Media More Concerned With Lipstick Than Politics
Thursday, September 18th, 2008 by Connie T.
Not that this is much of a surprise, but the mainstream media has been more
focused on Barack Obama's "lipstick on a pig" comment in the past week than anything
remotely politically-related. FreePress.net
has put together this amusing (albeit hair-pullingly ridiculous) series of clips of just how
wild the MSM went for those four words. And if you're a member of our forum,
you got to see it first!
I could care less about the phrase Obama used and whether or not it was really
in reference to Sarah Palin (although it's an old saying and I don't think it was). She
calls herself a pit bull with lipstick herself. And it's all essentially irrelevant.
Here are
just some of the things I want to know that the mass media should be at least touching upon,
if not making it the forefront instead of this silly play on words.
Will the candidate reverse
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) - or at least the immunity for telecoms portion?
Will the candidate do more to ensure the safety of the animals on the Endangered Species list, and
make sure that the species that need protection are listed?
Will the price of oil go down, and if
not, will the government reduce or remove federal gas taxes for consumers?
Will there be extra tax
cuts or some sort of incentive strictly for corporations that are keeping and/or bringing back
their manufacturing to the United States?
If we're not going to eliminate the Federal Reserve entirely (which
we should), can we at least govern them?
Will the federal poverty level be increased to
something that actually resembles what it means to be poor in this country? A recent study showed that
many couples making $100,000 or more are now living paycheck-to-paycheck. $10,000 a year - about our
current federal poverty level - should be increased by at least 50%.
The Patriot Act - it needs to
go. Now.
The Military Commissions Act. Let's do something about that.
Roe v. Wade. Would a
McCain/Palin ticket actually seek to reverse this decision, or is it just talk? Because I remember George W. Bush
touting the same rhetoric, and doing nothing. If they seriously want to reverse it...that's major for
either side of the issue.
We have so many regulations on what collection agencies can and
cannot do, but the IRS can tow your car, drain your bank accounts, seize your assets, toss you in jail
and throw away the key. So if we must have them - can we reform the agency to truly be a service
to the people instead of one of the people's greatest fears?
Are we going to war with Afghanistan? Are
we already?
Are we invading Pakistan?
Do we have some sort of plan to repay China and Japan, our
two largest creditors, so that our economic and foreign policy decisions are not biased by whose
thumb(s) we're under?
Do we have a plan to repay our giant national deficit?
Will there be
help for those in debt due to medical expenses?
Are we working to resolve the forthcoming issue
of Social Security needs outweighing the number of people on payroll?
Those are just a few. I'll have more.
RSS Feed
