Monday, July 09, 2007


I think this is a good post to read regarding characterizations by the press. It shows a broad perspective on something that is constantly a thorn in any Democratic campaign. The press will always show the Republican as a strong manly man with very serious ideas while in contrast the Democrat is always sidled with weakness, lack of connection with their base constituency and particularly in the last few years, blatant lies. Just like Al Gore's invention of the internet, something that was never actually said by Gore, John Edwards will always have to live down a fuckin' expensive haircut. Why? Well because people accept it. People accept the crap the media says about Democrats, because they come across as the nice guys and we know how much we like to pick on them? The Republicans can do everything wrong that the Democrats have done and get blamed for it less, Why? Because we accept it. When we hear someone calling Bush a people person and an ordinary guy, we act like that makes sense because it suites the guise he uses. We never hear these comments about Democrats, because they are more often characterized by their opponents talking points. Regardless of how much a Democrat does to help low income families, the opposition will talk about how much money he has. While the Republican will often have more. Why not turn the table? Because Republicans don't care about poor people. So it never becomes an issue. And when comparisons are made, another misguided statement easily throws the main stream off message. Let's not forget that while progressive liberals are merely trying to make the playing field fair for all economies, the conservative only cares about productive members of society, in other words people that are filthy stinking rich. Liberals will create complex policies intent on making sure all caveats are met for different people, conservatives will only worry about one demographic and therefore their policies will always seem simpler, easier to digest and most assuredly always wrong. This again is our fault. If we could, in general, understand something political that's more complicated than half a sentence, we might actually have an educated electorate. But we don't. We'd still rather see Paris on Larry King than Michael Moore. We'd still rather worry about our simple problems and so long as we have three hots and a cot, not get dragged down by actually thinking about the people running our country.

No comments: