I'm a McCain supporter, although I would have supported Mitt Romney for the ticket had he not withdrawn when he did.  When the issue of McCain vs. Obama came up at work recently, one of my co-workers stated simply that since Obama has never served in the military, then he should not be Comander In Chief or allowed to put our sons, daughters, fathers and mothers in harms's way.  OK so lets discuss this.  I think this is a good argument and one that in my mind gives the edge to McCain, in that regard.  But many would vehemently disagree with me, but not because of the reasons you might expect or any statistics that could be quoted, but with personal attacks and finger-pointing.  Any Democrat I have talked to recently firstly tears down McCain and Palin using whatever tools their media outlet supplies them with using character assault and name calling almost exclusively.  Likewise, Obama recieves the same teardown from conservatives who have shunned the liberal media.  What I do know is that this campaign and country is dividing the nation as never before and it is being done in the media.  It appears that more aggressively than ever, the agenda of the Democrats is being pushed by the major networks and NPR, while the agenda of the right is being upheld by Talk Radio and conservative media.  As a result, we are not only divided as citizenry, but additionally we are separated, depending upon from which end of the media trough we feed.  NPR libs on the left, Rush Limbaugh conservatives on the right.  

 

There is almost no overlap on the part of these "sects" of media, concerning the subtext of this election, much less on the issues which are hardly at the forefront.  More importantly, not only are the two segments of popular news media telling different sides of the same story, in many cases they are not bringing forth the same stories at all.  This situation is extremely devisive to when trying to discuss issues and candidates with those that have a different view.  There is not just a differing view, there is a different set of information in play, depending on where you get your news.  So if you believe something is scandalous, then the other person may never have even heard of this issue.

 

Here is an example.  A friend of mine came to my house recently and got into a political discussion with me.  He drew "first blood", by saying that John McCain and Sarah Palin are "liars".  The conversation really tanked when I remarked that I thought Obama was a "marxist piece of $#!+" and that I would never vote for a socialist.  (In defense of myself, this was the day the stock market bottomed out, which I blame on socialist government policies - Fannie, Freddie and Obama/ACORN/Democrat policies that bully banks into making loans to people who can't afford them.  Hence, the current state of economic affairs and my intolerant attitude).  Anyway, thank goodness it didn't come to blows, because he really is a good guy and I'm way out of shape.

 

The question becomes: why can't we discuss politics calmly and resonably?  The short answer: We are divided at the information level.  He listens to NPR and I get my news from sources such as The Drudge Report, which is basically conservative and challenges mainstream media and NPR.  So, how did McCain become a liar and Obama not a liar?  I mean, did Obama vote only 93 times for tax hikes, instead of 94 or something like that?  I hadn't heard anyone calling McCain a liar, just accusations of fact-stretching.  On the other hand, Obama has denied ANY dealings with the infamous ACORN, but documents show that he actually ran training sessions and represented them in court!  How is it that my friend has not heard this?!  Does he see this as "fact-stretching" where I see a lie?

 

Anyway, neither his point, nor mine were made clear to the other person, because the conversation became incendiary over the character and methods of the candidates.  Did we dicsuss ideology?  We never had a chance.  Did we discuss the issues?  How could we?  Because, you can't discuss these things when the issues and ideology of the candidates are obfuscated by the divergence of information streams.  Is this by design of the media?  Is it their plan to create a frenzy of finger pointing and thereby obscure what is happening to our country and what our country is really all about, or should be about?  I say yes. 

 

Resultingly, we have all become "ahmadine-jaded".  The other side is infidel!  They must be crushed!  There is no tolerance or attempt to understand the other sides needs or concerns, only mistrust of the others sides motivation.  There is only, "How can you vote for them?" And, "You must be a racist!"  How sad for our nation.  Watch, listen and be assimilated!

 

I believe that what is being done by, and to, this populace is unprecedented.  Those who subscribe to NPR and "The Big Four" - ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN are hardwired to that mindset.  And their capture has been years in the making, and through many types of manipulations.  Talk Radio, Fox News and Drudge have captured the "Patriot", of which I am one.  These media outlets are now in full "save the country mode", fighting back against the Big Four.  But, I see this as having the effect of emboldening the mainstream media to become more partisan, selectively ignorant, and to redouble its efforts on behalf of the Democrats.  In the minds of conservatives we are now at war with the Dems, and vice-versa. 

 

So, as we warriors settle in for a quiet night at home watching the latest Bill Mahr appearance on Jay Leno, we surf the web on our laptops to find evidence to contradict the liberal spewage to which we subject ourselves. 

 

Waiting..., for election day.  When once again we might be whole. 

 

 

Thanks for reading.  Please remember the Bill Of Rights and our Constituion when voting.  That is all that really matters.