On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote:
> That's just it -- both sides want the distraction, because the facts > do not serve either candidate. Both guys do better if we're talking > about Obama drinking beer or bad speeches by Dirty Harry or the > weather or sports. And the media follows along in lock-step formation. > Jon Stewart humorously calls them out on their lies, but nobody > seriously suggests those in power who lie ought to resign, nor do they > order those who are running for the highest office in the land to have > their facts checked. The media just accepts these blatant hand-fakes > with the sort of "everybody does it" attitude. And everybody does it > because we don't have journalists who hold those in power accountable. > I do not agree that this is it. Obama is well served if the country is distracted from Romney's speech last night - but Romney is not well served at all - he is hurt, and potentially hurt badly by it. Two weeks from now Romney will be well served if the country is somehow distracted by a great speech that Obama might give by some triviality, but Obama would be greatly hurt by it. Romney was behind in the polls before the convention, and most experts saw the election as close, but Obama's to lose. Romney had to change the game, and get his message out to persuadable voters, and the convention is still the single most effective way to do that. Nothing that happens between now and election day will have as much impact on voters as these two conventions (unless something unexpected and dramatic happens in the real world, like a war or another economic collapse). Romney picked Ryan in part to maximize his impact this week, and got screwed (through no fault of his own) by getting cheated out of a day of coverage by the hurricane, and now (to a much smaller degree), but a rogue, off-script actor. > > [SNIP] A month ago when everybody talked about eating chicken or boycotting > chicken, nobody bothered to report on the number of assaults and > murders against homosexuals, nobody reported how many gays committed > suicide while serving our country in the military, nobody reported > about a child made to feel like his parents are dirty or evil or > broken because his parents happen to be the same gender. And it is > funny/sad that if you talk to both sides about that day, they both > think they won. More harm was done to America that day than by the > events of 9/11 -- not just to the gay community, but to those of any > group or any issue who value substantive debate. Two sides who have > reasons for believing as they do decided, reason be damned, we're > gonna put on a minstrel show and dance. And the media ate it the f*ck > up. > > > I agree that the Chik-Fil-A wars were silly (I had actually never heard of Chik-Fil-A before that, so for me it was just a lot of free advertising for them), but it is not true that nobody bothered to report about the suidice and other negative consequences of homophobic bullying. I read a couple of stories about the chicken wars, but I read dozens of stories during that time period about the effect of bullying, and participated in lots of substantive debates and discussions with a wide range of people for whom the chicken wars put the issue on their radar for the first time. I am in negotiaion with at least one school to get an anti-bullying program in place this fall, and several others are at least talking about it for the first time (these are private, very conservative Christian schools). -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
