Tag: liberal

Categories
don't speak...don't speak!

Me smart?

“We will never have the elite smart people on our side.”

Not any where near elite and never considered myself smart.  Until I listened to this.  I actually, don’t think that I’m smart in the traditional sense.  But I do my best to read, read and read some more so that maybe have something behind my opinions.  Maybe?

[youtube]http://youtu.be/0n5oa55EsmI[/youtube]

Santorum also claimed “the media” and “colleges and universities” would not be “on our side” because “they want to tell you what to do.”

Interesting since I’ve been reading that the Koch brothers are donating tons of money, strings attached to colleges and universities.  Strings being their choice of faculty and curriculum.  Telling them what to do, what to teach. Maybe Santorum isn’t on the Koch email distribution list for their updates on education?

Granted my experience working in the “media” was framed in an full summer internship while in school.  As were several friends in college, during the Gulf War.  If you are in the media, you see everything.  Un-edited, un-filtered straight up news from the world.  Video feed that comes through from where ever is not edited.  It is as it happens.  That lead me to this conclusion.  If the media is “liberal”, it’s because they see everything. Un-edited and un-filtered.  So even if they never tell the whole story or tend to lean one way or the other.  Depending on the network.  It’s because they see it all.  If you saw it all, you might think or feel differently.

Categories
rant

mean people suck

I just watched this. Yes, start to finish and now my stomach is in my throat.

I’ve been trying to write a post for the last week about perception. But I keep getting confused and distracted.

From dictionary.com
1. the act or faculty of apprehending by means of the senses or of the mind; cognition; understanding.
2. immediate or intuitive recognition or appreciation, as of moral, psychological, or aesthetic qualities; insight; intuition; discernment: an artist of rare perception.
3. the result or product of perceiving, as distinguished from the act of perceiving; percept.
4. Psychology. a single unified awareness derived from sensory processes while a stimulus is present.
5. Law. the taking into possession of rents, crops, profits, etc.

I think maybe I’m easily confused? I try to be fair and descent. I admit to an ornery streak from time to time. But I do think I am descent person with reasonably logical, rational ideas and thoughts.

My thought about this, Bill O’Reilly, is the problem. To be this mean, this disrespectful to another human being is Un-American. But that’s my perception.

A friend from my youth Tweeted yesterday that while listening to “Rush” (yes, I have a friend who listens to Rush) in the car his 10 year old son said, “why does the government want to raise taxes Dad? Don’t they have enough money?” I thought, well if the government hadn’t given that top 10% a big tax break maybe they wouldn’t need to change taxes. But the “perception” is that everyone will get hit. But I keep hearing someone say, “only the top 10%”. I must be making that up? More of that perception.

I had another thought recently as well. You know the noise about the media being liberal? The “liberal media”. The media does craft the message. They do decide what we see and hear. They see and hear everything. In college I had friends that interned during the Gulf War at stations in Kansas City. The public does NOT see all the news that’s fit to anything.

My thought is that the media is liberal because they see everything and they really know what is going on, they truly know corruption. But that’s my perception.

How many times have I listened to or watched a “liberal” news report take every point of a conservative report and disputes each point with facts. Fact’s either in writing or recorded tape. I’d try to upload those hear, but don’t think my little blog has the bandwidth.

I think Bill O’Reilly is straight up, no holds barred mean. I keep going back to the “visceral hatred” comment from another friend about George W. Bush. Visceral is a pretty harsh word, he must have mean friends. I didn’t agree with much that Bush did, but don’t think any of my comments could be labeled visceral? O’Reilly in the video above, visceral. But then that’s my perception.

I am entitled to my perception, but what does that mean in reality? I can read every paper. I can listen to every news sources, but am I reading someone’s perception of what happened? My Mom says, “Your perception is developed around your intelligence and experience, I think. If you make sure you view all sides of an issue, then make up your mind according to the best information you have, that’s the best you can do.” She also said, “Listening only to Rush, Cheney, and O’Reilly and now Glen Beck would sure screw up your perception.”

So can I get a show and yell and be mean to people who voice their perceptions, get paid lot’s of money and get that great tax break?

I don’t see how the meanness or hatred solves anything. Certainly has to raise someone’s blood pressure? What does it accomplish? What purpose does it serve? Some might say, it’s entertainment. I find nothing entertaining about most of what is reported today. And why is this acceptable? Yelling at someone, talking over them, not having a “conversation” to make your bogus point. Again, my perception.

Oops, shouldn’t have gone to Huffington Post, just read this post, Cupp, who is a contributor to the Washington Post and Politico, fumed:

“This is the enduring legacy of the Obama campaign. I’m not saying this to be inflammatory, I blame Barack Obama because he allowed his surrogates in the media and Hollywood and everyone else on the left to do this dirty talking for him.”

What? She gets paid to be a journalist and thinks like this? I’m done!

Categories
rant

what’s right?

Do you watch TV? I watch TV. I’ll admit it I’m a junkie. The TV is always on. If I had the resources I’d have a wall of TV’s, four maybe six. Today four might be enough with all the crap that’s on. By crap I mean “reality” television.

Reality – dictionary.com
1. the state or quality of being real.
2. resemblance to what is real.
3. a real thing or fact.
4. real things, facts, or events taken as a whole; state of affairs: the reality of the business world; vacationing to escape reality.

Interesting. Quality, fact…what have these shows done to how we live or see the world? Is the reality an exaggeration of some altering reality? I thought that I was safe by being a news junkie. But now what happens on these shows and to the people on these’s shows is news.

You can’t pass a news cast, magazine or online news outlet with out seeing something about someone who is now famous because they can’t sing, eat bugs, can throw other’s under a bus with a smile on their face or have buckets of kids. Like these things are acceptable. Well doesn’t it? Or have these things always happened, its just now there is more coverage in the media? Hey, I’m just asking.

Why all of a sudden am I talking about this?

“Jon & Kate” Ratings Record: 9.8 Million For Season Five Premiere

And this today;

‘Jon & Kate’ Brother & Sister-In-Law: The Kids Are Being Exploited, The Parents Blinded

Hey! Where’s my fame and fortune!? So Jon’s family has now put themselves in the “spotlight”, for the sake of the children of course. I’m not going to provide links to the actual stories. If you are so compelled you can go find them on your own.

For the last month or so I kept seeing some reference to one of them having an affair (Jon or Kate) with someone. A bodyguard or…I don’t remember! And WHO CARES!!! GAD! As Mary and Earl Childs would say about the ridiculous when I was a child.

I’ve said this before, not just here. But what does this say about us as a society? That it is acceptable to humiliate, abuse and generally treat people horribly for the sake of winning something. Coming out on top for acting something unbecoming a decent human being. Also in this vein … I’m going to put it out there … wait for it … is having anything more than 2 maybe 3 at a time are these shows and the attention around them making it acceptable to have litter’s of children. You want a big family, bunch of kids and aren’t Angelina and Brad. What about adoption or foster care?

At an event I attended a couple of months ago in response to the speaker a discussion kicked off between a two people in attendance. As it started to heat up a bit the speaker said an amazing thing. He said, “stop trying to invalidate each other.”

We try so hard to be right. We try so hard to be right sometimes that we alienate and push people away. Which brings me to the question, what is right?

I have a conservative friend; yes that’s right, a conservative friend who wrote after the election, “The hatred of our prior President was visceral. It invaded everything, most especially journalism. It invaded many of the meetings I endured, small talk sessions, football games, you name it. I say let it go … What has been lifted are the complaints. For you the sky shines, birds chirp, etc., and I am deeply appreciative to have had a day without the complaints and the hatred. Thank you for this small gift you may not know you gave me.”

I thought that was interesting considering Rush, Bill and Sean. I guess for some it’s only visceral if it’s in contrast to what you believe or want to be true? And I’m a liberal so this will sound liberal; I’ve always thought that no matter who, the conservative side of the coin, or the side that gets airtime is beyond visceral. And whenever the “liberal” side of the media talks about the “conservative” talk they run through a list of error’s in fact long enough to collectively wrap around several time Rush, Bill and Sean!

He also wrote, “To my friends who learn of this and can’t separate my politics from your friendship with me, it was nice being your friend. I hope someday you heal.” He’s still my friend, I think? But doesn’t that sound just like a conservative? I hope someday YOU heal? It’s the arrogant self-righteousness I don’t care for, not the conservatism.

Sorry didn’t mean to mix a political statement in the middle of my rant about the state of television. But maybe it helps make a point about perception or impression, maybe even interpretation.

It’s the differences that people don’t seem to want to embrace. Individually, they want the world to be their world, roll the way they roll, think the way they think. Be in total agreement with their views and beliefs. Really…really??

I think it would be great if people didn’t think it was okay to humiliate other in public. To deem others unworthy of basic human rights. If society wasn’t about who had the most toys at the end. If we could have somehow kept celebrity at the movies. If “E” and “Entertainment Tonight was just that entertainment and Charlie, Katie and Brian reported “news”! Someone muddied the water’s. But then I guess that’s me imposing my idea of news on the rest of you. Sorry….

If it were about fairness, equality, patience and compassion, imagine that?

What’s right anyway? No really, I’m asking!