Simply put - Change? At whose expense?


>We all might be whining soon, Mike. And, oh man, do I so agree with you on the dumbed-down electorate. Actual conversations I had recently:
>
>Me: You're voting for Obama? Why?
>Dude: I think we need change.
>Me: Does that change include monitoring airwaves to ensure a diversity of opinion? To me that sounds like muzzling free speech!
>Dude: What do you mean?
>Me: Obama in his issues makes veiled threats against the free market in broadcasting.
>Dude: Well, heck, doesn't the FOCC make them present equal time for all viewpoints?
>Me: You mean the FCC?
>Dude: Yeah, that's what I meant. Don't they have to air all sides?
>Me: Not since 1987 when the Fairness Doctrine went away.
>Dude: Well...ummm...(conversation ends)
>
>Co-worker: Man, is Palin dumb or what. She needs some peanut-butter spread (the rest redacted ... extremely crude)
>Me: Dude, that was uncalled for! What's wrong with her?
>Co-worker: She's so dumb. She got her butt kicked in the debate and she's an idiot and inexperienced.
>Me: Inexperienced how? She's been a governor for almost two years.
>Co-worker: That's what I mean! Governor of what? Alaska? Hahaha.
>Me: And Obama has been an executive where?
>Co-worker: (More comments on Palin's anatomy that don't deserve repeating)
>
>
>And it continues. Nine out of 10 Obama supporters I have spoken to cannot name the school he was a lecturer at. These same geniuses cannot tell me what the Federal deficit is. Or whom is the president of Russia.
>
>It's like the zombies in the Return of the Living Dead Movies....BRAINS! (Substitute CHANGE!). Most of them don't even know what they are asking for.
>
>Bread and circuses.
>
>>We have had this discussion before. The entire newspaper industry is dying, and it doesn't have much to do with objectivity. It has a lot to do with a dumbed down populace which gets its information elsewhere or chooses to be uninformed.
>>
>>Of course John is entitled to his opinion. I just don't want to talk politics with him any more. Well, at least not until after the election, when he will REALLY be whining, LOL.
>>
>>>Mike, you're being thin-skinned. The NYT being pro-Obama to an extreme is not news to anyone. In fact, their loss of objectivity is probably why the subscriber numbers are plummetting as they are losing the trust factor.
>>>
>>>John is welcome to his opinion, isn't he? One thing for sure, Obama is the most unvetted, uninvestigated Presidential candidate in modern media history and that leaves a lot of doors open for interpretation.
>>>
>>>>>>http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/04/palin.obama/index.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>Who didn't expect the NYT to go on defense for their candidate. They are trying to create confusion as to whether or not Obama is untrustworthy. I already convinced, he can't be trusted with the garbage, much less our country.
>>>>
>>>>You already convinced? You were born convinced. Over and out with you on politics. We have had a meal together and I think you're a good guy but you and me and politics don't mix. Be well.