|
Talking loud and talking over. That's not all of it. What they say in the process is even more important. They lie, then smear. They lie about the topic, then smear the the opponent or the sources the opponent uses. That way, the opponent must spend time trying to correct the lie or defend the smear and the rightard simply bellows onto another subject leaving the opponent behind.
So, how do you plan to counteract that? The only way to do it on the spot is to lie and smear back, which gets us nowhere.
This point is most effectively illustrated by the O'Rielly Vs. Krugman debate this weekend. The exchange regarding the transcript of Oreally's radio show and how Ojackoff smeared the cource and Krugman without ever speaking to the fact that he was caught in a lie and Krugman was unable to deflect the smear for what it is and was unable to firmly establish the exposure of oshithead's lie.
How do you talk over that?
The only way to get this done is to establish a set of debate groundrules and stick to them, then refuse to engaguge in any talkshow debate outside of those rules. What rules? Well I am sure we could sit here for days and bullshit endlessly and fruitlessly on the topic, or someone with a connection could seek out a debate expert who could pull up some set of rules from some classic age of discourse, something with major history behind it, something old, so that there can be no crying from the unwashed, uneducated, uncivilized right about them.
Excuse me for a moment. GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKING GODDAMN BASTARDS MOTHERFUCKING GODDAMN RIGHT WING NEANDERHAL FASCISHT STEALING LYING MOTHERFUCKING GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKERS!!!
Sorry. I am just so angry at the liars.
Anyway, this set of rules would be presented to ALL talk show whores. Then, all dems and leftys must agree not to go on any show with a history of allowing bellowing contests unless they comform to the rules. Whining? Oh my god it will deafen your hearing. But, after a while, it will make a huge impact.
Civilized discourse with factual basis. No insults or bullying. If this situation with what Tom Leykis described on Tina Brown with Howard Dean as the tendency of corporate media's presentation of "heat, not light" for profit's sake is going to change, we must change it. And, it must be a sudden and powerful method to be taken seriously.
My plan would force the rightards into a position of having to defend lying. Heh heh heh.
|