Monday, January 17, 2011
Loudmouths and Sarah Palin
Has hell frozen over? Joy Behar, out from The View all last week, rejoined the ladies this week and had her first chance to chime in on the Sarah Palin craze. Most liberals in the media (so basically, 95% of all major media) blame Sarah Palin's brand of politics for the Tucson shooting. Joy Behar, however, made me about fall out of my chair this morning. She stated that she does not blame Sarah Palin. Joy recognizes that it's a dangerous road to blame Palin because that same microscope has to be put on everyone else that expresses any kind of opinion in public. Joy admitted that she herself is a loudmouth, just like Palin, and that every loudmouth out there will have to be looked at. I can't believe I'm saying it but Joy Behar is actually the voice of reason on this issue. Too bad the major media doesn't agree.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Civil Discourse Starts With Our Media
Is anyone besides me feeling like common sense is gone and double standards and irrationality has taken over? I've been watching the media firestorm over the Tucson shootings. When I found out the injured congresswoman was a democrat, I knew that within 24 hours the mainstream media would be blaming Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and the right wing. I was right on who they were blaming, but they came out swinging much more quickly than I had anticipated. Within hours of the shooting the accusations were flying against Palin and the "vitriol". Isn't it nice that the "vitriol" on the left has somehow escaped scrutiny?
Palin endured a media firestorm for days and other than a message of condolence, she stayed silent on the accusations against her. Anyone with common sense and rational thinking skills (or any truly "objective" journalist) would know that you don't start pointing the finger until you have some idea of who the shooter is and what his motivations might be. As we've seen from the evidence that has since come out, Loughner appeared both apolitical and very disturbed. But that didn't stop the MSM from continuing to point the finger at the "vitriol" from Palin and talk radio, and they are now pushing for the Fairness Doctrine. Have they no shame? Will they politicize absolutely everything?
I've digressed. Palin stayed quiet for days while multiple news outlets and personalities had their say about her and accused her for being complicit in the shooting. Finally, Palin releases an 8 minute video in defense of herself. And the insanity ensued.
One alphabet soup network declared that Sarah had managed to interject herself again into a news story. Um, didn't the rabid left interject her into a story that had absolutely nothing to do with her? And so Palin defending herself is "interjecting herself"? Another alphabet soup accused her of playing the victim card. Again, how can she defend herself against wild, unfounded accusations that are coming from every single mainstream news outlet without sounding like a victim? What defense could she have given that would shut the talking heads up? And do the talking heads of all these outlets not realize they are fueling the fire that they are claiming is destructive? By having so much power through the media, they render the rest of us powerless, and powerlessness leads to desperation to be heard, as well as anger at the insanity and injustice of it, and the divisiveness continues.
I just saw the the New York Times compared both Palin's "speech" and Obama's "speech". The two cannot be compared. Obama was not accused of being complicit in the shooting; Palin was. Obama is our elected leader; Palin is not. Obama was giving a speech at a memorial service (does anyone besides me question why on earth he went down there?) and Palin released a video defending herself. Yet the Times deemed it necessary to compare the two speeches. Now, I know most people will be surprised by the Times' summation, but they found Obama's speech to be inspirational (implied) and Palin's to be an example of the "vitriol" that the MSM had been talking about.
I want a MSM that will treat both the right and the left equally. Currently the MSM are acting as though the left has never engaged in over the top antics, violent images, and vitriolic rhetoric. If the MSM truly cares about the discourse in our country, they could go along way towards healing if they would just treat the right and the left the same. But right now they are so predictably against the right that I was able to predict exactly who they would blame for the shooting since it was a Democrat that had been targeted. (And I find it sad that they have given barely a mention of the conservative justice that lost his life that day)
Despite their shallow pleas for a more civil discourse in our country, unless they are willing to look in a mirror at their own actions, the MSM is going to find that the discourse will most likely get worse as they use their power to favor one side over another and dole out misinformation and unfounded accusations.
Palin endured a media firestorm for days and other than a message of condolence, she stayed silent on the accusations against her. Anyone with common sense and rational thinking skills (or any truly "objective" journalist) would know that you don't start pointing the finger until you have some idea of who the shooter is and what his motivations might be. As we've seen from the evidence that has since come out, Loughner appeared both apolitical and very disturbed. But that didn't stop the MSM from continuing to point the finger at the "vitriol" from Palin and talk radio, and they are now pushing for the Fairness Doctrine. Have they no shame? Will they politicize absolutely everything?
I've digressed. Palin stayed quiet for days while multiple news outlets and personalities had their say about her and accused her for being complicit in the shooting. Finally, Palin releases an 8 minute video in defense of herself. And the insanity ensued.
One alphabet soup network declared that Sarah had managed to interject herself again into a news story. Um, didn't the rabid left interject her into a story that had absolutely nothing to do with her? And so Palin defending herself is "interjecting herself"? Another alphabet soup accused her of playing the victim card. Again, how can she defend herself against wild, unfounded accusations that are coming from every single mainstream news outlet without sounding like a victim? What defense could she have given that would shut the talking heads up? And do the talking heads of all these outlets not realize they are fueling the fire that they are claiming is destructive? By having so much power through the media, they render the rest of us powerless, and powerlessness leads to desperation to be heard, as well as anger at the insanity and injustice of it, and the divisiveness continues.
I just saw the the New York Times compared both Palin's "speech" and Obama's "speech". The two cannot be compared. Obama was not accused of being complicit in the shooting; Palin was. Obama is our elected leader; Palin is not. Obama was giving a speech at a memorial service (does anyone besides me question why on earth he went down there?) and Palin released a video defending herself. Yet the Times deemed it necessary to compare the two speeches. Now, I know most people will be surprised by the Times' summation, but they found Obama's speech to be inspirational (implied) and Palin's to be an example of the "vitriol" that the MSM had been talking about.
I want a MSM that will treat both the right and the left equally. Currently the MSM are acting as though the left has never engaged in over the top antics, violent images, and vitriolic rhetoric. If the MSM truly cares about the discourse in our country, they could go along way towards healing if they would just treat the right and the left the same. But right now they are so predictably against the right that I was able to predict exactly who they would blame for the shooting since it was a Democrat that had been targeted. (And I find it sad that they have given barely a mention of the conservative justice that lost his life that day)
Despite their shallow pleas for a more civil discourse in our country, unless they are willing to look in a mirror at their own actions, the MSM is going to find that the discourse will most likely get worse as they use their power to favor one side over another and dole out misinformation and unfounded accusations.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Well, apparently George W Bush's memoir is selling more copies than Bill Clinton's memoir did. As you can imagine, this has liberals in a tizzy, looking for an explanation. After all, conservatives don't read, and everybody hates GW, right? So, one of the explanations being touted is that people like to read about people they hate. Amazing how I've never heard this explanation for books by Barack. In liberals' minds, it is impossible for a conservative to be liked, especially one that they hate so much. If they would ever step out of their bubble and visit "flyover country" they would meet the millions that love GW. Liberals have wrongly equated a low approval rating with hatred for the former president.
There are many people that disapproved of GW's leadership as president, but still like the man himself. I believe that polling questions should have been more elaborate during his presidency. Do you approve of the job the president is doing? If no, do you think he needs to be more conservative, more moderate, or more liberal? I think the answers to those questions would have been very telling. Liberals are always going to hate a Republican president, always, so we can expect low approval numbers from them. When a Republican fails to act conservatively, then conservatives are going to disapprove of his job performance as well. I believe that conservatives disapproved of GW's job performance because he did not veto any spending bills, and sent our country on the path of a spending frenzy. Although, compared to the current administration, GW looks downright fiscally conservative. But, with Democrats controlling Congress for GW's last 2 years of office, conservatives expected some vetoes of the outrageous spending bills, and he didn't do that, so we disapproved of his job. Didn't mean we didn't like him and wouldn't look forward to reading his memoir; it just meant we wished he would govern as a conservative.
I know this will be a hard concept for the elite liberals to grasp, so they will continue to cling to their nonsensical explanations and paint the rest of us as stupid. But, the rest of us know that job approval does not equate to hatred of the president, and we will continue to lift sales of GW's memoirs to downright inexplicable numbers for the liberals:0)
There are many people that disapproved of GW's leadership as president, but still like the man himself. I believe that polling questions should have been more elaborate during his presidency. Do you approve of the job the president is doing? If no, do you think he needs to be more conservative, more moderate, or more liberal? I think the answers to those questions would have been very telling. Liberals are always going to hate a Republican president, always, so we can expect low approval numbers from them. When a Republican fails to act conservatively, then conservatives are going to disapprove of his job performance as well. I believe that conservatives disapproved of GW's job performance because he did not veto any spending bills, and sent our country on the path of a spending frenzy. Although, compared to the current administration, GW looks downright fiscally conservative. But, with Democrats controlling Congress for GW's last 2 years of office, conservatives expected some vetoes of the outrageous spending bills, and he didn't do that, so we disapproved of his job. Didn't mean we didn't like him and wouldn't look forward to reading his memoir; it just meant we wished he would govern as a conservative.
I know this will be a hard concept for the elite liberals to grasp, so they will continue to cling to their nonsensical explanations and paint the rest of us as stupid. But, the rest of us know that job approval does not equate to hatred of the president, and we will continue to lift sales of GW's memoirs to downright inexplicable numbers for the liberals:0)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)