hogster17,

>>>If Fox News' use of "fair and balanced" is sarcasm, it is totally lost on me<<<
As I said earlier, the big networks always claimed to be impartial. So Fox doing the same thing, but being conservative, looks like sarcasm to me. Maybe I am wrong, but that's what it looks like.

>>>mra wrote: "He usually had a segment where a Democrat would say something, then, less than 24 hours later, would be saying the exact opposite to another group of people."<<<
>>>In the wake of 9/11, Bush opposes setting up Dept. of Homeland Security. Months later, he embraces it like it was his own idea. About-turn, you say? <<<<

I am not a big Bush supporter, but changing your mind or being persuaded over a period of time, is much different than saying one thing to a group, and saying something else the next day to a different group. As far as embracing it as his own idea, I think its nice we can talk about this over the "Al Gore information super-highway"!;)

mra wrote: "it is such a breath of fresh air to have a second opinion on TV for once"

>>>From what you have written, right now you seem to be listening to only that one side. I think we should all hear from both sides and make up our own minds. I hope all of us will not degenerate into being a lemming as it will be detrimental to the future of democracy.<<<
So you are calling me a "one-sided lemming"? THANKS!:@
I believe I am up to speed on what many different people are saying. Of course, once someone has made up his mind on an issue, he looks one-sided to others.

I just think that the people who didn't vote shouldn't whine about whoever was elected, because they didn't do anything to encourage the election of someone else.

Just a question (I've close to zero knowledge on the statistics of voting in the US), but from the exchanges here it seems like some are making a rather big assumption that the people who whine about the government are the ones who don't vote. Could it be that the people who don't vote also don't care enough about the country, and the ones doing all the complaining are mostly the ones who did vote since they involve themselves in this?

-Chin

ps: Yes I also believe in one person making a difference :) If everyone believed in themselves, the sum of the individual efforts will amount to something significant. Or else, like TGP said, a single person can inspire enough people to make a difference.

Oh yeah, don't get me wrong, voting is important and I will be sure to vote every year when I'm old enough. And you're most CERTAINLY right when you say that one man can make a difference. My 7th grade teacher was an arrogant witch with a capital B and she tried to convince the class that one person can't do anything by themselves. I hated her to begin with so I launched into a debate and shut her down. Although significant people have followers, they sparked the flame and made their intentions/goals widespread. Examples I mentioned to this teacher were like Adolf Hitler, Martin Luther King Jr., Stalin... They didn't affect and change history by themselves? Of course they did! So, with that mentality, one vote does make a difference... but it doesn't make ALL the difference. Great leaders need followers and votes must be in the multitudes. It is shameful that a large percentage of America doesn't vote, and then they feel free to whine about our elected officials. The key word there is "elected"... it's our responsibility to elect someone who fits most/all of our personal values and concerns so they can do something about them. Since this is a democracy, the majority rules and the largest portion possible of Americans can get their concerns immediatly addressed. Unless, of course, the President turns into an A-hole or something... It reminds me of Bill CLinton. Bill CLinton was not a bad President at all. I always liked CLinton because he was, at times, painfully honest. He was once interviewed on a teen TV show where teen asked him questions and he answered (this was either when he was a senator or after his terms in office). A kid addressed his arrest for smoking weed, and they asked, "if you could go back and do it again, would you inhale?" In a surprisingly honest response, he thought about it for awhile and said yes. His affair with Lewinsky overshadowed all of the good things he did and no one remembers anything else. Clinton will always be "the guy who did Lewinsky in the Oval Office." Of course, no mention was made of the countless other presidents who had affairs with their wives, even the best presidents (JFK, anyone?) and with a wife like Hillary who could blame him? JK, that was terrible. The point is, all presidents have made good decisions and bad decisions, some have made more of one or the other. In order to elect a pres. with the greatest possible likelihood to satisfy the greatest possible number of Americans, you have to VOTE. Let your opinion be heard. Nothing changes if you don't take the initiative.

-TGP

Sean:
to vote is not a duty, it is one´s right. That is why one is free to take advantage of it or ignore it. Like you I incourage anyone to vote. And I know we all heard this before, but in other countries people fight and go to unbelievable risks to use up their right to vote. I know a person from Ukraine who went to Presidential election under a risk of being arrested. (His candidate lost.)

mra:
yeah, Rush is real clever. I used to teach his book to my English students. They would entertain themselves by counting how many pages it is before he contradicts his statements.

John:
you are just so cool!

Sasha

---

[Post edited by Sashaofspain on Jul 18, 2004]

Chin,
(not to you specifically, but all who would share your mindset)
Better to make the choice best you can than do nothing and be stuck with who everybody else voted for. We can't make anyone do anything, but if we don't help in the decision, we don't have much grounds to complain if things don't go our way.

Tim,
While I understand your statement, it's exactly that type of acidic cynicism that brings us to where we are. On the one hand, you're right, but you have to start somewhere to get the momentum going.

The more people who actually take the initiative and vote, the more politicians HAVE to listen to their constituencies. Right now, voter turnout is so low politicians don't have to worry about anyone in an income bracket under Upper Class. Middle-Lower Class voters are scarce percentage-wise to say the least, so politicians pander to the masses on TV and in public appearances, but do their real campaining at the $5000 a plate dinners. These are the folks who have a vested interest, usually monetary, and therefore wish to protect that interest by voting for someone who is like-minded and more inclined to protect said interest. Can you see a cycle here?

The rich vote for the rich, so the rich remain in power. You and me? Not as big a deal when less than 1/3 of us who are registered actually fulfill our duty.

I know I sound idealistic, but the reality is that the more people that are involved, the better the government runs. So this year, maybe your vote doesn't make much of an impact, but because you voted five of your friends vote. Next time all six of you vote, and you each have an additional five friends who vote because of your example, and so on, and so on. Where are we fifty years from now in this scenario? Better off, to say the least.

The whole popular vote/electoral college dilemma is more crucial now that so many people don't vote. This is why Bush won the 2000 election with the electoral vote, but not the popular vote. You spoke of "millions" of votes, and while it is true that millions are voting, those millions still only represent a small fraction of registered voters.

Our only way to truly impact the way this nation runs is to vote. If we decide to throw that out the window, then we leave it up to other voters who WILL vote to make up our minds for us. I don't know about you, but I like to make up my own mind.

What if the founders of this nation simply thought there were too many British for thier voices to make a difference? Where would we be then? I hate calling TV the "telly" and I don't think kidney pie is my cup of tea.

On a more common note you and I have, what if Paul's thought was that Jesus was just one man?

How can one man make a difference? Just food for thought.

Sean (...but pick yourself up a Value Meal...not much thought to chew on if it's from me!...)

While voting is important, and I certainly encourage it, the statement that "every vote counts, your vote matters" isn't nevessarily true. In this day of recounts and Bush allegedly winning with less votes, one vote in the pile of millions really doesn't matter. They can ultimately make the vote's outcome into anything they want.

TGP aka Tim (Where's the love for Ralph Nader? Honestly...:))

Sean wrote:

"Vote. Plain and simple. Vote, and do something about what's in your own heart."

Yeah. And hope your candidate of choice (I'm not into politics much, but the candidates with good chances of winning Election 2004 are :p)doesn't turn into an asshole.

Political discussions always seem to degenerate into "this side, that side" arguments. The truth of the matter is that BOTH of the major political parties have railroaded the country into this boxed-up mindset of either/or. The pundits on the Hill have gotten us all to think only in terms of conservative/liberal or Republican/Democrat. This is not sufficient.

I would urge anyone to base their decisions on FACTS as much as possible. I know that's extremely difficult, but I feel that John and Hock have hit on a couple of outlets that consistently prove more reliable than those labeled liberal or conservative. NPR and NewsHour are very good shows and, as stated, try vigorously to keep an unbiased standard.

Watch Fox News, CNN, or whatever simply for entertainment value. Laugh along at the jibes and gashes, enjoy the slant toward your political affiliation, but please do NOT use these as your sources for getting the facts.

Every politician wants to stay in office. Every politician wants his or her agenda to come to fruition. And, naive as it may sound, I still believe that under all of this lay the hearts of people who really do want to do good in the world. As buried as it may be, I feel it's still there. But, power corrupts, and America's apathetic attitude toward truly being involved in the process has let that power get out of hand.

Speak up and speak out. Bash Moore, Rush, Fox News, CNN, etc. all you want'at least they are taking advantage of their rights in this country while the majority remains silent except when they wish to complain about something they didn't even care enough about to become involved in.

Vote. Plain and simple. Vote, and do something about what's in your own heart.

Sean (...anyone know where I could get a bigger soap box?...)

mra,

It is true that you can change the channel anytime you want. That's why I don't watch TV news anymore. I get my news from NPR now. They are not perfect and they usually try to get diverse point of view on all their topics.

If Fox News' use of "fair and balanced" is sarcasm, it is totally lost on me. When does a news network use that term and not mean it? Hey, they even tried to block Al Franken from using it!

mra wrote: "He usually had a segment where a Democrat would say something, then, less than 24 hours later, would be saying the exact opposite to another group of people."

Talk about a one-sided opinion! I guess Republicans are saintly politicians, huh?
Eg. In the wake of 9/11, Bush opposes setting up Dept. of Homeland Security. Months later, he embraces it like it was his own idea. About-turn, you say?

mra wrote: "it is such a breath of fresh air to have a second opinion on TV for once"

From what you have written, right now you seem to be listening to only that one side. I think we should all hear from both sides and make up our own minds. I hope all of us will not degenerate into being a lemming as it will be detrimental to the future of democracy.