for any perceived bias, and because we're tired of dealing with public reaction to anything we put on that's critical of Bush or complimentary of Kerry that we're becoming avoidant of the subject altogether. That's why punditry has become so popular - just put a couple of guys on-screen, let them spout off what they want, and then blame it on them when people complain. Also, big media has become too corporate to have an overt political agenda, at least on the liberal side. And yes, I know that RatherGate can be used to dispute my opinion, but my belief is that TPTB latched onto that to boost ratings, not to promote a liberal agenda.

[dwivian]

Not at all -- the position is exactly the same as in my pic, which is about dead center of the shoulder blades, minus an inch or two. That's where the bulge appears in my jacket, which is why I take pains to "fluff" my shirt beforehand. I also pull down on it when sitting, to avoid the roll on the shoulders look. Am I vain? :)

I learned of the slight left bias in a class I attended on inherent bias in linguistic analysis, and how descriptives are brought into the public mind, and how such descriptives can be used to sway public opinion ahead of polls, and ahead of elections. The professor, someone that makes Ted Kennedy look like Strom Thurmond, was unhappy to admit it, but for academic integrity showed us how the bias in the media exists, and then proceeded to explain some of why it comes about (advertising revenue, learned phrases from journalism schools, learned phrases from the academic world, refusal to accept some spin and the creation of sound bytes that take on their own lives, etc). She was very clear that the media is slightly left of center.

She also postulated that it could reflect the fact that America was left of center, but it was argued back that media is representative of the target audience more so than the population in general. Her return argument was that the media, in serving the largest part of the population, met the rules for reasonable sample size as reflective of the trends of a population, and it pretty much stalemated there.

I got an A in the class, but I think that was as much because I memorized the ANOVA formulas as because of any study of bias... ::grin::

[sujata.livejournal.com]

I learned of the slight left bias in a class I attended on inherent bias in linguistic analysis,

What year did you take this class?

Personally, I've seen the "liberal bias" disappear and be replaced by a "conservative bias" during the past twenty years. I've a hunch you took that class at a time when liberal bias in the media was gasping out its dying breath, and conservatism was moving in to take over.

ariedana makes an excellent point about corporate control of the media, nowadays. She doesn't really make clear how pervasive it is, though. Incidentally, corporate control of the media ultimately resulting in a conservative bias, along with almost every other major influence on conditions in America as they now exist, was predicted in 1984 in Herbert I. Schiller's Information and the Crisis Economy. The only influence on contemporary conditions and affairs that Schiller didn't outright predict was 9-11, and he even hinted at the possibility of something like that occurring.

[dwivian]

Took the course in 2001. Not quite so late as you'd expect. And, my continued, and now informed, read shows that the bias is still there. Remember, this is not in the decision of what to report (which is a seperate bias of its own) but in the language used in the reporting. That is almost never influenced by the ownership, as it is a tone set by regional authors and newsfeeds, which tend not to change overmuch because of market needs for writers.

What is covered, and what isn't, comes out of the desire to protect the revenue stream, and thus is related to the advertiser base. Watch, sometime, to see how far apart a story about the evils of fast food can get from the latest HappyMeal placement.... If that's conservative or liberal I can't say, as I'm sure it is more a reflection of the target market than anything else. So.... is America becoming more conservative? Or is there some other reason you'd guess? I'll admit to not reading Schiller's book, so I'll bet you have an answer in there you can share!

::waiting, with anticipation::

[dwivian]

It's just like the union goons assaulting republican offices. It's proof that there are WAY TOO MANY IDIOTS out there, and not enough bricks to fling at their heads.

Kudos to you for accepting contrary discussion gracefully.

::steals your margharita::

[deza.livejournal.com]

Go ahead and lose your mind, sweetie. You'll feel much less stress once you get past that.

BTW, you've got email.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

Is that email from last week that I haven't managed to answer yet, or new email?

[deza.livejournal.com]

New, about something I just saw in the AJC.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

Which addy did you send it to? I haven't gotten it yet.

[deza.livejournal.com]

Merdre. I hate using netscape. :(

Long and the short of it--the position for the circulation librarian at your library ran again in the AJC. Is it actually open, or was that a misprint?

[deza.livejournal.com]

And you know you're getting too damned popular, right?

:P

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

Me? Popular? *confused*

YEP!

[flewellyn.livejournal.com]

It could be the snark. It could be the wit. It could be the cleavage.

But I think it's the snark.

[streamweaver.livejournal.com]

When I read this I have to wonder why it is we aren't married?

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

Because you met cadoln first. *sniffle*

[streamweaver.livejournal.com]

I knew I should have been a Mormon!

[stronae.livejournal.com]

[insidejoke]Oh look, another similarity![/inisidejoke]

[orfeo517.livejournal.com]

My Republican values dictate that I must now bomb you for disagreeing with me. Sorry. Heh! I loved watching the Jon Stewart interview with Lewis Lapham. The man said that the neo-cons are in no way conservative. He said they're "utopian idealists" or "radical nationalists." One good quotation is "what in Hell are conservatives conserving?"

[sujata.livejournal.com]

I was furious when I heard about this, too, and wrote about it in http://www.livejournal.com/users/sujata/68005.html.

I referred to the threats made against the newspaper staff as "Constitution-busting," which led to intelligent discourse between john666 and myself. So no, intelligent discourse is not dead.

Intelligent Republicans, however, may well be extinct. >:-)

[kobrin.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I read that the other day. *shakes his head*

We haven't gotten quite to that stage yet down here in Australia, but I think that's mainly because most Australians simply refuse to take themselves too seriously. (Might be something in the beer) Heh.

I'm annoyed at our recent elections though, as the Prime Monster has returned to power for a fourth term (there is no limit to the number of terms a prime minister can serve down here). His platform was lies, fear and B.S. and his opponent tried to lead a campaign of hope and promise for the future. Sadly, the B.S. campaign won.

I hope that this doesn't foreshadow the results of the US elections. :S

[flewellyn.livejournal.com]

Where? When? Got links?

[grunion.livejournal.com]

Threats of physical violence are illegal, and those making them should be charged and dealt with accordingly. They are NOT protected speech no matter what party they support.

As for the party of values.. um, there is NO party of values. There are only parties of "how can I get votes". Every time I hear someone giving me a line with the words "family values" in it, I know they want ME to change to THEIR values or they will put a gun to my head to make me. I think the exact same thing when I hear the words "common good" or "progressive". The first has its roots in a history I want no part of (religion based governments), the second and third are from movements I know to be wrong (Fascism and Communism respectively). The only way to make me more dedicated to being opposed to any given position is to actually use the word "neo-con". It's fun to know where certain concepts or words came from sometimes.

Words can be powerful sometimes, but replying to them with bricks and threats is never appropriate.

[thetuan.livejournal.com]

actually the old fashioned way of disagreeing with an editor was to call them out. there are many instances where newspaper editors dueled in order to defend their paper's view or statements.

JOHN HAMPTON PLEASANTS VS. THOMAS RITCHIE, JR. Thomas Ritchie was the son of the founder of the Richmond Enquirer (first issued in 1804) and one of the editors after 1845. John Hampton Pleasants (1797-1846) founded the rival Richmond Whig in 1824 and edited it until 1846 when he was shot and killed the duel. The two paper editors feuded over their papers and finally it got so out of hand a duel was called.

THE HYMAN-HILLIARD DUEL. In the Summer of 1855 John D. Hyman, editor of the Spectator said in his paper the mail service was not as efficiently conducted as when been under the management of the Whigs. Dr. W. L. Hilliard was then the postmaster, and a partner of Dr. J. F. E. Hardy. Besides this, both were Democrats. Dr. Hilliard sent Dr. Hardy to Col. Hyman with a polite request for a retraction and apology, which were refused. Thereupon a challenge to mortal combat followed which was promptly accepted, rifles designated as the weapons, and Paint Rock on the Tennessee line agreed on as the place of meeting.





http://www.twainquotes.com/18630802t.html


perhaps one should let them duel....http://clarionherald.org/19990916/stall.htm

[whorlwind.livejournal.com]

Basic logic, A is B does not mean B is A. Some assholes are republican does not mean all republicans are assholes.
Just like not all democrats/republicans are unthinking sheep... it just seems that way.