Here's a question for Republicans:

[intheflow]

If what's spouted by conservative commentators and Republicans doesn't effect people's actions, why do it?

Why spend billions of dollars on advertising, speechwriters, mailings, web sites, publicity departments and tv shows?

Think of the money you could save the Republican Party and Rupert Murdoch if you just got rid of all that ineffectual outreach!

Because it it clearly doesn't influence anyone's actions, certainly not anyone's violent actions.

By your own logic, you really should just save yourselves some time and money since you have no influence and never will with these unproductive tactics.





I'm sure the rest of us won't mind.

[RandomThoughts]

1. Something not being about effect.

Does not mean effect will not occur.

Something being about intent, is to say the ends do not justify the means.

By being about intent, sometimes things get better, sometimes there are setbacks.



Doing for intent, is not giving up on effect, it is not doing for effect first, but with what can be thought and felt to be better intents.


Side note, I am still due beer and travel money, and that will be paid.

[Drale]

2. Its not that words can't effect people

its that the repukes don't understand that violence is bad, therefor they can't comprehend that their rhetoric is violence and evil.

[intheflow]

3. Yes, there's that.

Hard to shut someone up when they think they're taking the high ground by spewing violent rhetoric. :(

[MyshkinCommaPrince]

4. They care only about winning

The RW cares only about winning. The angry rhetoric has been helping them for years to control the discourse, distract from more relevant matters, emotionalize every topic, and reduce the chance that they'll get caught in any calm and rational discussion of real issues. They won't change what they're doing until and unless it no longer helps their cause. They don't care about any influence their words might have if it isn't keeping them from winning. It's like the corporate culture. Everything is considered in terms of short-term profitability. Anything else is an external consideration which needs to be ignored. Including logic, good taste, and the value of human life.

That noted, I certainly wouldn't mind if they stopped. Nothing that has happened recently is going to cause them to change their approach, though. Not unless there's a broad public rejection of their methods, which doesn't seem likely, based on current public response.

[hfojvt]

5. They say there are no bad questions.

Q: If what's spouted by conservative commentators and Republicans doesn't effect people's actions, why do it?

A: What is spouted by conservative commentators and Republicans is supposed to affect people to vote for Republicans, to donate to Republicans and to work for the election of Republicans, and to enact conservative legislation and to stop liberal legislation.


Q: Why spend billions of dollars on advertising, speechwriters, mailings, web sites, publicity departments and tv shows?

A: see above. And the other reason is that there seems to be good money in it.

Think of the money you could save the Republican Party and Rupert Murdoch if you just got rid of all that ineffectual outreach!

Because it it clearly doesn't influence anyone's actions, certainly not anyone's violent actions.

[intheflow]

6. But they're not saying "Vote for Republicans!"

They're saying "Liberals are the problem and here's the solution: "

Of course the money made off all the people who aren't really listening is pretty good. For some reason. :shrug: