Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

It is as if the tea party, glen beck and limbaugh are "grooming" their uninformed followers

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-11 11:26 PM
Original message
It is as if the tea party, glen beck and limbaugh are "grooming" their uninformed followers
by filling their heads with bull****. Said supporters will never find a narrative that resonates with them in their contact with liberals, what with the founding fathers fighting against slavery and all. The right wing just keeps their followers away from the Democrats this way. And it will work well into the future. They've guesstimated that a certain percentage of the right are totally empty vessels (in terms of knowledge of American/World history or common sense)and the right wingers have decided to put them to good use as perpetual right wing voting machines by filling them up with a bull**** narratives. Then they own them.

For the same reasons, abusive people like the naive.....they are easily controlled over the long term.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-11 11:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. I wish everyone would refer to them as "teabaggers".
It's mildly offensive. They fucking hate it. They aren't a real party. They are just the rethuglicans with the lowest IQs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 02:34 AM
Response to Reply #1
13. Paid posers on the dole. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sharesunited Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-11 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. Oh, uninformed. I thought you said uniformed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CoffeeCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-11 11:36 PM
Response to Original message
3. I think this is one of the most spot on...
Edited on Mon Jan-31-11 11:38 PM by CoffeeCat
...descriptions of what these right-wing propagandists do to their listening audience.

Seriously, that's brilliant.

"Grooming" is exactly what they're doing. I've only used that word in reference to how pedophiles lull their
victims into compliance, through manipulation, fear and other mind games. That's exactly what the right
wing does to their audience. They are manipulated. They are lied to. They are exposed to fear-based disinformation
until they are so afraid--that they need a leader who will rescue them.

Oh, it's so sick--but your "grooming" reference is EXACTLY what is happening here. It is a perversion.

What's really disturbing about the dynamic between Beck/Limbaugh listeners--is that Beck and Limbaugh actually
despise and have no respect for their listening audience members. They detest them and they believe that they are
spineless fools for believing their lies and manipulations. These clowns who listen to Limbaugh and Beck---and
feel important and smart, are being laughed at by Beck and Limbaugh during their production meetings with the elites in government/politics/corporate America who are helping to craft the right-wing memes that are disseminated during these shows.

It's a very sick and twisted dynamic, which is why your grooming description is really accurate. That idea could be
the basis for a very slick editorial. You should consider writing one!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-11 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Oh I am in no way an editorial writer. You or anyone here is welcome
to expand upon my 'notions' and get it out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-11 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. Rush isn't making $60MM/year telling his audience the truth.
Truth telling doesn't pay. But someone who can spin an alternate reality and get a few million people to vote against their best interests...that's worth real money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 07:05 AM
Response to Reply #4
15. Rush makes $60MM/year ?
Where can that info be verified?

I'm curious and would like to publicise it because it more than anything else would reveal his motives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. May be overstated...closer to $50MM/year.
He hosts The Rush Limbaugh Show which is aired throughout the U.S. on Premiere Radio Networks and is the highest-rated talk-radio program in the United States. Limbaugh signed an 8 year, $400 million contract extension with Clear Channel in 2008 that pays him $50 million a year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh

Not bad for a narcotics junkie!

Of course, there's probably income from investments and other income that isn't included in the contract, so it's quite possible that he's netting out $60MM or more, these days. But the point is, no one gets paid this kind of money to tell the truth. And, it seems to be working, in the same Wikipedia article - "A November 2008 poll by Zogby International found that Rush Limbaugh was the most trusted news personality in the nation.<21>" I have no idea who was polled or who the competition was, but surely, every Dittohead would agree. Personally, I find that calling him a news personality means that he is successful in catapulting the propaganda. Goebbels would have been impressed.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 12:01 AM
Response to Original message
6. Beck was saying today that the fall of Mubarak was part of Obama's "Marxist agenda"
and of course, we're next. Kid you not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
social_critic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #6
17. Come on, you got to admit he's funny
I was watching him with his blackboard, and the funky map showing how the Ayrabs were going to invade Europe, then they would take NATO's landing craft and invade us - I think the landing is supposed to take place in New Jersey. The commies, meanwhile, would surge out of Russia and Cuba, and attack us with invisible submarines they are having built by the Chinese.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. He's hillarious in a darkly disturbing "idiocracy in motion" kind of way, yes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 12:21 AM
Response to Original message
7. the founding fathers didn't fight against slavery?
Or did you write that wrong?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Michelle Bachman, in her responce to the state of the union, claimed they did.
Edited on Tue Feb-01-11 12:25 AM by applegrove
I was repeating what she was claiming as an example of the bull**** histoy they feed their followers.









Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 01:30 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. But they did.
The b.s. was that they fought until it was eliminated because none of them were still alive in 1864, but an anti-slavery message was certainly passed down from parents to children and grandchildren among many families in the north, and some gave their lives to the cause of ending slavery. http://www.greatriverroad.com/cities/Alton/Lovejoy.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 02:33 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. Some of the founding fathers were slaveowners.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 02:58 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. some were, but many were not
and those who were not certainly did fight against slavery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
COLGATE4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. By way of illustration, could you name some of these Founding
Fathers who fought against slavery?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #18
21. only by linking to a rightwing site
but are their quotes inaccurate? Did they make it all up? All I did was google "founding fathers slavery" and found this.

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-wall/wal-g003.html

"Other prominent Founding Fathers who were members of societies for ending slavery included Richard Bassett, James Madison, James Monroe, Bushrod Washington, Charles Carroll, William Few, John Marshall, Richard Stockton, Zephaniah Swift, and many more.

In fact, based in part on the efforts of these Founders, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts abolished slavery in 1780; Connecticut and Rhode Island did so in 1784; New Hampshire in 1792; Vermont in 1793; New York in 1799; and New Jersey in 1804. Furthermore, the reason that the states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa all prohibited slavery was a federal act authored by Rufus King (signer of the Constitution) and signed into law by President George Washington which prohibited slavery in those territories."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. So when Michelle Bachman said "the founding fathers fought against slavery" she was parsing the
truth. Typical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gato Moteado Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 12:39 AM
Response to Original message
9. teabaggers = useful idiots
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toon Me Out Donating Member (245 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 02:07 AM
Response to Original message
11. Well put! I agree...
...but it also seems to be about something more than garnering votes, because they lace their diatribes with luridly violent scenarios of a dystopian America and include hate speech against minorities. (See most recently Rush's "joke" about catching diseases from intercourse with illegal aliens.)

Aren't they trying to further desensitize their viewers/listeners by routinely dehumanizing their political opponents as un-American, traitors, socialists, or "so dead inside" (Beck)? It's a fact that many of their listeners are rabid for gun culture. If these minions believe that their "enemies" are less than human, then violence is easier for a sadly warped mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-11 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
20. they are embracing 'history according to palin'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-11 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
23. So it is all about giving the right wing soldiers a narrative that will separate them
from liberals, right down to creating distrust and hatred amid families. And this from the GOP who claim to be advocates for strong healthy families.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 05:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC