Any man who affects the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood.  -H.L. Mencken  That statement seems to be true today as it was before he died in the 50s and spoke  it.  One of the disturbing facts of our times is that it differs when a man stood on a soap box in the village or city square and spoke without amplification.  In today's world, the word of men and women is tweeted, networked, and distorted in is being repeated by the massive media systems.  We have radio which can be heard everywhere, hand held technology that gives instant news, and even apps to inform us that raindrops are about to fall.

Ed Schultz

Rachel Maddow

Today we live in a world where we are subjected to the opinions of people who have no constructive ideas.  As one show pointed out, about three times as many Republicans, most from the Bush administration, while only three Democrats, not especially close to the the killing of Osama bin Laden. were brought in to comment.  Ed Schultz and Rachel Maddow both (MSNBC) questioned why the shows seem to be bringing on a lot of the Bush administration people.  This was unclear to them as it is to me. 

Christianne Amanpour

David Gregory

More importantly, I was a faithful viewer of This Week on ABC and admire Christianne Amanpour but whether by her choice or that of the producer of the show, the past few shows have lacked news and meaning for me as has Meet the Press, though I also don't believe it is the fault of David Gregory, either.  Who chooses the guests?  I'm afraid I have become a non-viewer on Sunday mornings though I cannot get desperate enough to think going to church would improve Sunday mornings.

Could we suggest better choices for guests and panelists in the future?

BIDEN-PALIN DEBATE

Despite the apparent wish of the media to see more action or a TKO, the debate was somewhat benign and predictable. In my opinion, Biden won hands-down. However, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder and those willing to assume charm is worth more than substance saw it differently than I did. Biden smiled a beautiful, white, toothful smile at some of Palins remarks and attacks but only spoke to correct the inaccuracy of some of Palin's reflections on the Obama positions.

Rachel Maddow, MSNBC, saw Palin realistically while Pat Buchanan, MSNBC, thought Palin did a wonderful job and won the debate. He could hardly stop raving about it. Rachel Maddow seemed to get it right when she said you could choose Biden (boring and right) or Palin (exciting and wrong). Catty Kay on the BBC thought that McCain needed more tonight from Palin than charm. She added that, because of the way the poll numbers are running currently, this might not have gone well for McCain. The woman rarely answered the question that was asked, often changed the subject to refer back to something she was more comfortable answering, usually to say what she had done as Mayor of that tiny town or as Governor of the 600,00+ people of that 'big state' of Alaska. She totally lacked substance in her answers. David Gregory, MSNBC, thought Palin had a game plan to which she stuck but did not add that she was particularly successful. Chris Matthews took issue with her saying she thought the powers of the Vice President should be expanded and read her as not planning to play by the rules. CNN offered focus group's responses which seemed to be a strong preference for Obama. One woman, who I had understood to be an independent going in, decided she liked what Palin had to say. The woman looked like a deer caught in the headlights, spoke slowly and seemed to have difficulty getting out her thoughts, so I was not clear on what part of Palin's responses she was using to change or solidy her vote.

Biden offered much historical data and did not bite at Palin's attempts to unseat him with her homespun darts. Her cutesy, raised voice at the beginning, asking if she could call Biden Joe, started her attempt to convince everyone that she, more than Biden, would be for six-pack Joe and middle America. However, on the substantive issues, she follows McCain who follows Bush.
Biden defined the job of the VP as one in which he follows the lead of the President and acts as an adviser, influencing the Legislature only when a tie needs to be broken. Palin expressed that she would be more engaged with the Legislature, seeming not to understand the Constitution on this matter any more than Cheney had, with Bush allowing himself to be led by the nose by 'Big Dick'.

Palin, at one point, said she did not have to compromise much and did not care who got credit in her state. (She is obviously able to speak constantly of all she has done as Mayor and, later, Governor). Biden quoted Mike Mansfield, an early mentor to him. Mansfield taught him to never question motive, only judgments. Biden matched Palin emotionally about single parenting, sadness, and losses which Palin glossed over with no hint of empathy then tried to make her own unrelated point.

To me, Biden answered questions quickly, concisely, and did not play games. Palin skirted answering the questions, chose to make her own political speech instead, and never answered a question as to how McCain would effect change. She only expressed where she thought change was needed. She spouted the Bush/McCain party line throughout and I saw eight more years of Bush policym if she and MCain get to the White House, with panic in my heart.

WE TOO SOON FORGET OR MISS IT

Roaming through YouTube, I came across an interview that Crossfire did with Jon Stewart in 2004. Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson are the interviewers, Jon Stewart the interviewee. By his honesty and directness, Jon Stewart illustrated in only moments why the media is worthless today. It is shocking that a comedian shows himself the politically wiser and greater patriot while the interviewers stubbornly hear only their own voices without a perception of the reaction of their audience.. It is shocking that a comedian shows himself the wiser philosopher and patriot while the interviewers remain clueless and absurd. It is a must-view, even if you saw it and have forgotten it from 2004. He accused them of partisan hackeryand pleaded with them to stop hurting the country..

It took until January of 2005 for CNN to realize just what Jon Stewart had made apparent, that they had two ridiculous, self-serving people on view who were responsible for the speed with which viewers were jumping the CNN ship. MSNBC, who was then picking up more viewers made the mistake of hiring Tucker Carlson (whom they have also now kept more often on the bench, though he still creeps in on panels) and who finally proved himself as worthless to an audience interested in facts, not opinion. His show was canceled recently. Perhaps the powers looked at viewing numbers had noted that having Tucker Carlson on 2 hours of prime time was not productive. This viewer is trying to be patient and give David Gregory, his replacement a trial since I'm apprehensive he will also fall off his pedestal along with Matthews and Olbermann and Russert. I still have some hope for Dan Abrams.