Mytzlplk
Governor
and when they catch a pol, etc, lying, that should become a story in an of itself. Unless and until the mostly rightwing liars are shamed into silence as we use to pretty much have their racists, etc, then nothing will change, and no compromising of any consequence will or can occur, nor will the incivility that rank and chronic dishonesty promotes be ended or substantially diminsihed. Liars aren't owed civility, they should get nothing but silence, or condemnation -- if not criminal prosectution -- and particularly when they are costly ones like lying us into war.
As I've noted more times than I'd care to count in the last decade or more, our deterioration and devolution as a country politically policy-wise, and the discourse used to come to those choices, has more to do with the successful conscious and concerted effort of rightwingers to destroy the concept of "agreed upon facts" that punished liars, than any other single factor by far. This of course includes it being the proximate cause of so many "cons" for example, going for the con and CONsistently voting against their self interests. And yes, I'd dare say that the trickle up scheme we've experienced in the last few decades resulting in the obscene wealth inequality seen today, was just another rightwing "up is down" scheme disguised as "trickle down". Such has been the propaganda power of the rightwing media machine launched with the well paid ass Limbaugh a long time ago.
Given the intellectually challenged nature of their "leave your hands off my SS and Medicare Dems" supporters, it was surefire, no? Just toss in the "them thar lazy, freeloading blacks are taking your money given to them by the dems to buy their votes", and the rest as they say, is history. Sound familiar?
That destruction started along with the class warfare we are still embroiled in today, with St. Raygun http://www.alternet.org/teaparty/15...g_lies_came_to_rule_our_politics/?page=entire more than any other before him being the architect. No wonder they revere him so, no, even though they've gone so far off the rightwing cliff they likely wouldn't elect him as dog catcher today...
It's also why the modern rightwinger today both big and small, rely heavily if not exclusively on dishonesty and/or hate speech in their many and varied forms, to "win" the "debate" whether big or small.
And what has been particualrly amusing and disgusting to me at the same time, is was and remains their use of things like that omnipotent mythical "liberal" media as another one of those "up is down" examples, like the "liberal media" owned wholly in this country by large corporations, and not many of them at that, don't do what corporations do -- hardly back the "socialists". They do just enough to occasionally make the rightwing bullies cry "liberal" media, but in the case of the NYT as posted about below, they never reward them with praise for selling wars, or keeping things like Bush illegally/feloniously wiretapping through the 2004 election under raps, possibly adversely effecting the outcome.
This has long been one of the rightwinger fav frequently repeated lies of which there are MANY, https://www.google.com/search?q=rig....,cf.osb&fp=5ce3e65fae576574&biw=1440&bih=670 that I addressed here just a few days ago.
And I doubt if a day goes by with your PJ experience where you don't see a few, several, if not many of those FRLs, and no matter how many times they've been thoroughly debunked like the example below, no?
"c" y'all
The Times itself has amplified the assertion — made by Romney and Rick Perry — that Obama has apologized for America, without any rebuttal, at least three times: Here, here, and here. I urge Brisbane to check them out. If he does, he’ll see that any Times customer reading them comes away misled. He or she is left with the mistaken impression that Obama may have, in fact, apologized for America, when he never did any such thing.
In other words, in all those three cases, the Times helped the GOP candidate mislead its own readers — with an assertion that has become absolutely central to the Republican case against Obama. Whatever the practical difficulties of changing this, surely we can all agree that this is not a role newspapers should be playing, particularly at a time when voters are choosing their next president. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ewspapers-for/2012/01/12/gIQAuUCqtP_blog.html
As I've noted more times than I'd care to count in the last decade or more, our deterioration and devolution as a country politically policy-wise, and the discourse used to come to those choices, has more to do with the successful conscious and concerted effort of rightwingers to destroy the concept of "agreed upon facts" that punished liars, than any other single factor by far. This of course includes it being the proximate cause of so many "cons" for example, going for the con and CONsistently voting against their self interests. And yes, I'd dare say that the trickle up scheme we've experienced in the last few decades resulting in the obscene wealth inequality seen today, was just another rightwing "up is down" scheme disguised as "trickle down". Such has been the propaganda power of the rightwing media machine launched with the well paid ass Limbaugh a long time ago.
Given the intellectually challenged nature of their "leave your hands off my SS and Medicare Dems" supporters, it was surefire, no? Just toss in the "them thar lazy, freeloading blacks are taking your money given to them by the dems to buy their votes", and the rest as they say, is history. Sound familiar?
That destruction started along with the class warfare we are still embroiled in today, with St. Raygun http://www.alternet.org/teaparty/15...g_lies_came_to_rule_our_politics/?page=entire more than any other before him being the architect. No wonder they revere him so, no, even though they've gone so far off the rightwing cliff they likely wouldn't elect him as dog catcher today...
It's also why the modern rightwinger today both big and small, rely heavily if not exclusively on dishonesty and/or hate speech in their many and varied forms, to "win" the "debate" whether big or small.
And what has been particualrly amusing and disgusting to me at the same time, is was and remains their use of things like that omnipotent mythical "liberal" media as another one of those "up is down" examples, like the "liberal media" owned wholly in this country by large corporations, and not many of them at that, don't do what corporations do -- hardly back the "socialists". They do just enough to occasionally make the rightwing bullies cry "liberal" media, but in the case of the NYT as posted about below, they never reward them with praise for selling wars, or keeping things like Bush illegally/feloniously wiretapping through the 2004 election under raps, possibly adversely effecting the outcome.
This has long been one of the rightwinger fav frequently repeated lies of which there are MANY, https://www.google.com/search?q=rig....,cf.osb&fp=5ce3e65fae576574&biw=1440&bih=670 that I addressed here just a few days ago.
And I doubt if a day goes by with your PJ experience where you don't see a few, several, if not many of those FRLs, and no matter how many times they've been thoroughly debunked like the example below, no?
"c" y'all
The Times itself has amplified the assertion — made by Romney and Rick Perry — that Obama has apologized for America, without any rebuttal, at least three times: Here, here, and here. I urge Brisbane to check them out. If he does, he’ll see that any Times customer reading them comes away misled. He or she is left with the mistaken impression that Obama may have, in fact, apologized for America, when he never did any such thing.
In other words, in all those three cases, the Times helped the GOP candidate mislead its own readers — with an assertion that has become absolutely central to the Republican case against Obama. Whatever the practical difficulties of changing this, surely we can all agree that this is not a role newspapers should be playing, particularly at a time when voters are choosing their next president. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ewspapers-for/2012/01/12/gIQAuUCqtP_blog.html
