The New McCarthyism

[Political Troublemkr]

Here is a video I just put together on a New McCarthyism rampant throughout the media today. It comes in response to that: Woman Who Called Obama a Communist video that swept the Internet last week after the Vice Presidential debates. I attempt to put her words into context, so that at least it's understood where she got that crazy idea from.

Hope you all like it!

[no_hypocrisy]

1. Welcome to DU.

Great vid

[Political Troublemkr]

2. Thanks!

[fasttense]

3. I think I'll embrace the Communist label since

it really has no meaning in the context of the slurs that RepubliCONS use.

[midnight]

4. K&R

[SamKnause]

5. The New McCarthyism

Nice job !

Welcome to the Democratic Underground.

[Sam1]

6. Good summation of the subject!

[Plucketeer]

7. Welcome to DU!

This is a great video. Sure glad you posted it here.

[Political Troublemkr]

8. Thanks to everyone who enjoyed it!

[AsahinaKimi]

9. Nicely done

welcome to DU!

[HopeHoops]

10. Very well done. Thank you. K&R

[Political Troublemkr]

11. Already getting downvotes over at youtube

Guess some conservative didn't like the message. lol

[november3rd]

12. There's Nothing More Pitiful Than a Coward

If they were honest about their own support for democracy and freedom, they wouldn't try to repress people who disagreed with them. They would let the anti-democratic and anti-freedom ideas self-destruct in the free exchange of ideas during our open, democratic political discourse.

So McCarthy, Gingrich, Bachmann and the Fox pundits are the real enemies of freedom. Instead of promoting freedom of expression to let American values assert themselves in open political and economic debate, they try to suppress the ideas they oppose with lies, scare tactics, and phony laws, hijacked government procedures.

Besides, Soviet Russia never approached Communism until Gorbachov. Stalin was just a psychotic paranoid murderer who never believed in anything but control-by-terror.

So, in the United States, not only was discussion and information about Communism suppressed to the point where Americans at all levels of society were entirely misinformed about its nature, but Communism as practiced in those countries that embraced it was more like a fascist state, that would have been unrecognizable to Marx.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

13. I love videos like this because they are great Moran bait on YouTube....

.....here fishy fishy fishy.....

[ProudProgressiveNow]

14. Bravo! K&R

[Sam1]

15. From the response it seems that we are eager to see the next one

[Political Troublemkr]

16. For sure.

I have a voting rights one in the pipeline which focuses on studies published by the Brennan Center for Justice on how VoterIDs restrict access. I have another one on media bias. And I have a third in the formative stage on the drug war, where I want to contrast the British Opium Wars with China to current domestic drug policy.

[markpkessinger]

17. Good video . . .

. . . with terrific content and narrative. But if I may, I'd like to offer a stylistic observation/suggestion . . .

The delivery style of the voice-over comes across as needlessly staccato and stilted, at times even robotic, what with its unusual word stresses and ... each ... word ... strangely ... detached ... from ...every ... other ... word. I assume you use this style in the interest of clarity, and I realize there is a school of thought in broadcasting that encourages that detached style. But that kind of radio announcer style is a holdover from the days when AM radio was King. When one is trying to deliver words over the snaps, crackles and pops of AM radio, allowing each word to stand alone in a distinct aural space from the words that precede or follow helps to ensure that each word will be heard, and thus enhances the listener's ability to understand the message. But with today's MUCH clearer audio standards, both for recording and broadcast, that old-fashioned style comes across as an affectation (and a mildly annoying one at that). While clear enunciation is as important as it ever was (and you, or whoever it was speaking on the video, already speak in a very clear manner), it makes far more sense nowadays to speak in smooth, fluid phrases, with very brief separations between those phrases, instead of micro-separations between individual words., and with the same word stresses and pitch variations one would use in normal, everyday speech. Phrasing, word stress and pitch rises and falls all serve as aural cues to the listener as to the intended meaning, and thus enhance clarity and comprehension.

I would suggest that instead of emulating reporters who themselves sound stilted and robotic in their delivery, consider emulating instead the speaking style of narrators in really good documentaries. Think of a Michael Moore or a Werner Herzog, each of whom narrates his documentaries in a manner very much like each one's normal speaking style. I believe if you were to do that on this video, the end product would both come across as being of a more professional quality, and would more effectively communicate your intended message.

Anyway, these are just suggestions, and I hope you won't take offense at my presumption in offering them. Take them or leave them as you wish.

Oh, and . . . keep up the good work!