Category: Politics

There certainly isn’t a shortage of topics for blogging in the world of politics. My intention as I write, is to be as open as possible. I have my own political leanings but I am just as apt to criticize those in my camp as I am for those in the other camp. Today I would like to consider a broader topic that spans all political opinions and contributes much to the troubles we are having today with misinformation. I am talking about 24 hour news stations.

The first station that was designed to report news all day and night was CNN, founded in 1980 by Ted Turner. Discerned by conservatives to be too liberal, Fox News was founded by Rupert Murdock in 1996. Since then, several others have come along. Having news being reported continually for 24 hours under one umbrella leads to a number of problems that have been recognized but are rarely acknowledged as people listen.

The first problem is that moderators have the challenge of filling time with comment and discussion. This can be a good thing as it enables them to look more deeply into issues with comments by experts, eye-witnesses, and supporting stories. Unfortunately, those brought in to do such deepening are not always experts and often give misinformation. Frequently these people give their own opinions rather than information based on history, science, or inside knowledge of a situation. It is about filling the time when there is not enough material available.

The second problem is the race to report. So often a story is reported before all the facts are in. Even when corrections are made, viewers are left with incomplete or false information that they heard first and never got the update. Social media becomes the perfect platform to pass on the misinformation.

A third problem which I believe is more recent is that there is no correcting done before putting information out. In the name of freedom of speech, misinformation and lies are allowed. To screen information before it is released in the media would be considered a form of government control. I believe that some news agencies are better at checking their facts before sharing them with the public, but ordinary viewers have no way of knowing this.

Finally Americans are not well educated about history, world affairs, economics, or legislation. We depend on our leaders and those more educated than we are to guide us. When we elect our officials we assume they are better informed than we are and that they will act with good will on our behalf. We are at the mercy of newscasters to do their research to be sure that what they report is accurate.

These are some of the challenges of any 24 news station. The problem of bias is another whole issue but it is not related to having too much time to fill. Bias is to be expected as we all look at the world through different lenses. In fact, good moderators of news shows will often select people with different views to better educate their audience. These individuals should be experts in their fields, however, not angry Joe-blows-off–the-street to makes the show more lively.

I am not sure what can be done. The advantage of 24 news reporting is that any American can tune in at any time to catch up on the news. This, in theory, should result in a more educated, better informed populace. Leaders in media are being challenged to figure out how to keep misinformation or lies from being introduced and spread.

My only suggestion is that we each take responsibility for how we take in our news, (use fact check) that we are skeptical even of those in our own camps. I try to use opportunities to point out misinformation when I see it posted on Facebook. I will correct people with discussing politics out in the community. I have occasionally written letters to the newspaper. I use my blog. I like to think there are experts out there with ideas that would not violate the freedom of speech but would control misinformation that causes harm to our society.

 

 

 

I was thinking this morning about the support Bernie Sanders is getting from Hispanics. If I were a person of Mexican origin living near the southern border, I would support him, too. Here is the reason why:

The current president during his campaign 4 years ago called those coming illegal immigrants murderers and rapists. He supported his statement by citing isolated cases where an immigrant did commit a crime ignoring the statistics that suggested that there is less crime, percentage wise, done by immigrants than by white Americans. People who are afraid have trouble trusting that just because one person of a race does harm, that doesn’t mean all people of that race would do harm. So I suspect that many folks in Texas and Southern California who are  or even who look like they might be Mexican have suffered profiling by police or discrimination in jobs or housing, or just plain disrespect. I also suspect that this is worse because of the attitude and the verbiage of the president of the United States.

Having supposed the above, I will also say that if I were in these people’s shoes I would be angry. When people are angry and doesn’t  have a safe outlet to express that anger, they will often look to others who have more power to do so on their behalf. After all, if a person in power expresses your anger, they are more likely be able to do something about it.*  For Hispanic people, Bernie Sanders seems to fit the bill.

Joe Biden is touted as a man of peace and civility. He really is an easy kind of guy and has a history of being well liked by his fellows in Congress from both parties. He reminds me of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Those of us that just want the country to heal are looking for someone like Joe. If the Republicans were to bring forth a person of peace, I could easily support that person. This is why I struggle with Sanders. He is too angry and we don’t need more divisiveness. We need unity and respect.

If I were to be an adviser to Biden, or any of the centrists, I would suggest that people’s anger needs to at least be recognized and named. I haven’t heard the crisis at the southern border mentioned in the debates for some time. I think it is time. The reason Hispanics supported George Bush was not because he could speak Spanish, but because he respected them and he had a good plan for solving our immigration problems. I think, if Biden wants to win,, he may need to look more to Bush than Obama for guidance.

* Rallying behind a person of power when they are able to express your own anger, I believe, is why Trump is in the White House right now.

I thought I would look up this idea called Democratic Socialism instead of reacting to all sorts of red flags. Some people think that Bernie Sanders needs to drop the title if he expects to get elected. I am one of those. The word “socialism” is too scary. But after doing some research, I realize that it is scary to older people my age more so than young people. We tend to equate socialism with communism, but as I read, I realize the two are not at all the same.

When I think of socialism, I think of Marx and Lenin and the Soviet Union. But these were authoritarian regimes, basically forcing a way of life upon their populace. Democratic socialism is “of the people”. The people have to agree to it. They may be giving up some individual rights, but they agree that it is better for their country as a whole.

Already in the United States, we have a system that is quite socialistic, public schools, which are financed by taxes, money that comes out of people’s paychecks via taxes on property or purchased goods. Most people agree to this arrangement even if they don’t have children or their own children benefit from private education. I like it because I believe all American children are ours collectively and because an educated populace makes for a healthier country.

While schools are payed for at a number of levels (national, state and local), most decisions about schools are in the hands of local school boards elected by local citizens. No matter what you think about education in public schools, there is one thing that I can support: in this country, all American children can attend.

Currently the idea of universal health care is being discussed (hotly). I try to be open to people’s opinions on this one, but I can’t stop thinking about those who don’t have adequate health care. My husband and I are privileged. We have Medicare plus affordable supplemental insurance. These two so far have covered our needs. Neither my husband nor I have catastrophic medical situations.

But there are people who can’t afford health insurance and will choose not to purchase medication or have life-saving surgery because they simply can’t afford it. Medical costs are the most common cause for bankruptcy. People who are in crisis but are not insured often us emergency rooms because it is the only way to get the help they need. This costs all of us because it impacts the cost of hospital care in general. But worse than all of the above, people and children suffer and die without health care.

Socialized medicine? I don’t think Medicare is socialized medicine. We get to choose our own doctors and care. The kind of care we get has a lot to do with the offerings of our local clinics and hospitals. There is some good competition around here for outdoing one another. Every time we go to a doctor, get surveys coming out of the kazoo asking about what we think about the service. I would vote any day for my fellow Americans across the country to be able to have the care we have. It should be a right of citizenship.

I don’t know about the rest of the agenda for socialist democrats. I plan to learn more, however. The one thing that seems to be clear, however, is that if it is “by the people”, that means the people have to believe in it and want it. The idea that it can be forced upon us seems contradictory to the whole idea. “Forced upon” implies a dictatorship. None of us wants that.

 

I am finding it hard to blog right now. I have been watching the proceedings in  the senate and I get a sinking feeling. As we head down the path where the balance between the three branches of government is toppled, I wonder when and where there a point of no return.

The one question I have for the president’s defense team is this: If what the House laid out as crimes that should remove a president from office don’t  qualify, what action would qualify? Is there such an action? Trump  himself once said that he could kill someone and his supporters would still stand behind him.

I don’t know. DT is looking more like a monarch each day.