I've seen some of the storyboards of
upcoming television commercials. They're delightful.

No they're not.

For the next 11 months we will engage in an experiment to see which side can
gather the most votes from Boobus Americanus by saying hateful things about the
other. Sadly enough, after the mega-millions spent by political candidates to
slander one another- we draw very little distinction between disdain for the
"wrong" candidate and disdain for the people who support that candidate.

The lies, the mischaracterizations, the demonizations, and the wretched,
smoking poison will flow from Democrat and Republican sources alike. As usual,
there will be very little discussion of what either candidate proposes to do
and much more about the certain apocalypse that will be spawned by the election
of the not-so-esteemed opponent.

Talk radio has kept this crap going for the last four years, non-stop.
Frightening to think how it will now escalate with an election coming on.

Last time out, we elected a "uniter, not a divider." Well, good thing. Imagine
how different the social climate would be today if we had elected a divider,
not a uniter.................

Here's a scary possibility: The National Rifle Association is stumping to be
declared a "news" organization. They are also planning to purchase television
and radio networks. Under current campaign laws, they are not allowed to
broadcast campaign ads known to be untrue for the last 30 days prior to an
election. If they get the right to masquerade as a news organization rather
than a lobbying group, they will be able to say whatever they want, (known to
be untrue or not), and spend as much as they want right up to election day.

Expect that to pass. It will be one "freedom of speech" issue that the right
wing will be trampling one another to support. Can't afford to miss those NRA
contributions- or see them directed to an opponent.



http://www.tomorrowsbestseller.com/w...State/book.asp

Gould 0738 wrote:

I've seen some of the storyboards of
upcoming television commercials. They're delightful.

No they're not.

For the next 11 months we will engage in an experiment to see which side can
gather the most votes from Boobus Americanus by saying hateful things about the
other. Sadly enough, after the mega-millions spent by political candidates to
slander one another- we draw very little distinction between disdain for the
"wrong" candidate and disdain for the people who support that candidate.

Actually, the kinds of ads I'm envisioning are aimed at getting the core
voters riled up so they show up at the polls on election day. Boobus
Americanus votes Republican these days, and you could show the actual
video tape of Bush diddling Michael Jackson and it wouldn't matter to them.



The lies, the mischaracterizations, the demonizations, and the wretched,
smoking poison will flow from Democrat and Republican sources alike.


The flow began from the GOP. Let's keep that in mind.

--
Email sent to is never read.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gould 0738 wrote:

I've seen some of the storyboards of
upcoming television commercials. They're delightful.

No they're not.

For the next 11 months we will engage in an experiment to see which side
can
gather the most votes from Boobus Americanus by saying hateful things
about the
other. Sadly enough, after the mega-millions spent by political
candidates to
slander one another- we draw very little distinction between disdain for
the
"wrong" candidate and disdain for the people who support that candidate.

Actually, the kinds of ads I'm envisioning are aimed at getting the core
voters riled up so they show up at the polls on election day.


Mark my words...personal attacks on a popular, affable guy is a sure means
to failure.

Oh yeah...and Bush, Rove, and company have not even begun to fight
back...yet.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:bqveo1

The flow began from the GOP. Let's keep that in mind.

Simply untrue, Harry, but you already know that. Your posts are part of the
process, which simply evolved in a country with less and less sense of
ethical propriety. I recall numerous examples from '00 when the Boston
Globe would head up "news" articles from the campaign trail in a particular
way. When Al was stumping for votes, it would be "...Gore confers with
_____ group". In the same type of article about W, the head would read
"...Bush targets _____ group". Just that simple shift of words makes Al the
nice guy, and George the bully. Slanted coverage. There were also
seemingly unlimited ads from a variety of labor groups claiming that Reps
would cut school lunches, or cut medicare, when in fact what was at issue
was not a cut at all, but a 2 or 3 percent reduction in the rate of growth!
But what gets heard? Your kids will starve, and your old parents will be
left to die in the gutter. Literally - I recall an ad that characterized
Calcutta as the future for US if a Republican were elected.

And -- part of the dissembling is the revisionism that goes on during and
after the fact. Example: remember the whole Willie Horton thing used
against Dukakis in '88? Press and pundits loved to excoriate Bush41 over
that, race card, negative campaigning, blah, blah,..... In fact it was
none other than our old pal Al Gore who brought Willie Horton out of the box
during the Dem primaries that year, but there were very few voices raised in
righteous indignation at that time. Why is that?



***** Now, as a special treat, I'll save you the effort of replying by
entering now your standard retort:******

"...another Republitrash puppet..."

The flow began from the GOP. Let's keep that in mind.

Simply untrue, Harry, but you already know that.

Puh-leeze. We'd need to go back a couple of hundred years to figure out who
"started it." Shame on you *and* Harry for insisting it was the other side.

Like the Hatfields and McCoys, after a generation nobody even remembers who
started it.

No person can honestly and accurately say the other side started it.
The conservatives have institutionalized it, however, with hate radio.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message

Puh-leeze. We'd need to go back a couple of hundred years to figure out
who
"started it." Shame on you *and* Harry for insisting it was the other
side.

My apologies, Chuck et al. I *do* agree with your point above. In the
original draft of my reply to Harry, there was a sentence referencing to the
"slime alley" as a two-way street. In editing it got cut, and I failed to
notice. Mea Culpa.


The conservatives have institutionalized it, however, with hate radio.

But let's not intentionally *******ize the language or the process with
loaded buzzwords like "hate radio". There's no hate, it is just
conservative talk radio. Most true conservatives are embarrassed by some of
the pompous rantings that go on, just as honorable Democrats are often
embarrassed by some of the drivel that occasionally spews from the far left.
Words have to mean something, or the whole process is pointless. If we use
words as triggers or weapons, credibility suffers.

John Gaquin wrote:

"Gould 0738" wrote in message

Puh-leeze. We'd need to go back a couple of hundred years to figure out
who
"started it." Shame on you *and* Harry for insisting it was the other
side.

My apologies, Chuck et al. I *do* agree with your point above. In the
original draft of my reply to Harry, there was a sentence referencing to the
"slime alley" as a two-way street. In editing it got cut, and I failed to
notice. Mea Culpa.


The conservatives have institutionalized it, however, with hate radio.

But let's not intentionally *******ize the language or the process with
loaded buzzwords like "hate radio".


It's hate radio. The "hosts" are spewing hate. There's no other word to
describe it.


--
Email sent to is never read.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

It's hate radio. The "hosts" are spewing hate. There's no other word to
describe it.

You make my point. QED

How is the hate you spew in this group and different than the hate on some
talk radio?


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John Gaquin wrote:

"Gould 0738" wrote in message

Puh-leeze. We'd need to go back a couple of hundred years to figure out
who
"started it." Shame on you *and* Harry for insisting it was the other
side.

My apologies, Chuck et al. I *do* agree with your point above. In the
original draft of my reply to Harry, there was a sentence referencing to
the
"slime alley" as a two-way street. In editing it got cut, and I failed
to
notice. Mea Culpa.


The conservatives have institutionalized it, however, with hate radio.

But let's not intentionally *******ize the language or the process with
loaded buzzwords like "hate radio".


It's hate radio. The "hosts" are spewing hate. There's no other word to
describe it.


--
Email sent to is never read.

Harry Krause wrote:

It's hate radio. The "hosts" are spewing hate. There's no other word to
describe it.


And there's no other word to describe your presence here either. It's
hate, pure and simple.

-- Charlie


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---