Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Ignorance of American Political History Both Now And Then


The Really: Are we really as ignorant as they say we are?

For the most part, the masses are certainly guilty of displaying ignorance as far as their American political history goes but is it their fault? Shouldn’t the elite take it upon themselves to educate the masses so they can best understand what elites are doing? Or would the elite still be elite if the masses had even half of the American political history savvy as they do?

I personally believe the masses need to educate themselves, however, I also believe that it is incumbent upon the elite to promote general knowledge of the whos, whats, whys and whens of our political history. When people are educated about something they have the capacity to apply critical thinking to it. If the masses were all Rhodes Scholars or even in the 50th percentile of knowing about American political history the elites would have a lot of explaining to do.

Just take a look at our media. For the most part our media is comprised of semi educated and very educated individuals that are tasked at times with asking our elite, in this case political figures hard questions about exactly what they are doing. It is our media that may not discover, but tends to exploit and educate the masses when the elite are not doing the "right" thing.

Take the war in Iraq, the Enron scandal, President Bill Clinton’s abuse of power with intern Monica Lewinsky or President Bush’s use of illegal wire taps post 9-11. We leave it up to the press to basically educate the masses so that the masses have some idea why what the press is reporting is important. Example. When current President George Bush signed a bill in 2007 that temporarily revised federal electronic surveillance laws, he didn’t come out and explain to the masses what he was doing.

There was no Oval Office or Rose Garden speech about why he was doing this or how it may affect our right to privacy and freedom of speech. It was and probably always will be up to ourselves or our advocates, in this case the press, to inform the masses of what is going on and why it affects us. CNN wrote an article explaining that Bush had signed this bill into law and what it meant in regards to the affect it would have on the masses. This is a perfect case of the elite keeping our masses ignorant of their political history so that they can go about their business and just think of the few who actually read this article or anything about it.

Think for a moment, if George W. Bush had gone on national TV and said, “I am going to sign a bill into law that basically gives the Federal Government the power to listen to any of your phone conversations and take away your 1st and 4th amendment rights as American Citizens” do you think it might have been a little bit more difficult to sign that bill into law?

I do. I think when people are educated they participate. I think when the press or our elite want to us to be educated about our political history they do everything in their power to shove it in our faces so we have to know. They, the elite, tend to only do this when they strongly believe that they need to be seen as having public support for something such as the War on Terror. When the current administration went out to the public, they used radio, TV, news papers and any other possible avenue to reach the public to inform the masses of the impending doom that awaited us if we did not allow them to act.

Right or wrong, for may Americans only in a few cases such as the War on Terror, Bill Clinton's possible impeachment and now the economic crisis do the masses pay any attention to current or past American political history.

Ultimately it is up to ourselves to be educated about our American political history although it would be nice if we had some non biased help from our privileged elite. Maybe we can pass a law that states if you are elected to government office part of your job is to educate your constituents. Don’t hold your breathe…

The Father Of US Political Mudslinging


The Really: This election seems very nasty compared to those in the past.

Well, not really. And if you guessed Karl Rove, you are a couple of hundred years off. But as people who watched the HBO John Adams know, it is one James T. Callender.

Like the political spinners of our time, James didn't care which side he worked on. He attacked Adams when Jefferson hired him to do so and later attacked Jefferson when in the employ of someone else. They threw him in jail; but he got out.

Often when the spinners come on the CNN, FOX, MSNBC shows, it is useful to have a scorecard, because no one goes on these shows without a motive. It is nice to know after cleaning off all the muck that somewhere James T. Callender is smiling as he sees his chosen profession has blossomed and been perfected into an art.

Monday, October 6, 2008

Sarah Palin's End Of Days


The Really: The economic meltdown is killing the McCain bid for the White House?

Conventional wisdom ( which seems an oxymoron these days) is that the economic downturn, or New Great Depression if you like, is dooming the McCain campaign but Sarah Palin appearing dressed in all white like an Aimee Semple McPherson wannabe seems very happy at a campaign rally this morning chiding the Four Horseman: Barack Obama, Joe Biden, The New York Times and the MSM (Main Stream Media) and Bill Ayers. The woman who believes Jesus will come back in her lifetime must truly feel like one of the chosen ones as the market opened Monday October 6 nearly -500 points down.

It must all be part of a plan, though we think God's plan has less to do with it rather than unbridled de-regulation and typical American consumer debt debt and mortgage habits: plenty of blame to go around for both Democrats and Republicans. But the strident, nasty tone (maybe it is just the Fargo accent?) which Palin has embraced seems to play well to the Left Behind people.

But Aimee ended up being exposed as an Elmer Gantry and markets go up as well as down so the End of Days may not be nigh, unless you listen to cable news all day long (which could give you hives as well.) Or maybe if you are part of the "still here" crowd you agree with one of the offspring of the New York Times founders who wrote on his Facebook page: "Sarah Palin Can Suck A D***."

Update: The "Aimee" connection is apparently not that much of a stretch: Dependable Renegade.

The Angriest Man


The Really: Is John McCain really just an angry old man? Is Sarah Palin just a pit-bully?

On This Week with George Stephanopoulos a visibly perturbed George Will (the Cubs lost all three of their playoff games and will once again NOT win the World Series) stated that "America does not elect angry men as leaders." No friend of the pick of Sarah Palin as VP, Will does hold an honored place in the pantheon of conservative commentators so when he says "angry" will not play and pit-bullyness will not win, one has to take it to heart.

The smeary, angry and super-neg week that is now upon us got off to a good start when Sarah Palin accused Obama of "palling around" with Weatherman bomber boy Bill Ayers even though he has been rehabilitated and even forgiven by the son of Richard Daley, the current Mayor for Life of Chicago: Dickie Daley.

Ian Speigelman at Gawker has a nice piece on the sophisticated neg McCain is capable of which is both angry and amusing.
But rather than try to point out the how badly the "Ayers" connection will not hunt in this race, it is instructive that the last time America suffered through a long term economic crisis (and this one looks to have legs) it was the calm reassurance from the fireside chat of FDR that got America through, and resembles the current calm, even Presidential demeanor of Barack Obama.

Maybe the McCain campaign has to go super-neg (even against his own desire not to engage in this kind of politics) but is there any other choice at this point?