On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Jeffrey Fisher <jeff.jfisher at gmail.com>wrote:
> Right. But isn't the flip side of this the media's obsession with finding
> "both sides," even when the "other" side is maintained only by a couple of
> people in Idaho with an Internet connection? At a certain point, people
> using inflammatory rhetoric (like calling Obama a Nazi) even while they
> demand to engage in rational discourse have to be called on it. They can't
> have your cake and eat it, too. You can be serious and aggressive without
> throwing that kind of language around, and the only reason to do so is to
> generate the buzz. Period. If you let them in, you're taking the Nazi thing
> seriously. If you exclude them, you are "narrowing the scope of the
> discussion." It's a transparently BS rhetorical tactic, and the only
> objections I really have to letting them hang themselves with their own BS
> are the possibility of legitimizing their views, on the one hand, and taking up time refuting charges that Obama is a Nazi, on the other. I don't like a lot about Obama, but Nazi
> is just utterly surreal.
> Oh, right. LaRouche.
>
> I
> guess I don't think everyone should always do what Frank did. But we need Franks around to do it sometimes. I notice FoxNews jumping to this woman's
> defense, but that is of course sheer
> opportunism, because in their view, generally speaking, tasers are
> legitimate options in these situations.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 2:43 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>wrote:
>
>> I think the administration is actually quite pleased with all the sound
>> and fury
>> about what's essentially a non-issue. (It's been obvious for a generation
>> that
>> the US should have a healthcare system like the other industrialized
>> nations;
>> it's equally obvious why we don't.)
>>
>> What the health care argument does is crowd out much consideration of the
>> administration's frenzied attempt to expand (i.e., win) the war in Afpak.
>> Polls
>> show a majority of Americans now disapprove of the war, but you wouldn't
>> know
>> that from the media, where what we hear is puerile boilerplate like what
>> Obama
>> gave the VFW this week, e.g.,
>>
>> "Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left
>> unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from
>> which
>> Al Qaida would plot to kill more Americans. So this is not only a war
>> worth
>> fighting; this is fundamental to the defense of our people ... No matter
>> the
>> mission, we must maintain America's military dominance."
>>
>> "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit
>> the
>> spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that
>> spectrum -- even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That
>> gives
>> people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time
>> the
>> presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on
>> the
>> range of the debate" [Noam Chomsky]. --CGE
>>
>>
>>
>> Mr. X wrote:
>>
>>> Reason falls flat..the right uses emotions while the left still tilts at
>>> the
>>> windmills of Reason and loses. Barney did the right thing with humor
>>>
>>> peace,
>>>
>>> Jim Davis Ozark Bioregion, USA Planet Gaia
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/historical-materialism/7346550
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>
>>>> From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.orgSent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 2:21:01 PM Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Barney
>>>> Frank at the top of his form
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't it have been better if he'd found out why the woman made the
>>>> comparison she did and what the source of her information was, and
>>>> refuted
>>>> it, if he could?
>>>>
>>>> This bit of low theater just keeps the argument going -- which may after
>>>> all be the point. --CGE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Doug Henwood wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The video of Barney Frank's "what planet?" exchange:
>>>>>
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>>>> He's the most entertaining guy in public life.
>>>>> ___________________________________
>>>>>
>>>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>
>
>