Why I'm Somewhat Torn on Altruism!!

If you've searched at all through my Facebook page, you'll notice references to Ayn Rand's works. I read Atlas Shrugged a few years ago and it completely consumed my life. It had a tremendous impact on what I do and don't believe anymore, and has shaped a new world view of things.

However... that puts my mind in great conflict from time to time, because I was always a leftist-socialist... and yet Ayn Rand spoke of a very Capitalist kind of extreme right-wing idealogy.

So how do the twain meet? 

I'm not sure they can or do!

The characters and heroes of Atlas Shrugged were individualists and against the idea that their personal successes should be shared with those who had nothing to do with it. Hank Rearden made his fortune because he invented a kind of metal that would last longer than steel but cost a fraction of the price. He became wealthy and prominent. Meanwhile, his wife, his mother and his failure of a brother, mooched from him at every opportunity. Hank felt a certain guilt that he had benefited so much from his work and yet these people needed him so much. It takes many pages of the novel before he figures out that they are leaches and that they never planned on making any of their own success stories. In the end, he abandons them all to rot in their weak-minded Hell holes!  

The moral of the story, according to Rand is: Don't live your life for the sake of any other, and don't ask any other to live for yours. Each person should be free to create, work and build their own weath and success, and not be made to feel guilty for it by those who haven't had these kinds of success. 

To me... especially based on my Christian upbringing, this makes a lot of sense. The Christian world is full of people who expect you to do something for them as a favour or out of your "sacrifice to God." I've had Christian people "hire" me for work and then later make up some bogus story about how they couldn't come up with the money to pay me and that I should perhaps consider it a sacrifice to God. So I guess when I get to Heaven, God will throw a few bucks my way to cover what I lost at the hands of his people!!

So to those people I have no feelings of obligation. They were liars then and will probably remain that way until somebody stops making it so easy for them to screw people over with their ideology!

But what about people who are poor and weak but not because they are lazy or just plain immoral?

I saw a guy begging for money at a street corner today, on my way to get an over-priced Latte from Starbucks. Part of me thinks... "hey buddy... instead of standing on a street corner looking for a hand-out, why don't you go find a job?!"  It's easy to look at it that way.

But, if the movie The Fisher King has taught me anything, it's that you never know what's really going on in someone's life, so it's best not to jump to conclusions.

There are people who came from nothing and then stay there. Sometimes it's parenting that caused it. Sometimes it's bad choices. Sometimes it's a society gearing itself towards the more affluent and not providing any escape valves for the poor to sneak into. 

I grew up in very modest surroundings. My dad died when I was very young, and my Mom had to go from being a stay-at-home Mom of the 60's to being soul-provider to two boys. Money was always tight, but I was never denied any opportunities to do things. I got to play Minor Hockey and take piano lessons, and I always had some money left over for records. But we didn't take fancy vacations or eat at expensive restaurants. So I guess when I look at my upbringing, I get a bit jealous and nasty when I see spoiled kids of rich parents, but that's human nature right?!!

(I can't believe how many teenagers I see at Starbucks buying designer coffee to sip while they send text messages on their Blackberry's and iPhones!  What kind of allowances are THESE kids getting?!!!)

So I'm empathetic to the needs of those who just aren't able to be in a higher financial position. At least in Canada these people don't have to starve to death in order to have health care for their children. In America, so many people are without health care, and this obviously leads to outrageous financial strain. I've driven through the Carolina's where you see run-down shacks all over the place. There might be a nice, expensive truck in the driveway, but the house is a dump. But whether it's a church, a nice house or a Uni-bomber-type shack, there is always an American flag waving outside. I get confused seeing the working poor in America waving their flags of patriotism when they live such a shitty existence. If that is the American Dream, somebody really sold them some Jimmy Jones Juice!

A lot of these same people would protest the raising of taxes, even if it was to provide health care to every American. I've heard many a Southerner tell me, "it's not my responsibility to pay for somebody else's kid to have their braces removed."  In Canada, we just don't see it this way. Other countries pay high taxes but GET something for their dollar. Free health care, free medicine, free college/university education. I certainly wouldn't mind paying higher taxes to ensure that those things are available to anyone who wants or needs them.

But that last statement is in direct contradiction with the Ayn Rand philosphy.

So you see where I wrestle with this stuff. On one hand, I want my individuality to be sacred. I don't want any person or interest group telling me how to live or where to spend my money, but then I think of those who are in a desperate situation and I take the attitude that they too, deserve some help to get out of their own messes.

Perhaps the biggest issue with me is the hypocrisy of the Religious Right. I think it's that the Ayn Rand model of ideal conservativism can't co-exist with a religious viewpoint. If Jesus cared about the sick and the poor and the weak, then how can you believe in Jesus but turn a blind eye to the suffering masses? If you don't have a religious philosophy that forces you to believe in Altruism, then you are free to pursue your fortunes without feeling guilty for the ones below you who don't get to share a piece of the pie.

If American Right-wingers were for free-enterprise and freedom from Government control, that would be one issue. But they ARE for these things but also having Government control whether a woman can have an abortion if she chooses to, or whether gay couples can share the legal benefits of marriage along with straight couples. You can't be Pro-life and Pro-Christian and still expect poor people to somehow get off their asses and solve their own problems.

Ayn Rand wrote a book about the Virtues of Selfishness, and in many ways I really appreciate that outlook. We should be allowed to see selfishness as not a negative term, but as a virtue. If all people were on a equal playing field and all out there working to built their own paradise, then society would be a richer, more independent creature. But the playing field is never equal. In fact, it's never been more unequal in modern history. The gap between super-rich and the poor is unbelievable. 

So our world is not an Ayn Rand fantasy world. There are people in really bad situations who need some help. If the people who claim Jesus as an example can't offer some assistance, who will?

That's my rant. Depending on the topic and the background info, my opinion can change between these two extremes. We either look out for #1 and say to hell with the weaker losers, or we find some way to help the destitute get a step closer to getting out of their holes. 

Who is John Galt?!!

Ian Tanner - November 08

How the Right have Socialism all Wrong!

"But, he wants to spread the wealth, this gives him control over the less fortunate. It encourages laziness and incompetence."

This comment was posted on YouTube at a video showing Barack Obama calling for a Civilian-type force in America. The comments at YouTube are a lot like the above... full of people convinced that Obama is the Anti-Christ and a man who will be the most Evil President ever. 

I am baffled. Bush 43 was the President who shat all over the US constitution and started spying on his own citizens, and they call Obama a Hitler-type leader?  Unreal!

Anyway... here's how the Right get it all wrong.

I've heard this from more than a few of my Right-wing friends. They hear about the poor and they immediately jump to the conclusion that they are lazy and incompetent. Lucky you that you were born in a family that had money from the start. Imagine if you were born in a trailer park to a broken family with a single parent working 2 or 3 lousy jobs just to barely scrape by. I know, the mother shouldn't have let herself get pregnant in the first place!!

It's always the poor persons fault for being poor, stupid and lazy. 

I have to ask... if Jesus were here... would he be telling his followers to call the poor lazy and incompetent?!!  How did the Right-wing party become so selfish?

I talked to a friend about the concept of Minimum Wage and he said, "who would work for minimum wage?"  He was serious. 

So I guess a lot of people on the Right really have no concept of being in need. I admit... neediness is not something to aspire to. This is why I prefer cats over dogs, because dogs are so needy and desperate for your love. But there are people in this world who, based on many things, have not been able to achieve much. For them, it's a bold concept to take some of the wealth of the richer people to help get them off their feet. The problem is obviously systemic, in that the outrageous costs of health care in America fuel the problem further. For the poor to get a fair shake, so much would have to change... like raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. But we all know, policies like this will never happen under the corporate state that is the USA. 

So whether Bush III gets elected or the inspiring Obama... most of these core issues will remain problematic in America. But I think it's sad and ironic that the Religious Right in America get so upset about having to spread their own wealth to those less fortunate. You'd think it would be the other way around. Ironically... liberal Atheists have no problem with such a concept and they don't even believe in Jesus' ideas of altruism!!

Anyway... food for thought... for those who can afford to buy it.

The Beginning Of The End Of "America"

The Beginning of the End of "America"

-unsure predictions of things to come, by Ian Tanner!

The atmosphere of the days of 2008 seem to point to one conclusion, especially for someone from outside the bubble - that we are witnessing the beginning of the end of the American dream - the American Empire. Fukayama wrote that history died some years ago and that all that remains for the planet Earth are various variations on previously written material.

We've seen the gradual erosion of signs of humanity in America over the last 100 years, and for many of those years, dismantlings of the US constitution were conducted under cover of night with many grave errors only being noticed years after they mattered. But in the last 20 years or so, the American dream has taken on entirely different meanings. It's been a good time to be alive if you work for an Oil Company, Pharmaceutical Company, Financial Institution, Major Corporate Conglomerate or either of the major political parties. For the average "Joe," the American dream has become something you see in lousy "U-S-A, U-S-A-type" movies but not something tangibly experienced by the people.

Flash forward to today and you see gross hemorrhaging of the rights of individuals at the benefit of the elite league of multi-millionaire policy makers. We've seen George W. Bush all but defecate on the US constitution through his launching of evil, un-lawful wars in foreign lands, his use of the Patriot Act to invade the privacy of American citizens, his aggressive desire to condone torture in lands far and wide, and his ability to pander to born again Christians while lying through his teeth about all of the above. The Neo-Cons have truly hijacked the concept of the American dream by emphasizing the concept of American Acceptionalism. They see America as the world's master-race and power source, thus permitting them any act, legal or otherwise, in any area of the planet Earth, if there is any perceived threat to the way of life in America.

They have two political parties with very few differences. What real choice do Americans have when it comes to elections? They can choose between the Republican candidate, who will always pander to the social-economic self-centredness of the religious 'right,' or the Democratic candidate, who will pander to the moderately liberal leftists. Both parties function in the same way. They say what they have to say to get elected, and then with a few exceptions, they continue with "business as usual," and the poor, un-involved electorate continue to debate the silly issues that kept them interested in the election process in the first place.

So where is this leading?

I see this as the beginning of the end of the great America. It may not collapse entirely in my lifetime, but I honestly believe this is the start of the downward spiral which will see other countries emerge in the role formally played by the United States of America. America is in such debt to China and so massively tied up in world wars that it cannot provide any kind of quality living for its own people. 

The America of John McCain arrogantly professes it's greatness in the world without any care to examine the facts of the matter. I've met people in the American south who have never been to another country and have never even ventured outside of their own State in their lifetime. How great a bubble it must be to be a Conservative American. These are the same people who believe that the attacks of 9/11 were because of the World's jealousy of American values and so-called "Freedom!" To believe that the 3000+ Americans who died on that day died because of some form of payback or "blowback" is a concept completely outside of their lexicon. "Nope, the terrorist Muslims hated our freedoms and now they're gonna get a can of America whoop-ass to learn 'em a lesson!"

America is not the #1 country in the world anymore. It may have been at some point, but it isn't anymore. If Barack Obama wins the Presidency, there is some fleeting hope that the reputation of America being a land of freedom loving people might once again  spread through the world. But if John McCain wins instead, it will bring the death sentence that much closer. 

Perhaps in some not-too-distant future, we'll see another civil war in America. If Barack gets elected and then assassinated by a white supremacist, Charles Manson's "Helter Skelter" race war may finally gets its genesis. 

Who knows how it will all play out, but like Chalmers Johnston wrote in his book "Nemesis," it would appear that the USA has already crossed its Rubicon and there is no turning back. The empire has begun its final days and the future can only get uglier and more pathetic. 

Should be interesting.

R.I.P. America

Ian Tanner

October 29/08

The Great Glasses Fiasco!!

Great Glasses?!

It's been five years since my last eye exam. That's a long time. Too long, in fact. And I could tell I was due, especially when driving on the highway at night. Things just didn't look as clear as they should.

There is a new store that opened in town called Great Glasses, so I went there to see how much they charged for an eye exam.

"Free?! Your exams are free?! How can that be?"

The person I asked informed me that the exam was given by a technician, not a doctor. I asked him if the technician checked the "health" of the eye. He told me they didn't and suggested I go to an Optometrist for that.

So, I found a local Optometrist and got my eyes checked. Then I went back to Great Glasses. They had a 3-for-1 special.

I was basically attacked by 6 eager sales people showing me various types of eyeglass frames. Since I could buy one and get two free I decided to go with sunglasses and reading glasses as my second and third options. And yes. I said reading glasses. (Sigh.) That's what I get for being old and liking to read.

I pick 3 frames, secured the deal and went on my way. Great!

Great? So, why - 24 hours later - was I feeling uncomfortable about my purchase? And what exactly could I do about it?

The next day I called Great Glasses to ask them a few additional questions about my order. First of all, I wanted to know if the sales people at Great Glasses were Opticians - you know, the people that "fit" your glasses, etc. The people that go to school for two years to learn about eyes and glasses. The people that need to be registered by The College of Opticians in order to legally do their job. THOSE Opticians.

The response I got to my first question was unusual. I was told that there was nothing illegal about what Great Glasses does.

"What? Why did they respond that way? Is there something I don't know?"

Then I was told that, although they are not registered Opticians, they are all TRAINED by a registered Optician. For one day!

GREAT glasses?!

Yesterday I picked up my glasses. They simply handed me my three prepaid pairs of glasses and I went on my way.

Today I went to a REGISTERED Optician to find out if my new glasses has been cut correctly. As soon as I said the words "Great Glasses" to the Optician she began having convulsions! She was horrified that I went there to get my new glasses, and even more amazed that I hadn't heard about the LAWSUITS against Great Glasses! She said there had been full page articles in the local paper and reports on the local news.

Oh GREAT!!

She also told me that she had the articles RE: Great Glasses posted on the walls of her store until she was THREATENED in the parking lot one night by one of the sales people from Great Glasses! She also told me that she sent two people to EMERGE because the contact lenses they purchased at Great Glasses got stuck to their eyes!!

Sigh. Great.

Thankfully, after she checked out the main pair of glasses I purchased from Great Glasses, she informed me that they were cut properly. I'm bringing my sunglasses and reading glasses to her tomorrow so she can check them too.

The moral of the story? If you live in Canada, stay FAR AWAY from Great Glasses! Don't get your eyes examined there, and don't purchase their GREAT deal!

And, oh yeah... tell all your friends.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

UPDATE:

Court rejects Great Glasses appeal bid TheSpec.com - Local - Court rejects Great Glasses appeal bid _Panel upholds contempt fine of at least $34m__Steve Buist_The Hamilton Spectator__(Oct 11, 2008)

Ontario's Court of Appeal has handed the founder of the Great Glasses empire a crushing defeat that could eventually come with a price tag of at least $34 million._In a scathing decision released yesterday, the three-justice panel completely rejected an appeal by Dundas optician Bruce Bergez, his wife, Joanne, and three of their Great Glasses companies._"This is a case of flagrant, protracted and deliberate disobedience of a court order to comply with a statute regulating the conduct of a health profession," the justices stated in dismissing the Bergez appeal in its entirety._Bergez was seeking to overturn a November 2006 finding of contempt in Hamilton court that led to the largest fine for a civil contempt case in Canadian history._

Bergez, his wife and the three companies had been fined $1 million and a further $50,000 a day for every day since that they haven't been in compliance with Ontario legislation that governs the prescribing and dispensing of eyeglasses and contact lenses._The outstanding fines dating back to November 2006 now total approximately $34 million._Eyeglasses and contact lenses must be dispensed by a registered optician based on a prescription supplied either by an optometrist or a physician._Great Glasses had been ordered to abide by Ontario's health regulations and to stop dispensing eyeglasses based on eye tests conducted on a computerized machine without a proper prescription. 

The stores were also ordered to post notices that customers must have a proper prescription from an optometrist or physician._"We cannot suffer the sacrifice of the rule of law to the lure of lucre," the Court of Appeal decision states._"It seems obvious that the appellants, especially Bruce Bergez, have no intention of complying," the justices added, noting that the penalty imposed was appropriate in light of "the appellants' intransigent and unremitting refusal to obey the law."_The three justices believed that Bergez was well aware he was flouting the regulations._"

He continues to operate his business as he sees fit, in open contravention of governing legislation and in plain defiance of a court order," the justices stated._"Bruce Bergez ignored the restrictions imposed upon his own competence in the public interest and redrew the boundaries to suit his own crass commercial purposes."_The Court of Appeal also had harsh words for Great Glasses' practice of dispensing eyeglasses based on readings generated by a machine._"Those who enter a Great Glasses store without a prescription for corrective lenses from either an optometrist or an ophthalmologist may well leave the store with corrective lenses," the decision states, "but they leave as prescriptionless as they entered."_

The lawyer for Ontario's College of Opticians, which joined forces with the College of Optometrists to pursue the case against Great Glasses, said both colleges are pleased with the result._"I think the decision is very clear and we would hope and expect that Mr. Bergez will comply with the court order," Robert Cosman said._Bergez' lawyer, Louis Frapporti, said his clients were disappointed with the result and they will review the decision to determine their next step._The last option available is for Bergez to seek an appeal with the Supreme Court of Canada._Bergez has 60 days to file an application asking the country's highest court for leave to appeal._

If he seeks to take his case to the Supreme Court, he can also apply to have the monetary penalties set aside until the Supreme Court rules._If Bergez doesn't seek a Supreme Court appeal, the province can begin taking steps to collect the outstanding fine._The Court of Appeal also ordered Bergez and the other appellants to pay the College of Optometrists $40,000 in legal costs._Bergez has already filed a separate appeal on the issue of the $50,000-a-day in fines that have been accumulating since 2006. That appeal will be heard in January._

Bergez has been suspended from practising as an optician since November 2006 by the College of Opticians._A discipline hearing for Bergez is scheduled for Oct. 28._sbuist@thespec.com_905-526-3226_

The McCain/Obama No-Tacular!!

This will be brief, as I'm between stints sanding down wood cabinets before going to attempt a career as a country drummer! (aren't we all the same?!!) But I thought I'd weigh in on the first Presidential debate from last night. I had to watch it on the PVR after my gig. Ironically... I started my viewing coverage by watching some of the after-debate chit-chat on the various networks. But I was getting so pissed off at the BS coming from the various party insiders, I thought to myself... 'Self, maybe you should just watch the debate and decide for yourself, self!!'   

So I started from the beginning to see how it all went down. Obviously, I'm against John McCain winning this thing because deep down I see him as being a war-monger and a pro-gun, anti-government kind of guy, and I'm a "health-care for everyone" kind of socialist in some ways. I'm mostly afraid of him getting elected and then dying and then handing the most important job in the world over to an inexperienced hack like Sarah Palin. That said... I'm no big fan of Obama's either. To me, he is the lessor of 3 evils... Bush term 3, McCain's age and Palin's Palinisms.  

So who won? It wasn't clear cut for me. John McCain obviously was in attack mode from the beginning, yet Obama wanted to stay Presidential (in the Clinton definition, not the Cheney definition) and not start fighting back too hard. I don't think elections in America are won this way, so hopefully Obama is playing a game of Poker here awaiting the right moment to go for McCain's jugular and start asking for his medical records to be revealed to the world, and his financial records, his wife's history in business, and how he could dump his first wife to pick up Cindy McCain in a night-club!! You know, the usual "Pro-Life" party that fights for the sanctity of human life unless those lives aren't in favor of the nation of Israel or live in some awful third-world country that they don't give a shit about!  

However, I digress... The Republicans always play dirty... I'm hoping that Obama will start swinging before it's too late or he may not win this thing. Sucks that that is the way elections get won or lost in the Home of the Brave. I felt McCain was lying and distorting a lot of facts last night, but then again, it's both candidates job to lie and distort in hopes of fooling the public and pandering to those who want to hear all the familiar talking points. (Obama will raise taxes - McCain will wage endless wars around the world, etc.)  

In closing, because I really AM tight for time! I was surprised at how well McCain controlled the debate. After his acts of political theatre this past week, I was certain that he would bomb miserably in the first debate. He didn't bomb by a long shot. But Obama seemed more comfortable in his own skin. One thing I DID note that I think is somewhat important is body language.  

Obama made many efforts to speak directly to McCain, but McCain looked like he hated Obama's guts and wouldn't even make eye contact. I think this can spell defeat if it's anything like Canadian politics. Our last Prime Minister, when trying to defend his position, looked defensive, rude, insulted and entitled. It didn't help him with favour with Canadians, and thus he lost that election to the more suave, professional-looking Stephen Harper. If McCain continues to look like he would sooner shoot Obama in the back than speak to him like an equal, I think it could send a message that McCain's just an asshole, and we just had 8 years of the biggest asshole in the world in charge and we all know how THAT went!! The other small thing I noticed was how Obama kept referring to Senator McCain as "John," which after awhile started to seem almost condescending, as if he wasn't giving him the respect of calling him a Senator. This could back-fire too.  

In closing... I've now done some minor reading at the various online sources I like to look at for my news... across the board, the Left-wing blogs are all saying how Obama clearly won the debate. Of course, Fox News tells you that McCain had the edge. I watched the debate and I didn't see it this cut and dry. I think both candidates came out looking pretty good. They both have their own special interests to protect, so we're not going to hear Obama talk about tax-sponsored universal health care, nor are we going to hear John McCain talk too much about how the Surge in Iraq ACTUALLY was successful. No major media outlet wants to talk too much about either topic. So they each have to nuance everything they say. It's tough to know who really won this thing. I'd call it a pretty close draw, with a slight edge to McCain, in that his attacking made Obama go on the defensive. Also, Obama's desire to play it clean and point out where "John" was "right," made it look like McCain was actually right, which scares me quite a bit!!  

So my prediction now (based on my incredibly small knowledge base!!) is that if Palin doesn't drop out before the VP debate, she will fail embarisingly, sending serious fear into the minds of conservatives, which would help boost Obama's ratings nationwide. Then it's time for Obama to start being a bit more like a Clinton and kick some ass. If he can't do it, he won't win. There's plenty of nasty dirt on McCain, such as his business associations through his wife, his part of the Keating Five scandal and probably lots of other stuff. In 2004, the Republicans made a fool out of a war vet like John Kerry and they got away with it. The only way Obama can win this thing, in my opinion, is if he starts flinging shit all over the place.  

What a wonderful world we live in!!

AllMusic Blog on the year 1968

Hi there friends!

1968... I was 2 years old... I don't remember it well!

Fortunately, the various media-type persons at All Music.com DO, and they've assembled a series of "best of" lists from the year 1968. What is great about these lists is, they feature audio samples. I have many of the albums on these lists, but there were certain names and groups I'd not checked out before (such as The Faces), and it's a great way to acquaint yourself with some music that might have passed you by on your musical journeys. 

Check it out at this link:

http://blog.allmusic.com/2008/9/8/allmusic-loves-1968/

Cheers

Ian

An On-Going Series: Why Fox News Is Pathetic!!

Welcome to my debut Blog on Blogger.com. I'm not sure who actually reads stuff like this, but I have so much on my mind lately (take it when you can get it!), I feel I need some outlet to unload the pith and vinegar!!!

This will be a brief blog for today, just to get things rolling. (Who am I kidding?!  I don't know the meaning of the word BRIEF!)

I watch political news on TV a lot. The more I watch, the more I'm convinced that mainstream, network media is simply awful. You learn so little of substance from network TV. Every so often somebody like Keith Olbermann will come along and say something radical, but then after you've spread the word about this brilliant, independent thinker, he starts playing "TV Star" and suddenly loses his edge. In searching for actual content that can be learned from, I've had to look to outside sources, such as online blogs and alternate, non-mainstream news sources. 

As an example... I watched as much of last week's Republican National Convention coverage as I could possibly stand. I'm a liberal, and I'd be quick to admit that my views are somewhat extreme and not in the mainstream. I'm a Canadian so I can't even vote in America, so why do I care?!!  Good question!  Anyway... I would vote for Obama because there is nobody else worth voting for. Ron Paul is inspiring and not-mainstream, but voting for him could take votes away from the Democrats and put them in the hands of the Neo-Con Artists. So supporting Obama is a safe way to ensure that the Neo-Con strangle hold on American politics has to take a vacation.

I digress...

I watched the mainstream network coverage of the RNC last week, and surfed from MSNBC to CNN to Fox News to PBS to CBS and on it goes. Every network has its pundits and experts, but most of what they have to say is about the horse-race... what was said that STRATEGICALLY would help Candidate A get more votes. These are not issues that concern me. John McCain spoke for an hour and said very little of importance. Wild accusations about Obama raising taxes came from McCain's tele-prompter, but nothing concrete was divulged. Then, after all of that, the pundits and experts continue to overlook the important points.

On Thursday, I watched Democracy Now online. For those who don't know, Democracy Now is a non-mainstream media outlet. They would appear to be leftist in their views, but they routinely go after both sides of the American political equation. They take the attitude that journalists are supposed to assume everybody is lying and then investigate thoroughly until they discover the hidden truths. It's fantastic and well worth checking out. 

On Thursday, they sent a reporter to the RNC to let the people speak. There was no commentary or explanation, just the opinions of the various people there. I learned more about the Republican attitude from that than from anything on CNN or MSNBC.

So there you have it... mainstream media sucks. It's the Britney Spears/Paris Hilton of information. Life goes on. No big deal.

But as bad as that is, Fox News goes that extra step further into suck-dom. I watch Fox News quite a lot, even though it is like torture. I have friends and family members who believe that Fox really is the most "fair and balanced" news network on American TV. I watch hour after hour and continue to catch them nuancing the issues to suit their conservative viewership base, and I think... "man, I wish my friends were with me right now, so I could point out all the subtle techniques they use to make the left look like radicals, extremists, and most typically, non-patriots!

So this, my first attempt at writing a blog, will give one example of this which I just saw a few moments ago on TV. 

You'd have to be sleeping to not know that Obama has the popularity edge in this election. I know people who think that when it comes down to the voting booth, Americans will not be ready to vote for a Black man for President. But as of now, Obama has all the magic. McCain and the RNC were virtually dead on impact. If it weren't for Sarah Palin, their entire convention could have been overlooked as the slow, agonizing death of the modern Conservative party. But she saved the day and gave McCain some life. But there's no doubt that the odds are stacked against McCain in winning this election. Bush and Darth Cheney have fucked things up so badly, even hardcore Republicans are ready to jump ship until the party gets back to being the GOP of less recent years. 

So if that is true, Fox News, the voice box for the Republican party, has to find clever ways of making the Democrats look bad. When the election process started, they went after Obama because his middle name was Hussein. They would show a picture of Bin Ladin on the screen with the name OBAMA written underneith of it!!  (I'm sure that was just a technical glitch, right?!!) They got on his case for not wearing a flag pin. They went after him because he was an "apparent Muslim." They did everything they could to discredit him. They were in their heyday when Obama's former Pastor was discovered to have held less than mainstream beliefs. 

So today on Fox... there was a report on how there were tons of American Flags left behind as garbage from the Democratic Convention. Disrespecting and discarding the flag?? How dare they?  This is obviously further proof that Obama and the Democrats don't put "America First!!" The Patriotism of all of the "left-wing kooks" or as Bush called them, "the angry Left," is definitely in question. They want their viewers to be reassured that an American-hating, terrorist-friendly BLACK man is not suitable to run the United States of America!!

This is outrageous, and it goes on day after day after day!

I'll be checking the other TV networks, to see if anybody mentions anything about this "flag-disposal scandal!"

For the love of all humanity... please tell me that people aren't stupid enough to fall for shit like this????!!!

Well, thanks for reading. More Fox Patheticisms coming up soon!

Cheers

Ian