Your top ten , page
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times
Topic started on 3-9-2008 @ 02:44 AM by Inannamute
While reading and posting in the "that is offensive to women" thread, I realized there are quite a few things I'm really tired of hearing about in the media this election cycle. Here's my top ten, please feel free to add yours, or change my mind on the importance of one of my choices.

1. McCain was a POW. Yes, I get that it was a formative experience for him. I get that it's important to his character. I understand that he maybe did some things that were heroic then. But that was a long time ago, and he's done a lot of things since then that have a lot more bearing on his character as a politician and potential president. If anything, I'd count this item as negative, because something that dramatic has to have psychological effects, such as PTSD and flashbacks, that perhaps could be dangerous in a president.

2. Hillary Clinton. I'm tired of hearing her name. I know she got a lot of support, I know there are people that need to be won over, because apparently they can't decide to think for themselves now that Hillary's not in the running.. Please media, let her campaign die already.

3. Sarah Palin is female. Yes. We know. Unlike you, the media, we can actually get past this fact and want to know what kind of person she is.

4. Likewise, Obama is black. Again, this we know. We know it's historic and stuff, but the people this fact matters to have already made up their minds one way or the other. The rest of us don't care about his race, and want to vote based upon actual character and potential.

5. Sarah Palin's impending grandchild. Don't care. Don't care what it says about her abstinence policies, except that she probably feels pretty dumb right about now, but it's just not important in the grand scheme of VP-ness.

6. The War on Terror. The most overused phrase in the history of the world since 2001. Security policy is about more than taking the last guy's bizarre ideology and phraseology and running with it. I'd like to vote for cancelling the war on terror and replacing it with the war on idiocy in government. At least then we'd actually be able to find the bad guys

7. Experience v. none. I think this topic has been done to death, though it's slightly relevant, I think actual positions on issues of importance clearly far outweighs the nebulous "Well they've done this so they might be better at this completely different job". Nobody has experience of being president before their first term, and more is not necessarily better.

8. Iraq. The American people don't want to be in Iraq any more and made that quite clear in 2006. The failure of anyone in government to do anything about it means that this is a dead issue. We can't control what the government does, and clearly they don't want to do what the majority of us want, so voting on this issue would be a waste of time, likewise, talking about it.

9. Strategy. I don't want to hear about what each candidate is doing and saying in terms of political strategy in order to win the election. I want to hear what they're going to do after the election is over. Being able to spin things enough to win an election does not automatically qualify you to be a president. Integrity, intelligence, leadership, education, ideas. Those things are what I want to hear about. Show me how much integrity each candidate has or does not have, based upon their lives so far. Talk to the candidates and ask them what they think about the things we actually care about - like energy policy, economy, security, constitutional rights - and don't let them extemporize, force them to tell us their actual beliefs, thoughts and ideas.

10. God. In a country as diverse as this one, whether or not our leaders go to church or not, believe in god, or some great purple alien in the sky, does not and should not matter. I'd like to see a leader that is able to make decisions based upon a strong sense of fairness, equality and ethics that has nothing to do with god. For example, the abortion debates, gay marriage, these things become far simpler when you take god out of the equation. I can't imagine a god that creates all people, and then doesn't allow them the freedom to love as they are made. Ethically, constitutionally, the pursuit of happiness should allow homosexuals to marry as freely as heterosexuals. If god and state truly are separate, this becomes clear. One religious segment should not dominate over all the others in a truly free country.


reply posted on 3-9-2008 @ 02:00 PM by kidflash2008
reply to post by Inannamute



I think your top ten sufficiently hit the proverbial head of the nail! The news media have 24 hour networks that have to fill at least 12 hours of it (the rest going to ads and promos for the Mother Networks programs).
I love watching "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report" for their take on the media. The strange thing is there is more to learn on two comedy programs than there is on the "hard" news channels. As the late, great Tom Snyder would state on his blog: Unf@#kingbelievable!



reply posted on 3-9-2008 @ 05:14 PM by Open_Minded Skeptic
reply to post by Inannamute



Very good idea!

I'll take your ten, and BH's 7 and add:

The word 'maverick'! I've heard that word enough to last the rest of my life!


reply posted on 20-9-2008 @ 11:58 AM by Maxmars
1. "The candidates": First of all they are NOT the candidates, they are TWO of the candidates. Technically every constitutionally eligible citizen is a potential 'candidate.' Furthermore, the meme is NOT the 'candidate' its THE PARTY. Each was picked by the party, based on game theory and public relations. The two are identified as a 'choice' when other choices abound - they just don't see efficiency in covering them all.

2. "My plan": These people couldn't plan anything. In fact, they sum knowledge about anything other than the socialite political corporate arena is virtually incompatible with being a public servant. These folks mumble the things they have been TOLD to say. That which is most palatable to the audience, which is conditioned to 'compete' as if the presidency were a prize instead of the profound responsibility it should be.

3. "Character": How can anyone who is remotely sentient look at these people and honestly suspend their disbelief enough to embrace the notion that we know anything about them at all? They are 'products' for the masses consumption, packaged and marketed to us like toilet paper. A persons' character can't be 'presented' on a media production. An illusion can however, and rather than reinforce that fact, we revel in it like spectators at a pro-wrestling match. What a person does in their life is the measure in their character - not what happens to them, but what they actually, purposefully, do. We equate what they claim to have seen, or been 'part of' as some reflection of who they are.

4. "...to protect the people/for the people...": They don't live with the people, they don't associate with the people, they are in a bubble of comfort that protects them from virtually ever hazard that the people face every day, and yet we believe they know who and what the people are. Their notion of the people hasn't caused them one in a hundred years to confront, question, or resist the abusive practices of their sponsors. Which people do you think they mean when they promise 'improvement?'

5. "The Constitution": Do I need to point out how it has been destroyed little by little by these very people? Must I really expound upon the silent complicity of all three branches of the federal construct in the erosion of the ability for the common person to confront them and have access to the 'redress' allegedly guaranteed by this so-called Constitution. They ARE effectively above the constitution and most people won't see it.

Ugh! I could go on, but..., this is a depressing and frustrating exercise for me...



reply posted on 21-9-2008 @ 01:44 AM by whatukno
Ive got a few

1) "I will not support special interest groups."

Oh pahleeze, pull the other leg here, both sides spout this garbage and BOTH sides pander to special interests.

2) "I'm an Outsider/Maverick"

Nope sorry guys, you both have spent your carriers in politics, therefore your both insiders, and to be a maverick, ya got to actually show up for votes, AND go against your party more than 5% of the time.

Heck, if I ran for president in 2012, I would be a Washington outsider. Why? I for one have never EVER been in a political office in my entire life! Thats a Washington outsider!

3) My opponent said (insert daily garbagefest here)

I don't care what your opponent said, what do you say? If I wanted to hear what your opponent said, I would listen to your opponent and make up my own mind!

4) My plan to fix the economy!

Holy heck, does anyone really buy this garbage? The president really doesn't have that much authority, the president cannot create new jobs out of a hat. It is funny that we blame the President for things well beyond his control. Yes the president can make policy that in turn will lead to new jobs created by businesses, but a president cannot create new jobs himself. If they could unemployment would be unheard of.

5) News Media (no bias, no bull, no spin, no WHATEVER)

It's obvious when you watch the news which side the news organization is pandering for. It doesn't matter if it's CNN or Fox, they have their guy picked and are plugging for him. This "Unbiased" bull dunk is just a load of horse manure that they are trying to sell as gold.

6) This historic. (blah blah blah)

We have had how many presidents now? How historic do you want to get? seriously as some other posters have already pointed out. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE REAL ISSUES!

7) (early on in the campaign) I will run a clean campaign!

Funny how that NEVER works out does it?

8) Introducing the candidate as "Your Next President of the United States..."

Hold up! This guy hasn't won anything, you can't say that till after the election before January 20. Before the election he doesn't have anything to go on. After the election it would be proper to introduce them as the next president of the United States because that is what they are. Until then they are just some guy vying for a job.

9) You the American people are smart (or whatever)

Have you talked to the average American? Not really that smart, or hard working, or whatever the candidate tells the people to kiss buttocks.

10) I will work for YOU the American Citizen

Oooh Really? Then can I come to your office and give you a performance review every six months? Heck if you work for me then I'm not asking, I'm telling you im coming to the oval office every six months of your term and giving you a performance review.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^