Comments on: Ol’ Hill Does It Again! -Grim

By: grimgold

grimgold — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:39:55 +0000

Joanne, where have you been all my life? I thoroughly agree with you. It is so nice to see someone else put these ideas in print, and so well. As I tell volt, you might try writing your own stuff and posting it!
Further you made me growl and grab the dictionary – now lets see… fabulism… hmmm. Not in the dictionary but comes from the word fable, probably. Good word in spite of Webster.
I want to see TV content, like C-Span puts out regularly, on nutball TV during the campaign season. Perhaps this would happen if the money was taken out of it.
Thank you for the response, you are most refreshing. Grimmy

By: Joanne from WI

Joanne from WI — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:59:19 +0000

Grim inquires: Once again, if most of the money is taken out of politics by requiring free television spots, the same as weather is required by the FCC, this sort of thing would diminish, don’t you think?

Well, Grim, depends on what you mean by “this sort of thing.” I’m all for it if it makes Republicans think twice about wasting their precious allotment of air time on innuendo and outright fabulism. I’m all for it if it would make all candidates focus on the issues and priorities of the American people instead of blathering away and using donor money to test fly talking points – most of which are pointless or beside the point.

I have another option to propose: ban candidates and campaign news from TV. That would reduce the constant barrage of unwelcome commercial interruptions during campaign seasons (which are getting longer and longer) and force candidates to communicate in person, in print, and on the internet. That would allow those who wish to avoid their so-called messages to do so more easily.

Let’s face it – while there are individual exceptions, the heaviest viewers of TV are not well informed, but they are easily inflamed and manipulated. Interleaving political messages with the violent, lowbrow, stereotype-ridden content of most TV shows is a very bad idea if one is interested in vibrant democracy. And I include televised “news” shows as being part of the matrix of lowbrow content.

By: Peregrin

Peregrin — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:59:19 +0000

Point 1 – Martinez was accused of racketeering. In the real world, an accusation is not the same as a conviction.

Point 2 – Martinez’s comments were in response to yet another right-wing hack who wants to blur those lines.

So, is this story about Martinez being accused of something and not just taking it lying down?