Replies

Is that what it called Rote rage or was that a flupah? Had to read the article to see if it was about road or steroid rage. : ) Scooby Doo speak: Rote row rage.

2 posted on March 28, 2010 10:17:19 PM EDT by Global2010

I HATE rote rage......having to memorize vulgarity and hand gestures....drives me Crazy!

Improving the political discourse resides in the hands of the political majority. Thus far, they have proven themselves unable or (more likely) unwilling to do so. Their rage is rote, not real, and it does none of us any good.
The writer's use of "rote" has reference to the fact that it is routine SOP for the Democrats to respond to opposition by going ad hominem on those who oppose them, in order to evade having to engage in debate on the merits.
What the writer leaves unsaid, and what I consistently insist on making explicit, is that the Democrats are able to get mileage out that tired tripe, whereas the Republicans cannot, and seldom or never even try it. For the simple reason that the Democratic Party exists in symbiosis with Big Journalism. It now amazes me to realize how long it took me to even identify that fact, let alone analyze the obvious reasons for it.
Big Journalism is in the business of selling the "sizzle" of objectivity and important information - and delivering the "steak" of pandering to our jealousy and base instincts. They claim the mantle of "the public interest" when they are merely delivering superficial and negative fluff systematically designed only to interest the public - which a different matter entirely. Big Journalism can be understood and referred to as a single entity for the simple reason that the newspapers were homogenized by the economics of the Associated Press, membership in which is expensive and the value of which must therefore be maximized. In consequence of which, the various organs of Big Journalism are like the various teams of Major League Baseball - competitive is delivering their product, but cooperative in promoting that product. It is always essentially the same product. So it it nothing to marvel at when journalists say that journalism is objective - of course they would say that. But that claim is self-negating, for the simple reason that subjectivity is the opposite of objectivity, and subjectivity is nothing other than a belief in one's own objectivity.
So the question is not "Why would journalism be in symbiosis with the Democratic Party," the only question is why a politician would not be in symbiosis with journalism. So it appears that the Republican Party, flawed as it is, must actually have some principle which separates it from the symbiosis with journalism which is enjoyed by Democrat politicians.
Journalism and Objectivity
The Right to Know
Why the Associated Press is Pernicious to the Public Interest
The Market for Conservative-Based News
Why Broadcast Journalism is Unnecessary and Illegitimate