General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIt Just So Happens, That Everything That Is Profitable, Is Also Patriotic.
You libtard Global warming is a hoax, and youre dumb enough to believe it Your teleprompter, socialist hero A trillion dollars on crack whores Socialist, communist, Nazi So your messiah can redistribute the wealth Unions have bankrupted the economy The enemy of the producers/job creators Tax and spend" "Socialism has never worked Liberal hate
Anyone who has ever debated on Face Book or other social media outlets is probably familiar with these and other variations of these, teabagger gems. Whether the subject is climate change, tax cuts, health care or the economy, certain people almost exclusively answer facts with attacks. Here is a letter signed by the heads eighteen science organizations, stating that anthropogenic global warming is an undeniable fact. Response: Did Al Gore write this to make himself more money, the hypocritical bastard? You lose again! Why does government spending on the military create jobs, but spending on education or infrastructure kills them? Response: Socialism doesnt work, dumbass! Ah, modern politics, Fox News infused.
Because one side of the political divide has entered an alternate reality, it is very hard to have rational debates in the 21st century. The stakes are higher, as always when war or a bad economy are at issue, so emotions naturally run hotter; but now we have the added dimension of talking to people who take their psychotic reality very seriously. If someone had predicted twenty, forty or sixty years ago, that about half of the U.S. population would believe that the biggest, richest and most powerful companies of all time would be held hostage by the worlds scientists, as they create and fix established science for profit, they would have been rightly laughed at. And who would have thought that the same people who look at the energy companies as victims of the worlds crooked scientists, would also see ninety-three percent of a recoverys wealth go to the top one percent, and fight hard to make that percentage larger?
You cant beat them because proof and logic are countered with hate, anger, projection, proud ignorance, stupidity, cruelty and cognitive dissonance. Debating the teabaggers/Fox News junkies is like arguing with a random phrase generator. Once in a while, inadvertently funny things appear on the screen, but it's always pointless. After over a decade of this, Im tired. Throwing in the towel -- they win. And since you cant beat them, Ive decided to join them. How will you know what to believe? you may ask. Well, thats the easy part. By observing the trends and national debates I have looked through a window, into their secret world. Here is how one knows what to believe. Follow the money. Take war for instance. War is profitable, so at the beginning of a war you support the troops and the war with equal vigor. Anything less is close to treason. But it costs money to take care of the vets coming home from war, so now its patriotic to ignore them. It costs money to clean up pollution, so now those who try to keep our air and water clean should become objects of derision. If its profitable, it is patriotic. If it is profitable, it is to be fought for. There, simple as that! Now all my beliefs will just happen to fall in line with the multi-national corporations' wish list. Nothing strange about that.
Now, its off to the shower for some reason.
Yeah, and I think Ill need a drink, too.
rgbecker
(4,834 posts)But I'm kicking it back up to the top.
20score
(4,769 posts)ihavenobias
(13,532 posts)Is good joke but reality in!
SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)I recall about a year ago on "This American Life" Ira had a show about young people.
One of these was a self professing Beck fan. Ira asked her about climate change which she stated she did to believe in it. He asked her to explain what climate change was and explain why she didn't believe in it. After a little hemming and hawing she couldn't. He arranged to get a climatologist to explain it to her in very simple terms. Did using the facts and logic in terms a teenager could understand change her mind. NO!
Right after the Citizen's United decision was announced, a conservative friend of mine called me with his latest guess what Obama did this time moment. These are usually the latest FOX, Bech and Limbaugh talking point. Knowing him rather well, once I debunked his guess what moment, I asked what he thought of the fact that corporations were not people. He started in a rage how stupid that was and how he was sure Obama did that to get more money from corporation. I then explained it was the SCOTUS which did this and predicted it would be used much more by Republicans. He now complains about every penny donated to Obama while overlooking the money donated to Romney.
Those are just two examples of how they are uninformed and even when the fact are given they still don't believe it. Or care.
meow2u3
(24,767 posts)We have to keep accusing the other side of unspeakable crimes against children. Most people hate pedophiles, and that's what we have to do.
suede1
(892 posts)Debating the teabaggers/Fox News junkies is like arguing with a random phrase generator.
Why yes, yes it is.
hbskifreak
(57 posts)You nailed it as usual, brother! And you know I know where that "trillion dollars for crack whores" comment came from; talking to that guy was like arguing with a friggin toaster (not to insult toasters).
But the sad fact is if you really look at the right's mindset the way you have defined it, it really does begin to make sense. Very disturbing.
20score
(4,769 posts)XemaSab
(60,212 posts)20score
(4,769 posts)Hence, pro drug war.
boppers
(16,588 posts)I think this message might need some tuning. As soon as "message based realities" become the mode of conversation, intelligent discourse is not possible.
It's not just the right that does it.
20score
(4,769 posts)I thought I was clear. I was talking about the effectiveness of propaganda. If that didn't come through for you, I guess I should have written a few more lines cover that base.
"As soon as "message based realities" become the mode of conversation, intelligent discourse is not possible." Kind of the whole point of the article, so I certainly agree.
And it true the left also does it, no doubt. And that infuriates me to no end. But there is only one side actively disputing settled science, and only one side fighting against the interests of the majority of the country, and it's not the left. Degrees matter.
On edit: It is satirical and tongue-in-cheek, too. So, I was going for a laugh as well as venting my frustration.
boppers
(16,588 posts)Some examples:
GMO's.
Risk/reward of Nuclear power.
Circumcision.
Genetic variation.
Student testing.
Pick any hot debate on DU.
(And, I hesitate to ask, could a kind soul fill me in on the "Olive Garden" debate? I have no context on that one.)
Ghost of Huey Long
(322 posts)Was it the meaning of the Declaration of Independence when it said that they held that there were certain rights that were inalienablethe right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Is that right of life, my friends, when the young children of this country are being reared into a sphere which is more owned by 12 men than it by 120,000,000 people?
Is that, my friends, giving them a fair shake of the dice or anything like the inalienable right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, or anything resembling the fact that all people are created equal; when we have today in America thousands and hundreds of thousands and millions of children on the verge of starvation in a land that is overflowing with too much to eat and too much to wear?