GOP: R.I.P.?

Townhall.com ^ | January 29, 2013 | Cal Thomas

[Sivad]

Nice post Windflier but I am not talking conservative vs conservative
lite. I am talking about having enough moxy to challenge the falla-
cious premises about us as advanced by the left. Gringrich does
that from time to time but I personally don’t trust him as a conser-
vative. Political Conservatives of all degrees drop the ball in my
book. We just have to own a larger piece of the information indus-
try as I see it.

[Windflier]

I am talking about having enough moxy to challenge the falla- cious premises about us as advanced by the left.

Well, I can think of lots of conservatives who do exactly that, whenever they get a chance, but as you said, our side doesn't have a large enough piece of the information industry to get through to the low info voters.

I've often wondered why the Koch brothers (or a pool of conservative investors) haven't invested in a television network that could give real conservatives a media platform. I personally think it's a business concept that can't fail to generate profits, and they're supposedly staunch conservatives - so what's the hold up?

[Sivad]

That’s what I’m talkin’ ‘bout......partially. We need a consortium
of conservative investors to purchase an EXISTING media outlet
(NBC, CBS, ABC?). My idea does not include providing a platform
for “real” conservatives. That does nothing but make folks like
you and I feel good. I’m talking power, here. I say that on a LEVEL
playing field conservatism wins EVERY DAMN TIME. I would
like to see all sides presented fairly....no bias, period. The opinion
programs would include responsible partisans from all
directions. Why does it need to have conservative ownership/
management? Because conservatives understand the concept
of objectivity and liberals can’t.

[napscoordinator]

lol. I had a laugh over your post. I thought I was a bit over the top but what the heck.

[Windflier]

I would like to see all sides presented fairly....no bias, period. The opinion programs would include responsible partisans from all directions.

You're describing the Fox News channel of the early 2000s. That formula made them number one in cable news, but they slid left over time, and now aren't a whole lot different than any other Obama suck up media.

Personally, I think the "fair and balanced" approach was doomed to failure. It gave equal credence to arguments from the left, which are based upon fallacies, lies, and dysfunction. When Fox allowed the liberals in their house, they sealed their fate.

I'm not interested in 'objectivity' where it comes to lies, failure, and a destructive political ideology.

[Windflier]

I had a laugh over your post. I thought I was a bit over the top but what the heck.

A raspberry is 'over the top'? Gee, maybe you should report me to the mods for abuse .. < rolls eyes >

[Sivad]

You and I will just just have to disagree on this tho I consider
you a friend. Preaching to the crowd doesn’t make for converts.
You know that FOX was only going to be able to go only so
far because it is cable. The problem w/FOX and the rest is
they don’t think the consumers have any degree of attention
spand and trot out idiots (ie Hannity) to explain important
Imformation.

You know, the lies and distortions you and I see every day, Wind,
are not seen that way by many others like many of what try are
calling “low information voters”. I say put the arguments side
by side. If we still lose then I just might have to seek foreign
realestate.

[Windflier]

Preaching to the crowd doesn’t make for converts.

Of course there's truth in that statement, but if there were a staunchly conservative (i.e., fact, logic, and reason based) television news and information channel, it would attract some liberal eyeballs - if only so they could see what 'the enemy' is up to.

Some of those liberals would soon find themselves wagging their heads in agreement with us, and some would even absorb enough facts, reason, and logic, that they'd find their way off the left-liberal mind control plantation.

Just as FR doesn't provide a platform for liberals to spout their lies and destructive theories, I think a conservative television channel would be well served by the same policy. The left has hundreds of established media outlets under their control. Those outlets rarely allow an unadulterated conservative view to be aired. If we're unwilling to have even ONE conservative media outlet, then our message will remain with 'the choir'.

I say put the arguments side by side.

That's fine, but if the one and only conservative media outlet meets the libs halfway, it will eventually be poisoned, just as Fox News was.

[napscoordinator]

No that is not really what I said. I was saying that my original post was over the top and that you reply to it was funny as he!!. Have a good one!

[Sivad]

I think we can agree that liberalism is about emotion and can
be explained in a few words while conservatism is about thinking
and needs details. I agree with you about your educational approach
and that is certainly something that could be included within the
concept I suggest. The libs would have their programing too. Even
tually some of those viewers will figure out they are really
conservatives. Also, I envision a debate format program more
sophisticated than the old Crossfire scream-off.

I would like to make new conservatives and I don’t think you
get there by re-producing FOX for network TV. You just get
the FOX label. FR is fine for we believers. To convert libs or fence-
sitters to the light side, however, isn’t part of its’ mission. You
can’t smack ‘em in the face and expect immersion conversion.

I too am concerned about liberal poisoning. I know what libs did
to AARP, the League of Women Voters, and any non partisan
institution with political potential. They takeover and still wave
the banner of objectivity. That is why it takes conservatives to
start and maintain such an enterprize.