America Divided?

[theburningliberal]

A flying squad of Vietnam Vets -- not directly related to the Bush campaign -- launched a slime attack on John Kerry's war record. A flying squad of pop musicians -- not directly related to the Kerry campaign -- announced that they would launch a massive October concert tour to save the nation from President Bush. And, of course, there was the usual array of screechers and squawkers polluting the airwaves, dominating public discourse and drowning out any hints of moderation or reason.

We are a divided nation, it is said. There is a cultural chasm between the red states, and blue, between the religious and secular, between Moore's America and Limbaugh's. The "culture war" has become a pillar of conventional wisdom.

But is it real? Is it possible that the great partisan divide is a media-induced mirage, little more than an exaggerated case of squeaky-wheelism? There is plenty of evidence that the very real disputes pushed by political activists and chair throwing media yakkers are being carelessly extrapolated to include a far less vehement populace.

Take the Moore/Limbaugh divide. A new Annenberg poll shows that the two infotainers are little more than post-modern tribal leaders: an estimated 8% of Americans saw F-9/11 in July, and an estimated 7% of Americans listened to Limbaugh's radio show. Their tribes are antithetical on a range of issues -- 83% of Rushites support the way Bush is handling Iraq, and 87% of Mooreites disapprove; 85% of Rushites support Bush's handling of the economy, 82% of Mooreites don't. And yet, these extremist clumps throw disproportionate weight in the arena of public opinion. Cheney appears on Limbaugh's show, and Moore appears in Carter's box during the DNC. But even if you double their numbers -- as some experts, like Andrew Kohut of the Pew poll do -- that leaves 7/10 of the public unaccounted for.

So what about this Culture War? Do we allow ourselves to be defined as a Mooreite or a Rushite, and then be done with it? Is there even such a thing a culture war? Is it a war between extremists that is drawing ever more Americans into it? Have we entered an era that defines American citizens into 3 groups: Uber-liberal, neo-conservative, or the vast majority of Americans who could give a damn? Is this "culture war" something that doesn't extend beyond the bounds of the politicians and the die-hard political junkies?

Ever since 9/11, we have been living in a different world. We are being forced to examine the most serious, complicated sort of issues -- war and solvency -- through an anachronistic, irresponsible political media lens created for more trivial times.

Comments?

[witeshark]

Clearly we have to watch these events develop with an awareness that there is influential intent in just about all the media

[FatherVenom]

At 8/18/04 11:12 PM, Skvnk_Hunter wrote: We are a divided nation, it is said.

That's nothing new.

Ever since 9/11, we have been living in a different world. We are being forced to examine the most serious, complicated sort of issues -- war and solvency -- through an anachronistic, irresponsible political media lens created for more trivial times.

Actually cynics and members of the intelligentia have always been doing this.

[TheShrike]

I don't think we're divided. America is becoming more and more liberal each year. Consider that Bush was only narrowly elected in 2000. That was due to apathy. What would have happened had all americans with a liberal demeanor actually voted?

There is no cultural war. The 60's had a cultural war on several fronts. All we have are front-row seats to the collapse of the republican party as we know it.

Don't be so shocked at my claim. The US has been around for a little over 200 years, and seen the rise and fall of several political parties. Including the Democrats(republicans) and the Republicans(democrats).

[RedSkunk]

Meh, everyone was just as divided when Clinton was in office.

Bush was going to come in and be a "uniter" with his "compassionate conservatism", remember?

[TheShrike]

At 8/18/04 11:31 PM, TheSkunk wrote: Bush was going to come in and be a "uniter" with his "compassionate conservatism", remember?

I remember laughing my ass off when I first heard that claim.

[Wraith]

At 8/18/04 11:37 PM, redshrike wrote: I remember laughing my ass off when I first heard that claim.

I remember thinking the new girl in the class was cute at that time.

What? I only became somewhat aware in freshman year. It hasn't even been a year yet.

[RedSkunk]

At 8/18/04 11:39 PM, -Wraith- wrote: I remember thinking the new girl in the class was cute at that time.

Yeah, but then she was..

[antiklaus]

The Red and the Blue dividing the Whites?

Ohhhh the irony.

So much for "Red White and Blue" huh?

[Lord-Humungus]

at least in america we settle our power struggles with slimey ads,rather than fighting in the streets like they do in the rest of the world!

[antiklaus]

At 8/19/04 07:14 AM, Lord_Humungus wrote: at least in america we settle our power struggles with slimey ads,rather than fighting in the streets like they do in the rest of the world!

what power struggles?

Dem or Republican - you still end up with the eilites in charge.

The power remains the same. What a perfect plan. Keep the citizens divided so they cannot be united against the folks at the top...

[MoralLibertarian]

I think September 11th has changed US politics a bit, making them more interesting and more passionate. It's not as easy to be apathetic as it once was because of all the serious world affairs we've been having. I think the reason the culture war seems bigger now is because both liberals and conservatives have grown more passionate about their ideologies.

[Lord-Humungus]

At 8/19/04 08:06 AM, antiklaus wrote:

Dem or Republican - you still end up with the eilites in charge.

Taliban or Opium Warlord......

[theburningliberal]

At 8/19/04 09:44 AM, Lord_Humungus wrote:

At 8/19/04 08:06 AM, antiklaus wrote:

Dem or Republican - you still end up with the eilites in charge.

Taliban or Opium Warlord......

Ba'athist or Kurdish or Shi'ite....

[Lord-Humungus]

At 8/19/04 01:57 PM, Skvnk_Hunter wrote:

Ba'athist or Kurdish or Shi'ite....

exactly...now you get it!...the diffrence is that in america we can decide which rich,privelaged group gets to make backroom deals to line their pockets and help their friends WITHOUT armed combat in the streets!!!!

[theburningliberal]

I dunno, I've seen some pretty nasty fights over presidential politics... I'm being serious, too.

[Lord-Humungus]

yeah...but I havn't heard any car-bombs go off over it yet...not here anyway!
Kerrys milita and bush's militas arnt shooting it out in the streets!

[antiklaus]

At 8/19/04 02:34 PM, Lord_Humungus wrote: yeah...but I havn't heard any car-bombs go off over it yet...not here anyway!
Kerrys milita and bush's militas arnt shooting it out in the streets!

we reserve those for other countries where we have installed a democracy...

[The-Enforcer]

At 8/19/04 04:52 PM, antiklaus wrote: we reserve those for other countries where we have installed a democracy...

Installing a democracy is good, antiklaus.

[bumcheekcity]

At 8/19/04 04:54 PM, The_Enforcer wrote: Installing a democracy is good, antiklaus.

Has anyone got a link to that page where it lists all those Countries America attacked since the 50s or 60s or something, that still don't have a democratic Government? I've lost the link.

[RedSkunk]

And everything called "democracy" is truely democratic. pff, hehe. Sorry... Couldn't help myself.

[theburningliberal]

At 8/19/04 04:54 PM, The_Enforcer wrote:

At 8/19/04 04:52 PM, antiklaus wrote: we reserve those for other countries where we have installed a democracy...

Installing a democracy is good, antiklaus.

Except for when it blows up in your face, like it did in Iraq, Afghanistan, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea, and so on and so forth.

[XcakerX]

what if I don't believe michael moore OR rush lintbag??

The reason why the vast majority of Americans apear "not to give a damn" is cause they really don't buy the bullshit by either side, and are sick of an increasingly narrow choice of screaming emotionalist assholes. They also don't feel there is anything to be gained by trying to talk politics anymore, it all seems to be one big grown up hike fight.

The only 0.000001% like me will ever say something about it, drunk out of their fucking skull, and ready to strangle the next asshole who gets in their face yelling the same piece of emotionalistic propiganda over and over again like a gregorian chant, as if that would ever change someones mind.

[Camarohusky]

I think that the apathy of the American public comes from just plain stupidity. The average person doesn't know how to fully utilize or understand the political system, so they just reject it.

[RedSkunk]

I think you're right Camaro. But let's call it "ignorance" rather than "stupidity" =P

We need to put more of an emphasis on the liberal arts in high school, emphasize current events and politics. This would help the problem a bit. Naturally everyone still won't be interested, but it'd be a start.

[theburningliberal]

That it would...

But how much of an impact do you honestly think trying to educate an educatable demographic will have?

[XcakerX]

At 8/20/04 01:35 AM, Camarohusky wrote: I think that the apathy of the American public comes from just plain stupidity. The average person doesn't know how to fully utilize or understand the political system, so they just reject it.

Its funny, I saw 9/11, I read almost every repetitve piece of extremist trash there is, on both the right and left.

People still think cause I ignore it cause most of it from both sides is lies, I never read it. I read it, used my brain, and decided it was full of shit and kept reading.

now if you link from a site like anti-war.com, kerryisalooser.com, or bushr00lz.com, michaelmoore.com moorewatch.com, or any extremely biased site, especially anything by a political action council(fancy work around soft-money ban), I ain't even gotta click, I know what its gonna say.

If you only read one side of the story objectively you are NOT taking in facts.

[theburningliberal]

X,

We all saw 9/11. How could we not? It was over every local and national news network for a FUCKING WEEK.

We didn't see it coming. Well, Bush did, because he got a letter from bin Laden saying that he was gonna hijack some planes on Sept 11 or 12... Plus the Aug 6 PDB.

Unless you are talking about FAHRENHEIT- 9/11. If such is the case, please say 'Fahrenheit 9/11' or 'F-9/11' so we know what the hell you are talking about.

[MoralLibertarian]

At 8/20/04 03:06 AM, theburningliberal wrote:

We didn't see it coming. Well, Bush did, because he got a letter from bin Laden saying that he was gonna hijack some planes on Sept 11 or 12... Plus the Aug 6 PDB.

He got a letter from Bin Laden? OMFG, for real? Where'd you hear that? I'm not trying to be obnoxious, I just want to know.

[antiklaus]

yeah - he got a letter.

There was an article or two on the major sites like msn about it for awhile.

In fact, Slate did sort of a comedy bit about it because it seemed so ludicrous that Bush could have known and done nothing.