"While conservative and liberal communities formulate their separate identities, [Americans] search for leaders to champion their way of life. They turn to pundits who are skilled in challenging opposing agenda's in the public realm. Conservatively, the Mainstream Personal Identifier (MPI) and liberally, the Marginal Identity Politico (MIP) process issues and agendas that propagate the confronting agenda. Each pundit embarks on a character crusade: they make appeals to the better interests and senses of the public's perception of image. If such appeals do not gain enough attention to their cause, the pundits will begin to hurl epithetical ad hominems at their target for effect, hoping that the media will exploit the moment, transform it into an event. [To make] Progress, to get a point across, pundits use a sophist's tactics: executing logic and shock plays to label their position. Not only attacking their nemesis, these polemicists prey on the audience's fears, attitudes and beliefs. The goal is to force the audience to make a decision (pro or con) about an issue (agenda item). Living for a debate, pundits essentially haggle for power over the image of the cultural center. While there is a serious competition for freedom of will, the spectacle of punditry turns conscientious controversy into sport."
- Edward K. Brown II, "Mainstream Political Identity, Marginal Identity Politics, and the Fringe" (http://www.multifest.com/essays/mpi-mip-web.pdf)
