Originally posted by jamie83
So your blaming the news organization for making Obama supporters look like idiots because they couldn't come up with one single accomplishment of
I know, it was Fox News' fault that Michelle Obama said that thing about never being proud of her country, or who made Obama say that thing about
My point was this, that cramming a group of people into a studio in front of a bunch of bright lights and cameras that have probably zero experience
being on live television, and having Frank Luntz put them on the spot, offering them literally 5 seconds to gather their thoughts and form a response,
does not prove anything.
Quite simply, this was an effort to paint Obama supporters as mindless zombies, not really to find out what Obama has accomplished as a Senator, which
worked quite well, but that is exactly what Frank Luntz is paid to do... steer the direction of a poll or "study group". Fact is, he probably could
have gotten the same sorts of responses if they had asked Clinton or McCain supporters the same question. Most Americans don't really follow
Congressional resolutions or check to see how candidates voted in the past. Most people are more interested in rhetoric about today's hot topic or
the current scandal.
If they really wanted to be straight forward and factual, and not try to sensationalize the issue by parading around and tagging our fellow working
class American citizens as nothing more than uneducated morons, than they could point their viewers to, oh my gosh, dare I say it... actual facts and
data! Perhaps they could provide the results they find from searching records at GovTrack.us ,which does show that there is, indeed, hardly much
legislature of any real substance that Obama has sponsored that has actually been brought to the floor (a resolution condemning violent actions of the
Government of Zimbabwe, a resolution designating July 12, 2007, as "National Summer Learning Day", and a resolution celebrating the life of Bishop
Gilbert Earl Patterson). But I was also making the point that I don't necessarily see that as a such a bad thing, due to the fact that I personally
feel that, generally speaking, the less government tinkers with things, the better.
But, at any rate, that's the current, sad state of American corporate-media, infotainment. Apparently, political "reporting" can't be done without
resorting to presenting someone else's political opinions as flattly irrational or grossly inferior to the reporter's own political bias.
Maybe it's our fault though. Maybe we demand to much entertainment and not enough real, fact-based information. Just give us the sound bites, and
demoralize someone while your at it, for our amusement. You'll get higher ratings that way.
And for the record, I'm not aware of what Michelle Obama said about America, or what Obama said about bitter voters. Most likely, knowing how the
media works today, whatever was presented was probably taken out of context. I'm inclined to believe it was more political mudslinging than
uncovering true un-Americanism.
Either way, I'm not voting for him, I'm not a supporter. I'm just not very fond of how the media handles political matters, making a spectacle of
the whole election process, like a soap opera or something. I especially don't like it when they do it at the expense of making the average American
look like an idiot.