What is the "dishonesty" here? Itis mainly the mainstream media, which is treating as "news" the Karl Rove "projection" that Obama would win the Presidency if the election were held today. Of course, part of the dhishonesy is that the election is not being held today, so what meaning does this projection have? I will answer that: It has absolutely none, except to pad the bankrolls or the enormous number of people, like Rove and all of those pollsters, who are making a good living telling us meaningless things. Yes, that is dishonesty on both the part of Rove and the media.'
The dishonesty, and hypocrisy, of the mainstream media is suddenly treating Karl Rove as a "reliable source". The mainstream media tried to destroy Karl Rove, in a campaign of ersonal destructions only slightly less over the top than their campaign against Sarah Palin. The mainstream media does not believe anything Karl Rove says, unless it happens to fit their agenda. They want Obama to win. Rove says that Obama is winning Thus, Rove is suddenly major "news", when this is not "news" at all.
You think this is "news"? Then you are as much of an idiot with an agenda as these hopeless people in the mainstream media. So what if Karl Rove thinks Obama would win if the election were held today? Should have affect the vote of one single person in this country. If you think it should, you are exposed as not only an idiot, but an idiot with an agenda. Why should anyone's opinion of who is "winning" right now affect the vote of any other person? There is no reason, and people who think that "polls" or "opinion" can be offensively used to influence how people vote re deluded, basically evil people. Explain to me why McCain being ahead after the Republican convention should have induced anyone to vote for McCain, or why Obama being ahead now should induce anyone to vote for Obama. You can't, because there is no reason. If you already favor McCain or Obama, you just feel better if your man is ahead. In fact, that is really the agenda here. It is all a game to try to make supporters of the candidate "behind" feel bad, and maybe give up, because they get discouraged. Now there is no reason they should do that, and they generally don't, but that is the agenda going on in these polls and "projections".
Why is Rove dishonest, besides attempting to use polls to mean something, when they mean nothing? You know why as well as I do. How does Rove get healdlines? How did that National Review columnist get headlines last week? It is because of the known hypocrisy and dishonesty of the mainstream media. If Rove had "projected McCain would wil, if the election were held today, he would get no headline. He would get no attention at all for that meaningless opinion (which cannot be checked because we are not holding the election today). It is only by projecting Obama as the "winner" that Rove gets a headline, and he is aware of theat. That is his dishonesty--not in his opinion but in giving that opinion way too much weight, when it is meaningless. The same was even more true to the National Review article suggesting that "many" (a weasel word) Republicans want Palin to drop out as the VP candidate. That story got headlines only because it fit the mainstream media agenda, and both the author and National Review knew it would get headlines solely for that reason.
I respect Karl Rove less today than I did before this weekend, just as I respected National Review more before last week. Rove's "projecton" has no purpose, other than to gain attention from the mainstream media. National Review's article had no purpose, other than the same, predictable purpose of gainging attention from the mainstream media.
But isn't this meaningless speculation what Rove now does? In a way, yes. And this is more a media problem, including Fox News, than it is a Rove problem. But Rove's media inspired "notoriety" is the only reason he gets this kind of attention. I don't respect a person who uses that kind of spurious notoriety to encourage his opponents to use his "opinions" against Republicans (the only reason the mainstream media is quoting him at all, even though his opinion logically means nothing).
Nope. I don't think Rove "has" to put himself out there in exactly this manner--encouraging the mainstream media to try to "use" him in this way. I certainly don't think the mainstream media has to be so hypocritical, and so stupid, as to suddenly discover that Karl Rove is a great authority, such that they treat his opinions as gospel. Again, logically, Karl Rove's opinion means nothing, even if he is right. The election is not until November, and shifting opinions in the meantime mean nothing.
This is really the "poll" evil in simply another form. See my entry tomorrow, reiterating my position that polls are evil, meaningless things, whether they agree with what I desire to be true at any individual time or not. The same is true of Karl Rove's opinion. Nope. His opinion does not have any more weight just because he is presumed to be Republican, and giving an opinion "against" a Republican. If you think it does, then you are not thinking, except with your agenda.
This whole entry has nothing to do with whether Obama is "ahead". I assume he probably is, with the economic problems. He should be ahead more. This entry has to do with the evil of treating speculation and opinion as factual "news", especially when the goal is not to report "facts" but to advance an agenda. This entry is also about the evil of supposed "conservatives" using their ability to create mainstream media "news" in a cynical and dishonest way. I believe Rove has done that, and that National Review did it last week. I don't respect that, As readers of this blog know, this has nothing to do with me supporting Republicans. I don't even support McCain. But I hope I would not use a position I had to pander to the hypocritical dishonesty of the mainstream media.
P.S. It coninues to be absolutely true that the mainstream media will only publicize conservatives and Republicans who say something perveived to be against the interest of conservatives and/or Republicans. You don't get any more dishonest and hypocritical than the way the mainstream media only pays any attention to "conseratives" is when they are opposing, or saying something allegedly to the deteriment of, other conservatives. But you know, in your heart, that yous hould pay no attention to the mainstream media--who are going to way of the buggy whip manufacturers, when the autromobile was invented.
No comments:
Post a Comment