(no subject)
Matthews can go to hell if he thinks he's a journalist
What happened to the NEWS, as in an unbiased report on what is going on in the world today? It's become less of what you believe in and more of what has become the popular opinion. It's obvious in the dull and intellectually-lacking responses to this already biased news. Watching Jindal's speech was a little painful; it was obvious he's never spoke in front of the US in a nationally spread speech. But, when I watch the news, I want to be able to listen to educated people who are bi-partisan journalists or, heck, even partisan experts. Instead we get Chris Matthews and Rachel W-something. I wanted to climb through the television and punch that bitch in the face, excuse my sudden anger. Why, of all things, would you act like you are struck dumb on the television from a speech that wasn't that radical? Because she is so partisan it hurts my face. Because she was one of the "quiet laughters" that followed the "Oh God" remark. If you are obviously not going to listen to the man in the first place, then why are you there? To provoke thought or to give your worthless opinion? You obviously are going to be leaning on the subject. I mean, you are not Jon Stewart (who is WAY too relied on for news information for my liking, since he is just an entertainer that has no political standing whatsoever and who should not be listened to seriously, as he himself has said before). I had Robert change the channel a few times after the speeches, especially since I like to see what each "news" channel has to say and how biased they are. CNN had Nancy Grace on about the damn mommy child-murderer on again, which was less-than-important information at the time, as well as the two other channels were on advertisement. But good ol' MSNBC was already ripping Jindal a new one before he was even on, and FoxNews was quietly waiting but at least discussing (note: not a one-sided bitchfest) the Presidential Address. People always ask me why I watch FoxNews, and that's my answer. But my other answer is: at least they talk politics. At least there's a few times a day where I can click on and feel like my political party and ideals are not going to get attacked. I have to admit it's a little much for me at times, too, but that's why I get my news from other forms. I'm just tired of having to pick through the "un-opinionated" words of the AP to get my news as well. And I'm tired of people getting their "news" from People magazine, who has put Michelle Obama on the cover at least three times since 2008, none for actually anything important (though I do find it absolutely enraging when I note that, after the whole issue of Palin buying $150,000 worth of clothes for the campaign and then donating them was such an issue for people to let go of--similar to the bs bookburning bull--and then they celebrate how fabulous our First Lady looks in a $3,000+ dress to go to some ball. . .fair?? no). Who cares if the "First Dog" is having a puppy? Seriously? That's what we all care about now-and-days? I mean, I thoroughly understand from living in Bellingham and having my own personal opinion taking a backseat from having political bs shoved down my throat that people can be swayed by where they live and who they grow up as. But, after realizing that for so many years I always felt awkward and uncomfortable and UNEDUCATED, and felt so wrong after going through so many Poli-Sci classes and still acting the way I did and saying the things I did (I still have yet to apologize to Heather for the way myself and others treated her for her opinion), I self-educated myself into knowing what--politically--I believe in. Unfortunately, for children these days, it's even more about what your peers believe in and less about finding yourself. Because of the uneducated and overly, OVERLY biased media, people aren't getting a fair chance to get to form their own opinions.
Does anyone want to start a new news channel?? Maybe one that hires actual bi-partisan journalists?
What happened to the NEWS, as in an unbiased report on what is going on in the world today? It's become less of what you believe in and more of what has become the popular opinion. It's obvious in the dull and intellectually-lacking responses to this already biased news. Watching Jindal's speech was a little painful; it was obvious he's never spoke in front of the US in a nationally spread speech. But, when I watch the news, I want to be able to listen to educated people who are bi-partisan journalists or, heck, even partisan experts. Instead we get Chris Matthews and Rachel W-something. I wanted to climb through the television and punch that bitch in the face, excuse my sudden anger. Why, of all things, would you act like you are struck dumb on the television from a speech that wasn't that radical? Because she is so partisan it hurts my face. Because she was one of the "quiet laughters" that followed the "Oh God" remark. If you are obviously not going to listen to the man in the first place, then why are you there? To provoke thought or to give your worthless opinion? You obviously are going to be leaning on the subject. I mean, you are not Jon Stewart (who is WAY too relied on for news information for my liking, since he is just an entertainer that has no political standing whatsoever and who should not be listened to seriously, as he himself has said before). I had Robert change the channel a few times after the speeches, especially since I like to see what each "news" channel has to say and how biased they are. CNN had Nancy Grace on about the damn mommy child-murderer on again, which was less-than-important information at the time, as well as the two other channels were on advertisement. But good ol' MSNBC was already ripping Jindal a new one before he was even on, and FoxNews was quietly waiting but at least discussing (note: not a one-sided bitchfest) the Presidential Address. People always ask me why I watch FoxNews, and that's my answer. But my other answer is: at least they talk politics. At least there's a few times a day where I can click on and feel like my political party and ideals are not going to get attacked. I have to admit it's a little much for me at times, too, but that's why I get my news from other forms. I'm just tired of having to pick through the "un-opinionated" words of the AP to get my news as well. And I'm tired of people getting their "news" from People magazine, who has put Michelle Obama on the cover at least three times since 2008, none for actually anything important (though I do find it absolutely enraging when I note that, after the whole issue of Palin buying $150,000 worth of clothes for the campaign and then donating them was such an issue for people to let go of--similar to the bs bookburning bull--and then they celebrate how fabulous our First Lady looks in a $3,000+ dress to go to some ball. . .fair?? no). Who cares if the "First Dog" is having a puppy? Seriously? That's what we all care about now-and-days? I mean, I thoroughly understand from living in Bellingham and having my own personal opinion taking a backseat from having political bs shoved down my throat that people can be swayed by where they live and who they grow up as. But, after realizing that for so many years I always felt awkward and uncomfortable and UNEDUCATED, and felt so wrong after going through so many Poli-Sci classes and still acting the way I did and saying the things I did (I still have yet to apologize to Heather for the way myself and others treated her for her opinion), I self-educated myself into knowing what--politically--I believe in. Unfortunately, for children these days, it's even more about what your peers believe in and less about finding yourself. Because of the uneducated and overly, OVERLY biased media, people aren't getting a fair chance to get to form their own opinions.
Does anyone want to start a new news channel?? Maybe one that hires actual bi-partisan journalists?