Showing posts with label misrepresentation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label misrepresentation. Show all posts

Thursday, August 30, 2012

The Elimination of Choice

Watching the Republican National Convention is an exercise in ambivalence; Condoleeza Rice with her thoughtful and soul stirring speech, brought me to tears of patriotic pride. Chris Christie demanded a respect for the American People seldom heard from any politician. A respect totally ignored by Ryan. This is a crucial election year (Aren't they all?) and frankly, even though I tilt left, I would have loved to be able to choose a reality based alternative to the inexperienced, star struck current administration.  I thought Mitt Romney might have been that choice, but just as with John McCain, the choice of a Vice Presidential running mate has closed that avenue. Last night Ryan did the exact opposite of the tone set by Christie, he showed the ultimate disrespect for himself and his party by ignoring Christie's admonition to "tell the truth". The Washington Post, not a bastion of liberalism and Obama love, summed up my reaction to both Ryan and his personal ethics in this editorial: "Mr, Ryan's Misleading Speech." I've voted in every election, local and national for the last five decades. This time I may not bother.

Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Don't drink the Kool-Aid!

The Voter's Handbook came today and along with it a flurry of Robo-Calls and the mailbox smells of political flack.  The TV and Radio Commercials have already started with their half-truths and gross misrepresentations. So if you're bogged down in the increasing swamp of Election Manure,here's my suggestion. Follow the money! Look for the funders. 

Every political ad, whether broadcast or print must identify the sponsor. Often it's an innocuous sounding committee like: "American's for Jobs" (Unions), "Californians For A Cure" and "Californians Against Out Of Control Taxes" (Both Big Tobacco) listen to the tags and then read the voter's handbook. These bastards are tricky, take 29 for instance. There's a Doctor saying she's against smoking. Nothing wrong with that until she says that the cigarette tax will not spend one cent on treating cancer. What she doesn't say while damning the research that Prop 29 will fund is that a large portion of the revenue will be invested in programs designed to curtail smoking. Maybe that's why the $$$$$ come from Big Tobacco.  

Who pays for the ads is more important in deciding for what and whom  you vote than the promises of the ads themselves. Since practically no one reads this blog anyway, let me add, that I will not vote for anyone who robo-calls me.