Shouting at the radio, again
May. 15th, 2009 10:13 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elfsAgain with the talk radio! This one happened yesterday. Mark Levin, who for some reason I always imagine looks like the scrawny, evil rat from The Secret of NIMH, was out of his chair yesterday, and there was a guest host, Michael Barrett. He was ranting about how the "current generation" has thrown out the wisdom of the past, and has proclaimed:
Karl Rove famously described his strategy thusly. Find your own candidates greatest weakness. Now, accuse your opponent of it. He'll be so flustered with the idea that he'll have a hard time defending himself against it, it will distract from your own candidate's weakness, and it will give the press something to talk about. It worked well against John Kerry and Al Gore: both Vietnam Vets, both athletes, yet by impugning their physical courage and getting the press to talk about it, Rove was able to give his cheerleader and draft-dodger candidate breathing room to make alternative cases while Gore and Kerry flailed about, shocked and horrified that anyone would dare make such an attack on their patriotism.
Barrett's rant makes me think that the Rovian cancer has mestastasized within the conservative body politic. Because here he is, the conservative talk show host, advocating a hateful attitude toward his own country: most people, he says, are idiots. Hate them. Resent them. The 53% of Americans who voted for Obama are either hateful anti-Americans or they're pureblind idiots.
I believe we should give our troops all the support they need: most of that support ought to be dedicated to making sure they get home safely from the unnecessary war of choice. I believe that my country is great and founded on great principles: principles I desperately want my country to embrace and honor in the fullest. I believe that it was and always has been a mistake for the state to arbitrarily recognize the religious commitment called "marriage," and that there is room enough in our civilization for the odd 2% to have civil relationships that encourage fidelity and responsibility. I believe that respect toward women and men is a crucial part of our culture, and that the foul material heard in some radio doesn't deserve the attention it gets, but censorship isn't the answer.
But Barrett wasn't done with his rant. He went on to say,
Cars are better than they were 30 years ago. (1978? Holy cow, that was a crappy year for cars!) They're safer in an accident, they get much better mileage, and they require less costly maintenance. Fewer people die in automobile crashes than they did at any time in history.
Parents: in general, yes. They know more. They have access to more information. There's a better support system than ever in terms of education and community, if only you have the wherewithall to use it. If they let their children fail, they have fewer excuses than at any time in the past.
And yes, children are far safer than they were 30 years ago. Crime statistics universally show them to be safer now than in 1978, or 1968, or even 1958. The current generation is growing up healthier and just as ready to take on the world we're leaving them as we were ready to take on the world our parents left us.
When Barrett goes off like this, what he's really telling his audience is that we should hate our successes, and wish for the "simpler" time, when the violence and mayhem went on behind closed doors and in the back pages of the newspaper, and we lived in blissful ignorance of the agonies outside our little towns.
Barrett's anti-Americanism, his opposition to the progress we've made, is on full display in his words, and we shouldn't be afraid to call him on it.
Man, if you think marriage ought to be between a man and a woman, and not between two men and two women, you're not with it. If you think our country is great, you're not with it. If you believe we should support the troops, you're not with it. If you believe we should not write hateful things about women and should not put those songs on the radio, man, you're just not with it.I was gobsmacked by the hateful idiocy contained in that rant. This is one of those classic "ascribe to your enemies all the qualities you perceive in yourself" rants that seem to be coming more and more out of the right.
Karl Rove famously described his strategy thusly. Find your own candidates greatest weakness. Now, accuse your opponent of it. He'll be so flustered with the idea that he'll have a hard time defending himself against it, it will distract from your own candidate's weakness, and it will give the press something to talk about. It worked well against John Kerry and Al Gore: both Vietnam Vets, both athletes, yet by impugning their physical courage and getting the press to talk about it, Rove was able to give his cheerleader and draft-dodger candidate breathing room to make alternative cases while Gore and Kerry flailed about, shocked and horrified that anyone would dare make such an attack on their patriotism.
Barrett's rant makes me think that the Rovian cancer has mestastasized within the conservative body politic. Because here he is, the conservative talk show host, advocating a hateful attitude toward his own country: most people, he says, are idiots. Hate them. Resent them. The 53% of Americans who voted for Obama are either hateful anti-Americans or they're pureblind idiots.
I believe we should give our troops all the support they need: most of that support ought to be dedicated to making sure they get home safely from the unnecessary war of choice. I believe that my country is great and founded on great principles: principles I desperately want my country to embrace and honor in the fullest. I believe that it was and always has been a mistake for the state to arbitrarily recognize the religious commitment called "marriage," and that there is room enough in our civilization for the odd 2% to have civil relationships that encourage fidelity and responsibility. I believe that respect toward women and men is a crucial part of our culture, and that the foul material heard in some radio doesn't deserve the attention it gets, but censorship isn't the answer.
But Barrett wasn't done with his rant. He went on to say,
Let me ask you something. They all say we shouldn't look to the past, but we should look forward. The past has nothing to teach us. Tradition isn't valuable. Let me ask you this: Are cars better than they were 30 years ago? Are your children safer than they were 30 years ago? Are parents better than they were 30 years ago?
Cars are better than they were 30 years ago. (1978? Holy cow, that was a crappy year for cars!) They're safer in an accident, they get much better mileage, and they require less costly maintenance. Fewer people die in automobile crashes than they did at any time in history.
Parents: in general, yes. They know more. They have access to more information. There's a better support system than ever in terms of education and community, if only you have the wherewithall to use it. If they let their children fail, they have fewer excuses than at any time in the past.
And yes, children are far safer than they were 30 years ago. Crime statistics universally show them to be safer now than in 1978, or 1968, or even 1958. The current generation is growing up healthier and just as ready to take on the world we're leaving them as we were ready to take on the world our parents left us.
When Barrett goes off like this, what he's really telling his audience is that we should hate our successes, and wish for the "simpler" time, when the violence and mayhem went on behind closed doors and in the back pages of the newspaper, and we lived in blissful ignorance of the agonies outside our little towns.
Barrett's anti-Americanism, his opposition to the progress we've made, is on full display in his words, and we shouldn't be afraid to call him on it.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-15 07:26 pm (UTC)not with it.
not with it.
not with it.
1968.
Are cars better than they were 30 years ago? Are your children safer than they were 30 years ago? Are parents better than they were 30 years ago?
1978. And there you have the entire range of time, as far as this segment is concerned.
Seriously. That's where this entire movement still lives. They're still fighting the 60s and they're still fighting the 70s. None of this insanity makes any sense outside of that context, but it all makes sense - in terms of being followable, anyway - inside that context.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-15 09:48 pm (UTC)I take it for the corporate keep-'em-callin'-in shill it is, rather than thinking its anything close to actual political dialogue. CSPAN is a better place for that, which is why "CSPAN" is synonymous with "boring" for most of the populace.