OT Bush propaganda against Kerry
 

"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:JdG4d.245117$mD.123682@attbi_s02...
Doug,
I am glad you got a good education and have continued to learn. My point
to
Gould was the two surveys below showed that Republicans have a better
formal
education than Democrats.

See link: http://plsc.uark.edu/arkpoll/fall99/party/PAGE4.HTM

And the higher the education level the more informed the voters a

http://www.policyattitudes.org/emsappxb.htm

So the higher the education, the less they will be influenced by sound
bites, slogan's, rumors and insults.

So if Gould is going to make statements such as " " the right wing relies
on
slogan, rumor,
insult, and easily remembered but out-of-context sound bytes to attract
that
portion of the
electorate that is more numerous, but less mentally adept."

It is not supported by any facts. In fact, two independent surveys show
the
opposite to be true.

Gould believes most Republicans get their facts from Rush and Hannity. I
have not seen any surveys that show most Republicans listen to either one.

Well, then find a label for the enormous audience enjoyed by idiots like
Rush & Hannity. We know the audience is large because companies like Clear
Channel never EVER carry programming unless it turns a profit. Incidentally,
I suspect the audience is not primarily Dems.

Even if all of the audience is Republicans, they can have an extremely large
audience and still not come close to being the majority of Republicans.
Also, it has not been proven that those Republicans who do listen believe
any or all of what they hear on those shows.

So what Gould was guilty of is making generalization concerning the
Republicans based upon
"slogan, rumor, insult, and easily remembered but out-of-context sound bytes
to attract
that portion of the electorate that is more numerous, but less mentally
adept

smile.


....
"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:JdG4d.245117$mD.123682@attbi_s02...
Doug,
I am glad you got a good education and have continued to learn. My point
to
Gould was the two surveys below showed that Republicans have a better
formal
education than Democrats.

See link: http://plsc.uark.edu/arkpoll/fall99/party/PAGE4.HTM

And the higher the education level the more informed the voters a

http://www.policyattitudes.org/emsappxb.htm

So the higher the education, the less they will be influenced by sound
bites, slogan's, rumors and insults.

So if Gould is going to make statements such as " " the right wing relies
on
slogan, rumor,
insult, and easily remembered but out-of-context sound bytes to attract
that
portion of the
electorate that is more numerous, but less mentally adept."

It is not supported by any facts. In fact, two independent surveys show
the
opposite to be true.

Gould believes most Republicans get their facts from Rush and Hannity. I
have not seen any surveys that show most Republicans listen to either
one.

Well, then find a label for the enormous audience enjoyed by idiots like
Rush & Hannity. We know the audience is large because companies like Clear
Channel never EVER carry programming unless it turns a profit.
Incidentally,
I suspect the audience is not primarily Dems.

Doug,
I am glad you got a good education and have continued to learn. My point to
Gould was the two surveys below showed that Republicans have a better formal
education than Democrats.

And my point stands:

To what portion of the audience do the slandrous right wing attack ads attempt
to appeal?

The college educated? puh-leeeze

Gould 0738 wrote:
Doug,
I am glad you got a good education and have continued to learn. My point to
Gould was the two surveys below showed that Republicans have a better formal
education than Democrats.

And my point stands:

To what portion of the audience do the slandrous right wing attack ads attempt
to appeal?

The college educated? puh-leeeze



Anything you need to know about today's Repubicans is embodied in their
support for George W. Bush, the dumbest, least competent POTUS in
anyone's memory.



--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?

Gould,

I thought you were smarter than that, my bad.

The attack ads and mud slinging from either the right or the left is not
targeted at democrats or republicans, they are targeted at the independents
and swing votes.

By the way, did you forget that independent study I referenced earlier, that
showed Kerry's team is more guilty of attack ads than Bush's team.

One needs to be careful of throwing stones if one lives in a glass house.

You are not upset about the slanderous slanderous attack ads, you are upset
because even though Kerry is using more negative advertising he is not as
effective as Bush's negative ads.






"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I am glad you got a good education and have continued to learn. My point
to
Gould was the two surveys below showed that Republicans have a better
formal
education than Democrats.

And my point stands:

To what portion of the audience do the slandrous right wing attack ads
attempt
to appeal?

The college educated? puh-leeeze

"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:WZG4d.101817$D%.8316@attbi_s51...
Even if all of the audience is Republicans, they can have an extremely
large
audience and still not come close to being the majority of Republicans.
Also, it has not been proven that those Republicans who do listen believe
any or all of what they hear on those shows.

True, but the audience seems to be extremely vocal about their beliefs,
which happen to match the bull**** spewed on those programs. This may seem
harmless, but those people repeat things like "Kerry voted against increased
intelligence funding", without knowing if the legislation in question had
riders for the building of a useless dam in North Dakota. They tell these
things to everyone who will listen, including their children. Therefore,
they are like a virus.


So what Gould was guilty of is making generalization concerning the
Republicans based upon
"slogan, rumor, insult, and easily remembered but out-of-context sound
bytes
to attract
that portion of the electorate that is more numerous, but less mentally
adept

Gould's generalization seems to be true, since your president was, in fact,
elected (if you choose to ignore the Florida debacle and continue to use the
word "elected").

But, let's assume you're correct, and the majority of Republicans are
smarter than the morons who shape their views around scum like Rush. How do
you explain the FACT that this enlightened and educated majority voted for a
boy who can barely get through a press conference without repeatedly
stumbling over his native language.

Is it possible (and think carefully here) that they wanted a president who
would leave things as they are because his supporters are comfortable?

"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:KFL4d.246623$Fg5.198184@attbi_s53...

You need to stop believing every left wing nut case that tells you that
the
majority of Republicans base their decisions upon what Rush or Hannity or
any other talking head you want to reference.

Uh oh. Something's wrong here.

1) If the majority of Repubs do NOT base their decisions on what the radio
slimeballs say, then the majority must base their decisions on something
else, right?

2) What is the something else? Their own insights? Their own research?

3) This enlightened majority you describe voted an idiot into office. What
possible reasons could they have had for doing that?

4) Since the idiot and his sitters have done nothing but damage to this
country, shouldn't the words "traitor" or "treason" be reserved for them,
not for his opponents?

By the way, did you forget that independent study I referenced earlier, that
showed Kerry's team is more guilty of attack ads than Bush's team.



I can probably find an "indenpendent study" that proves Hillary Clinton is the
Virgin Mary. An intelligent conservative would be ablr to organize a body of
evidence that surpasses a singel survey.

Give it up. Kerry's a loser. Being from MA and seeing his work ethic and
lack of any moral convictions in the past, is he going to change. I think
not.
He's just playing the game like the rest but to the nth degree.
Any moron today can get up and say he's for health care, social security,
world peace, save to poor and get votes.
Let's smarten up.
We'll never have world peace, social security is fine and if everyone would
stop abusing the present health care systems, they won't be so expensive.
I remember a time when you went to the doctor's office and paid for the
visit. We're not talking a lot of money here. But now, someone gets a wood
splinter and they run to the doctors.
The demos had a president who obsouletly dodge the draft during the Vietnam
war, but that was okay.
I must say that one's not much better than the other.

You know what, do what you want to do, but keep your hands out of my
pockets. I work hard for my money and do not appreciate handing it over to
people who want to abuse the system, sit home and watch the boob tube while
I'm working.



"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
By the way, did you forget that independent study I referenced earlier,
that
showed Kerry's team is more guilty of attack ads than Bush's team.



I can probably find an "indenpendent study" that proves Hillary Clinton is
the
Virgin Mary. An intelligent conservative would be ablr to organize a body
of
evidence that surpasses a singel survey.