Pepper said:
Is the sky blue in your world?
This is a perfect example of the crap you wingnuts use to deflect an ability to engage in a discussion. The sky can't be "blue" unless everyone interprets things precisely the way you do - even if that means dummying themselves down in order to relate to your own insecurity level.
I let loose with the same kind of "wingnut" names as you guys regularly do with others who dare disagree with the mantra being promoted. If you don't like that - too bad. Don't shovel shit unless you know how to accept having it thrown back.
But there is one point that I'm going to make very clear here - and that is that I worked very hard for many years for my own professional credentials, and when someone attacks that integrity from their rather limited experience in the same field, it tends to be offensive. It is rather obvious that neither Eggs nor you have much of a clue about how the media operates, including the history of the industry, and that just happens to be my area of experience. You certainly don't see me imposing myself in your profession or assuming you don't know what you are talking about in those matters. Yet the utter lack of disrespect for anyone else's expertise is not only amazing but insulting, and intentionally so. If you can't comprehend something, there's nothing wrong with asking - and it can be done without attempting to insult someone else's professional expertise.
Does that mean you aren't entitled to an opinion? No. But in that respect, I give you guys a whole lot more respect than you afford others, even when my own experience sees that opinion as misinformed or without a lot of credibility. I try to look for the idea behind that opinion, but then it often gets lost beneath the accusations of "lying" "propaganda" "bigotry" and "hatred" that, for some reason, you feel must be included in a discussion in order to be regarded as credible.
I happen to hold two degrees in print journalism, with hundreds of published articles and research studies in that field over more than 20 years of work in various parts of that industry. And, if any of you knew anything about my own research work, you'd be surprised at the levels in which I've critiqued the effectiveness of media influences in areas such as agendasetting and gatekeeping. I've worked in a "watchdog" group for years that examines inherent bias in reporting, both on the Right and the Left. I've earned the right to respect in that field. Neither you or Eggs have done so, yet you expect credibility simply because you type a sentence, even if you refuse to accept that others might know something about the subject beyond your own chosen limited scope.
I also have a tendancy to post about things I either wish to question or have some kind of knowledge about, rather than just go off on a rant about any issue because I've memorized the cliches some political party has taught me to regurgitate. That happens to be how I choose to generally participate in discussions on these forums, and yet even that becomes questioned as a tactic if I pursue a different point of view.
Last year in these forums, there were continuous threads about the political campaign and the social issues attached to them, most of which were geared toward supporting the Republican Party or attacking "liberals." Naturally, those who have that agenda had no issue with those at all, but yet feel an innate responsibility to attack any other point of view that doesn't reflect that opinion. If you need to hide behind automatic labels for people, then be adult enough to admit that insecurity.
The only thing that is relatively honest about your assessments is that you are right - I don't like George Bush, particularly in this hurricane situation. And frankly, his butt should be bashed because of his ceaseless claim to being all about a "culture of life" while he dawdled helping American citizens in a huge disaster. I understand the proportions of the storm - I know the task was monumental. But I also know that the President of the United States allowed American citizens to die of dehydration and/or starvation and/or lack of insulin in a storm-ravaged zone. And the entire world got to look at those bodies and those people stranded on rooftops while bureaucracy dragged its feet fighting over who gets to command what in the relief effort that came much too late for some people. You can bet the Governor of Louisiana and Mississippi have some things to answer for in this crisis, along with many of the mayors in this situation. But for four years, we've been spending billions of dollars on a Department of Homeland Security that is, among other things, supposed to deal with these kinds of situations. The President created this agency and appointed its directors. It fell on its ass.
I wish some conservative would explain to me when it is perfectly acceptable for the President of the United States to avoid parachuting food and water to American citizens for several days because control issues are more important than their lives. Or why we could find U.S. Marines who could get food and water and medical assistance to tsunami victims in TWO days halfway around the world when we could only manage FIVE days at home.
Do I give the Governor of Louisiana and the Mayor of New Orleans a pass for whatever mistakes they might have made? Nope. But I tend to be more willing to believe their side of things when I see the lack of sleep in their eyes, hear the fear in their voices and watch the Lt. Governor of Louisiana working on search and rescue missions while federal officials are arguing over who gets to boss who around. Ironically, I give major credit to the U.S. Coast Guard, because it seems to be the only federal department that had its act together and went right into action. Of course, upgrading their equipment has been put off another 20 years by the Bush Administration. I happen to believe that the first commitment of the American government, the American military, and the American president is the preservation of American lives. And I don't happen to think any official gets a free pass when they neglect that duty. If the idea that NO American citizen's life is the price to pay for government inefficiency is "liberal" then good. . .I'm not so willing to dismiss the President from that responsibility. And I'm not so willing to just "wait until the facts come out" - because those people who died don't get to wait for that report.
This is a federal government that, in response to publicity by right wing activists over the plight of Terri Schiavo rushed back to Washington to sign special rights legislation to give her parents more time to fight for her "life" while demonstrators chanted how she was dying of thirst and hunger. Yet, when we have thousands of Americans stranded on rooftops and in shelters experiencing the same thing, our government dragged its ass around for days because half the Cabinet was on vacation. And the agency officials in charge of the relief efforts on the federal level repeatedly came on television and LIED about what they knew about the crisis. No American should have patience for that crap.
