RE: Rush, Hannity, Coulter, Fox News and - 3/15/2009 8:32:05 AM
|
|
|
StrangerThan
Posts: 1515
Joined: 4/25/2008 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: VanessaChaland For the people that seem to spend an inordinate amount of time viewing their shows and reading their blogs, do you ever have the urge to check out people like Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, you know, people with an education, that are well read, unbiased, articulate? I am asking a serious question and not trying to inflame the usual partisian verbiage and retorts. Its like on one side, you have endless political posturing, sound bites, be "right back after this commercial". The other side is people that are willing to get on a stage, debate certain issues, no clock, no "cutting off mics", no judges other than a moderator and an audience. Do you ever wonder why the Dobsons, Limbaughs, Hannity's, Coulters are not willing to debate other people in public? Does that not bother anyone that certain people only spew their vitriol and misguided notions from a one sided, safe and secure, no rebuttal possible, recording station? I enjoy both sides to an extent - that extend being somewhere around the point where nausea starts to set in. With all the experts around, seems like we could find one who could run the country, create harmony, reassure Wall Street and make golden futures for us all. And besides, most commentators do exactly the same thing. Having a lectern, an audience and not allowing much debate is nothing new. But to answer your question in another way. I don't think they generate the kind of discord and division most people think they do. I think they tap into it.
< Message edited by StrangerThan -- 3/15/2009 8:33:38 AM >
_____________________________
--'Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform' - Mark Twain
|
|
|