RE: Rush, Hannity, Coulter, Fox News and - 3/16/2009 9:36:25 AM
|
|
|
StrangerThan
Posts: 1515
Joined: 4/25/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: VanessaChaland
Good point. A point I was trying to make is how disturbing it is that so many (usually in America, right wing, Fox News fans, etc) find their information from those talking heads/pundits that appeal to the lowest common denominator. Those with the least amount of education, the poorest, least capable to think for themselves and think "outside the box".
People should absorb their info from a variety of sources, the left, the right, independant, overseas, Arabic, Oriental, conservative and liberal, digest this information and draw their own conclusions. I worship/adhere to no one persons ideals or agenda. But tragically those that seem to do so, gravitate to the pundits and news organizations wherein the least amount of common sense, facts, evidence and critical thinking is encouraged and allowed. Hence my original question, why so many follow those with the least amount of credentials, intellect and are willing to defend their positions and assertions. (And no, I don't mean anyone on an unmoderated stage hurling insults or anyone talking smack between commercials, but an actual debate, not just something for soundbite fodder.) :)
quote:
ORIGINAL: SilverMark
I'd rather watch or listen to anything but, any of those mentioned....the idea that they are all so popular and so readily agreed with by so many is a bit scary.
People need to read and make their own decisions, anyone that I might not agree with but, I do respect, makes arguments and draws conclusions based on fact and does so with knowledge of a subjects ramifications.
I'll give you another perspective, if you really want one.
I listen when I travel, but what I listen to has changed over the past few years. For news itself, I was a big ABC fan with Peter Jennings. I liked his style, personality, just liked him. He was the familiar voice in my home when I watched the evening news.
In the 2000 election, I voted for Bush. I admit, I didn't follow politics much. He was a change and Gore just didn't appeal to me at all. Wasn't because of anything he did or didn't do, any environmental stance or lack thereof. He lacked something Clinton had in spades, and that being, a likability factor. I could see myself sitting down and talking trash with Clinton. With Gore? The thought kind of lent itself to a heebie-jeebie feeling. The man just seemed a bit creepy, oily, unsure and more of a hand-wringer than a decision maker. So Bush it was.
So, 9/11 rolls around. The country has been attacked and we're at war. I, like most of the country, was behind him around 100 percent when it came to invading Afghanistan. About the only, hmmm moment there was when the Taliban government asked for proof and we didn't seem to have a lot of it. But we knew, or thought we did, and most of what we thought turned out to be true. Bin Laden was behind it. Good nuff. They didn't want to turn him over, and you know, I just didn't care for the jerks anyway after watching them destroy history because it didn't jive with what they thought historical sites should portray. Again, good nuff.
Then we start the Iraq BS. By 2004, the RNC couldn't have bought my vote. I didn't care a lot for Kerry, but I voted for him. By then the stubborn, head-strong, end-around the law, stomp on the Constitution type of behavior that so characterized Bush was so evident the man and his cabinet were scary, and I desperately wanted him to lose. For whatever reason, I ended up on CBS watching the returns, and there is where I began to understand what conservatives had been complaining about for years when it came to bias. The friggin news room was in meltdown mode. I'm telling ya, if you could watch that coverage and not see a desperate desire for a Democrat to win, you'd have to be blind.
So I call up my brother, who is a pretty strong conservative and who considered me a "liberal". I put it in quotes because liberal doesn't describe political things so much to him as it describes just a general flake, freak, socialistically inclined idiot whose purpose is to destroy the US - among other things. I could go on and on and on but that's a decent summation of the view point. And in some respects, I agreed with him. But I also see the same sort of thing on the Conservative side, which he never agreed with. My comment to him was that liberals would eventually strangle the Constitution, but Conservatives would outright abolish it if given the chance. It's something I still believe.
Anyway, I call him, and concede the point, that out of mainstream media, CBS at least appeared quite biased. That was followed by the other Rather fiasco over some forged document that CBS didn't vet well enough. Quite turned into extreme about that point. I've always viewed reporters and news people as being held to the objectivity guideline. Having been a reporter, I know how difficult that is, and know how easily you can sway a piece with just a few words - and how tempting it is. After listening to him gloat for a bit, he threw out the rest. Watch ABC, NBC, CNN, watch the headlines coming across on the internet. Do it brother, he says.
So I did. Body counts. Bombs, destruction. death, critics, it was a never ending feed of bad news. I couldn't tolerate Fox long enough to watch it on my own, but to appease him, I did. The slant was in the opposite direction. Yes, some bad news, but some good news too. Progress made on this front, on that one. Yes, some soldiers died today, but there is progress. I was in the military. I know soldiers die. It's part of what we sign up for. Military people don't decide missions, don't declare wars, don't make the big decisions. We just do what we do, and what we do is kill and die. That is, I know, a simplistic sense of the military, but everyone signing that dotted line knows the military exists for that purpose and they will be trained, will be taught and may be called upon to execute that duty. You can put it in any wrapper you want, defending the country, overthrowing despots, whatever, but the bottom line is some will kill and some will die in the pursuit of that grander purpose.
At the time I was blogging, arguing, debating, writing and attacking Bush on just about every front. I didn't hate the man. I just thought he was wrong, taking our country in the wrong direction, and saw him as a danger to the freedom and liberty those men and women in uniform were killing and dying for. I never understood why the invasion of Iraq was done on false pretenses. It would have been much easier for the nation to swallow, and gotten many more people on board if it had just been a, ya know, this guy hates us, violates the treaty from the first war every instance he can, commits genocide among his own people, and may harbor and support terrorists. Let's go get him. The WMD argument was bullshit from the start and everyone knew it. If you read the UN charter though, you'll understand why WMD's were used.
So I'm on the liberal side on just about every debate. Bush, abortion, the right for the terminally ill to choose the manner of their passing, the desperate need for healthcare, the abomination that was the legislation passed over credit card debt where credit card companies wrote said legislation. The list went on and on and on. But, I'm conceding the point, that bias is out there and apparent. The more I started taking notice, the more apparent it was.
I don't like that crap. I despise spin. I'm one of those people who, if you're going to screw me over, just do it. Don't sit there and try to make me think it's something else and make me feel good about it. Just give me the facts, and do it.
At the time, I still listened to radio talk when I traveled, just not conservative talk radio. NPR, ABC, CNN, the major affillates. But at that point, what I understood was I was getting the auditory version of the same spin and same bias. I get Chris Matthews with shivers running up and down his legs at the sight of Obama. I get a lot of support in the let's wait and see type opinion for some of the same bs that generated criticism when Bush was in offfice.
It is more sickening to me to listen to that, than it is to listen to someone who doesn't give one damn that you know whose side they're on. I don't have to guess. I don't have to wonder, is this really the truth, or just the truth spun in a soft voice. I swear, if I ever hear Wolf Blitzer again, I think I'll puke. I listened to him last week babysit Richard Gere talk about why we should be spending money in Africa right now. Don't get me wrong. I support the aid organizations. Gere didn't come prepared. He wandered around for about 10 minutes talking in vaccuous and hazy terms when any good spokesman given that kind of platform should have had bullet points, been believable, followable, passionate, not presenting eyeroll and yawn material.
Rush is arrogant, egotistical, dead wrong a good bit of the time, but he has an audience and he has it for a good reason. This is something a lot of folks will never understand. It is not about him generating hate, discord or disdain for liberals. That stuff is there. Rush just taps into it and gives them a place to voice their opinions that no one else does.
I've said many times that you can't cure oppression by instigating other forms of it. If you don't understand that statement, then no matter which side of the political spectrum you sit, take off the blinders and look around. Both sides do it. And there is a growing body of skeptics in the middle who really trust neither side to actually govern this nation. We trust them to line their pockets, to pander to fringe elements, to sneak legislation through for the big donors, to lie to us, to screw us over again and again and again and try and paint it in terms that make us feel good about it, to twist voting districts to their advantage.
We're called swing voters. It's how politcal parties can go from owning 2/3 of the governing bodies in this nation to none, and both sides have done it in the past few decades.
So yes, I listen to him occasionally. I have little to no desire to listen to him for long, and absolutely none to listen to people where I have to guess what they're trying to spin for me.
_____________________________
--'Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform' - Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread