Ridicule as a political weapon.

[KlatooBNikto]

I think one of the unused weapons on our side is ridicule. In trying to be gentlemanly and polite, we treat the crazies on the right too earnestly and accord too much respect even when we hear their claptrap ideas. A full frontal attack with sarcasm and ridicule can be very potent especially in dealing with windbags like Limbaugh, Hannity, Krauthammer,Cheney and the like.

[bunkerbuster1]

1. Listen to Air America much?

All (well deserved) ridicule, all the time.

Anyway, I agree it has its place, but mostly to balance out the onslaught of mostly unanswered ridicule we'd taken since the Fairness Doctrine was abolished.

[skylarmae]

2. is 'playing their game' our only option to defeat these

asses and political criminals???

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

3. apparently so.

[KlatooBNikto]

4. Not really.When we give a claptrap economic idea like Supply Side

Economics a respectful hearing, we do a disservice to the many serious economists and the people who are affected by it.

To top it off a big time AH like Cheney ( A latent economist,he) says
deficits don't matter because Ronald Reagan proved that.But Ronald Reagan also proved that the earth is flat and the sun revolves around it.

[Demit]

7. Yes. The classic example of stupid, misplaced respect:

"Earth is Round--Views Differ"

[Wright Patman]

8. Greenspan actually is on record

during the last year or so of the Clinton administration expressing alarm over the projected surpluses and concern that there would not be enough deficit spending in the future to create a viable "bond market."

So it's worse than what Cheney said. Greenspan was saying deficits "do matter" in the sense that the Federal Reserve zombies need the U.S. and other governments to permanently float trillions in debt to keep us all enslaved to the bankers.

There is that other minor detail of our fiat money and credit system. Every "dollar" must be borrowed into existence. Under our system, if all debts were paid off, there'd be no "money."

[fasttense]

5. You ever wish there was another way? I mean lowering ourselves to use

their tactics. But it seems that's what Amerikans want.

[KlatooBNikto]

6. Some juicy sex scandal involving Rove, Bush and Cheney ( no! not

another nightmare!) might also come in handy.

[mogster]

9. YES!

I do this all the time in Norw.
Full frontal attack, outline their extremism, play on their prejudices, offset their views against tradition, list past transgressions repeatedly and so on.

Problem in the US seems to be:
1. There's no neutral ground where debate takes place, it is being hosted in either liberal or conservative environment
2. There is no sense of 'common' ground to appeal to - sadly, the US is truly split in two camps these days

Note: This is my impression, not a fact ;-)

Ridicule is good because it disfavors extremism. Problem is that the US has gone so far to the right since the millenium changed that the ridiculous now seems normal. It is the norm to get served hyperbole and biased facts instead of just facts from the Right, and the picture is turned upside down to such an extent that right is wrong and wrong is right.

In this intricate picture of deceit there are some neutral absolutes, however.
For instance, the US society is changing fast. There was a status quo, and then there are the people that's working aggressively to change that. (In the upside down world, to be conservative is now representing fast change. Go figure.)
To change a society fast is never smart - that used to be a neutral absolute. To change society fast in a time of danger and war is even less smart. Or used to be.

Then there's the split between Americans. There IS a split right down the middle of the American people--it's undeniable, and that split is being aided and promoted by the Neocons - not the liberals.
You lived through an event a couple of years ago that SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT YOU CLOSER TOGETHER as a people, as a nation. Instead the nation is split. Doesn't that make the US weaker? I mean, if the scare of terrorism is as real as they all say?
Is that a neutral absolute? I don't know.
In Norway it would be.

(This split is also a proof of a proto-fascist society IMHO. Ask the Norwegians about THEIR split 60 years ago, when Quisling grabbed the power as the Nazi's invaded our country. The result: A split people that hated each other's guts..)