Democrats scrambling to find strong liberal voices for media

Houston Chronicle ^ | January 5, 2002 | JIM RUTENBERG, New York Times

[Deb]

Ah. That must have been the cue for this current tsunami of media about Democrats "finding their voice".

I'll bet Rush has a good time with it tomorrow.

[Kevin Curry]

Democrats have no message worth listening to. Anyone who has spent a half hour at DU knows that liberals are pedantic, self-righteous, and humorless. Their ideology is intellectually bankrupt and morally dissolute. They have been reduced to race-baiting, defending late-term abortions, and trying to sell the American public on the lie that there is something noble, praseworthy, and honorable about men porking men.

Ultimately they are on the wrong side of every issue of substance. They are still coasting on the momentum of black civil rights movement of the 1960s but they have begun to lose speed. Their constant vilification of conservative blacks whose achievements and access to power have eclipsed anything that liberal blacks can point to is proof that they beginning to panic.

[DeFault User]

Thus, we have the Democratic Party in an urn of the body politic and the scent thereof wafts forth putrified when the lid is loosened from time to time.

Good point.

Yet, they will always tells us that the stench is really new ideas that will solve our problems and promote growth.

[DeFault User]

Coincedence

noun, alt. spelling of coinkydink

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Don't forget, Democrats hold hands with the rotting National Education Association, who in their bid to keep kids under their control, pass on millions of dollars and feverishly work phones at election time.

[Lancey Howard]

Joe Isuzu might fit the bill..... After all, the only qualification is "good liar".

Okay, so Joe wasn't a very good liar but he would certainly be believed by anybody who would vote for the scumbags anyway, so why not?

[Lancey Howard]

"Hey, dude, listened to Molly Ivens new talk radio program. Purdy kewl!."

That's kidding, right? That cow Molly Ivens doesn't really have a radio show, right?

I just got a vision of that slob sitting behind a microphone, and the microphone is shaped like a ham. Uck!

[Cincinatus' Wife]

They'll cuddle up with any spin meister.

Liars, liars, pants on fire.

[BradyLS]

I am kidding. But who know what crazed thought and blank check may sail Molly's way? The 'rats are desperate to hear some 'rat chat on 'rat radio! 'RaTV ain't enough for 'em!

[Political Junkie Too]

Can't you see it coming? Bubba.

There are several problems with this:

1. Clinton will make the show about him -- he can't help it. Many Democrats want to move away from Clinton as the face of the party.

2. Callers (if he allows an ideological diversity like Limbaugh does) will make the show about Clinton. They will challenge him on his past policy decisions. Clinton will either spin or get angry at being confronted repeatedly, or deny opposition viewpoints from appearing on the show altogether. The contrast to Limbaugh's style of engaging those with opposing views would be apparent, and if not, then it would be made apparent by Limbaugh and other conservative hosts to mock the liberal attempt to duplicate them.

3. Non-political commentators don't bring the baggage of past policy decisions to the microphone the way Clinton would. Clinton will be dragged back to his administration policies repeatedly and may not be able to stay on message as consistently as a non-political host would.

Just some thoughts...

-PJ