At What Point Can We Stop Taking Republican Argument Seriously?

How long does the mainstream media have to pretend that Republican commentary is in any way serious? It frames the discourse of this country in a ludicrous context that is undeserving of critical debate. When you observe Republican argument it is devoid of constructive rational input and centers around hate and pronouncements of doom designed to rattle their audience. I would like to note that all conservative argument is devoid of merit; it's just that the current way the Republican party is approaching its duties in that matter are not serious.
It's gotten to the point where I don't even mentally try to counter the arguments I hear Republicans make because I don't believe the people saying them could even mean them. They aren't things that someone who is rational and out to seriously benefit society would say. It's really entertainment and how do you defeat an entertainer? By ignoring them. That is they only way that you can defy the Republican talking heads. There's a precedent for their message in history and it is frightening. Such messages of doom and national entitlement are seductive especially in times of economic hardship. This fact should be recognized and the Republicans should be denied a serious platform until they stop talking crazy. They have nothing to offer. Their arguments are half hearted and stagnant yet as a whole shocking- they do it in a way that draws a crowd. Is that as good as American politics is ever going to get? I hope not. Here are several examples of Republicans making meaningless comments designed to entertain.

Newt Gingrich:
"White man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw."

What a provocative statement. You'd think that if someone would make such a comment it would be undeniably true, right? Well, Republicans like Gingrich like take things completely out of context. There's no way anybody can confuse what she was saying as racist. Her point was that her experiences of rising in a society as a minority gives her a perspective on things that is in some ways richer than a person that is from the dominant group of society that never having encountered racism. This leader of the Republican party is throwing around pretty big accusations like racism and he should know better. It is clear he isn't trying to make any serious contribution to political debate in this country. Why should someone who is so disingenuous be taken seriously?

"Obama has already failed"
Gingrch said this in regards to Obama's stimulus spending and government interventions to save the economy. Saying something so ignorant and having it be given serious consideration is astonishing as such a claim is patently false. Obama's policies haven't had a chance to even take effect. It doesn't help the country if they don't yet going around claiming they have already failed is dispiriting and harmful. Would you hold it against a caterpillar for not yet being a butterfly? That is basically what Newt Gingrich is doing to Obama's policy. In fact that is the whole problem with the American system. Everything that is profitable isn't profitable immediately. Newt Gingrich knows better and his words have value as an entertainment tool. He is not even debating; he is just trying to be destructive.

Sean Hannity:
Sean Hannity cropped an Obama speech in the context of- "I am aware that there are still some that would question or even justify the events of 9-11."

Hannity said President Obama "decided to give 9-11 sympathizers a voice on the world stage." Again, it was another example of the Republicans knowingly making absurd irresponsible actions to frighten and confuse people. If he's reporting on it, he should know that Obama was condemning people that would justify the events of 9-11. This is not a serious argument but it could convince a lot of people that the president is excusing 9-11. It is disingenuous reporting. How do you argue with someone that isn't even making any serious claims but trying to create a stir. I believe that you can only ignore them.

Sarah Palin:
Sarah recently attacked Obama saying, "When you consider that the federal government is about $11 trillion in debt, and we're borrowing more to spend more ... it defies any sensible economic policy any of us ever learned through college,"
Actually anybody that has studied economics at even a high school level would know that the way to get out of a depression is by spending. By investing in your own society -- building roads, damns, and schools -- you will be able to function better as a society and thus have more value as a people. Palin might be excused because she doesn't know any better than to spurt out ignorance. How lucky she is that there's an audience for it. Not being purposely deceitful does not mean however that she should not be ignored especially when what she is saying is so undeniably stupid. Many people in America don't know that she doesn't have a clue as to what she's talking about and that is why she's so dangerous.

Other examples I decided to ignore were Bill O'Reilly, Dick Cheney, John Boehner, and Michael Steele just to name a few.

If a doctor approached healing the way some of our journalists and politicians approach their duties they would be prevented from ever practicing medicine again. Why shouldn't we hold the people that direct the functioning of our society accountable?

Comments

[HeevenSteven]

Spot on John. There has been an enormous failure of leadership, both in the Republican party and the news media.

[Parducci]

This is a very confusing post. First, when was it that the mainstream media took the "Republican commentary" seriously. And exactly what is it in your background that would qualify you as a member of the MSM?