Wednesday, March 12, 2008

I think it's just about time. . .

Political-type ranting to follow. Have a nice day! ;o)

Maybe I'm just in a bad mood this morning (actually, I'm not, for a change ;o)), but I think it might be time to add to the List o' Hated Professions. You know the ones. It's generally accepted to loathe tax collectors (particularly auditors), tow truck drivers, politicians, and (most notably) lawyers purely on the basis of how they earn a living. (There are probably others that go on that list, too, but for the moment I'm coming up empty-handed. Feel free to add to the list via the comments, if you feel the need.) Well, I think it's just about time to add most journalists (tv and print-- I don't discriminate) to that list.

Of course there's still a handful of decent, honorable reporters out there, and thank goodness for them, but for the most part, I'd just as soon get my news from the trashiest gossip rag ever to clutter a supermarket checkout counter. It's getting to the point that you can expect the "Woman Gives Birth to Quadruplet Alien Babies at Age 80!!" headline to be just about as honest as those you see in many so-called legitimate papers. There's always a spin-- always a bias. Half-truths and false implications abound! And need I say that TV news is just as bad? Mankind has never had such access to news, 24-7, but so much of it isn't to be trusted.

I know I'm probably preaching to the choir here, but so be it! (g)

Here's something interesting from NewsBusters. These political sex scandals are disgusting no matter what the political affiliation of the politician, but isn't it funny how the same journalists who are so eager to point out that one guy is a Republican somehow neglect to mention that the other guy is a Democrat?

A while back, there was a lot of talk about the hypocrisy of Republican representatives engaging in such behavior. (And yes, it is hypocritical of those individuals to say one thing and do another.) But what does it say about the Democratic party that when a Dem does much the same thing, there's no mention of hypocrisy? Wouldn't you love to be part of a political party that is so reluctant to take a firm stand on moral issues that when you commit a crime of this sort, it never occurs to anyone to lament how far you've fallen from your party's standards? (shrug) Hey, don't kill the messenger. ;o)

One more thing, since the fat's already in the fire: I really hate to defend Hillary Clinton, because (in case you haven't already guessed ;o)) I'm "not a fan", but I think this article suggesting that her silly little "3 a.m. phone call" commercial is racist is just ridiculous. The author suggests that if the ad had shown a black child sleeping, it might not have given him that "uneasy" feeling. (Excuse me a moment while I roll my eyes.)

Maybe as a white woman my opinion doesn't count on this issue, but I don't care what race the kids in the commercial were. (And for the record, I don't want either of the Democratic candidates to be the ones answering that phone, because I don't trust either of them with that responsibility.) But do we really need to have a representative of each race in every single commercial?

I don't remember how old I was when I first thought about the fact that so many kids' cartoons (and commercials, and so many other things) "just happened" to have a representative of each race. It was so painfully obvious that the creators had struggled to represent all the major groups (black, white, asian, hispanic/latino/whatever's "pc" for the moment-- male and female).
This was everywhere when I was growing up. I think "They" wanted my generation to think it was "normal", but I still managed to notice it and, frankly, I thought it was a little silly. It was just so predictable, and it wasn't realistic. There isn't always going to be a representative of every possible group everywhere you go in real life, so why should there be in every single commercial? I'm sorry, but it's just laughable.

Anyway, just some thoughts. . .