Two working together (for the
benefit of the whole).
Will it ever happen in
Washington, our nations capitol? I’m
going to say, “Of course. It has to." It won’t be easy. I will project optimism.
In a TV interview this morning,
Haley Barbour, former Republican Governor of Mississippi as an example of his
party knowing how to compromise cited Ronald Reagan as having that valuable
skill. Lyndon Johnson and Bill Clinton
are frequently referenced for their reaching-out and working-with-others
style.
Actually, I think a mountain of
verbal turmoil higher than Mt. Rushmore will have to be climbed before we see meaningful
compromise in our Congress these days.
The same is true for conciliatory activity between the President and Congress.
A view from The William J. Clinton Presidential Library |
Why would I think that? Because it’s a different world from that of
Lyndon Johnson, Ronald Reagan, even Bill Clinton. Too much of our print, radio and TV media
seems to incite more than inspire.
In these times, opinion-driven
news programming comes to us with a strongly antagonistic viewpoint - entertainment feeding our emotions, not our
intellect. Do viewers mostly restrict themselves to the
network that supports their political view?
I think so. This does nothing to
encourage their consideration of the merits in another point of view.
Back in the days of Lyndon,
Ronnie or Bill, how prolific was talk radio? Did resoundingly partial TV news
talkers keep us, the constituency, tethered to the party line?
There was no FOX News and its
promotion of the conservative agenda.
There was no MSNBC enthusiastically supporting the liberal viewpoint. Today, disrespectful programming colorful,
practically offensive, devalues the objectives of the other political party. I have a friend who tells me she will not
look at FOX News. “I'm not looking at that stuff.” I understand.
I choose to look because I want to know why and how deeply they feel. In spite of the bruising negativity, there is
a chance I might learn something. That’s a good thing. Once or twice, watching, working through what distressed me;
I actually grasped a premise of some merit.
Too bad anyone has to hurt to learn.
Yesterday we re-elected President Barack Obama, Democrat to serve another four years in the White
House. Election results show the
Democrats maintained their majority in the Senate. Republicans will continue to lead the House
of Representatives.
I’ve just turned on FOX
News and shook my head at the relentless combative and negative discussion of what
might happen, what is happening and what didn’t happen in Washington these past
four years. Not one bit of positive
commentary was offered. Depressing.
Bipartisanship in Washington must exist in
order to produce legislation important to correct what is broken in our
troubled economy.
Do you think the media helps
or hurts achieve quality governance, i.e., bipartisanship?
I’m thinking televised opinionated
political news is primarily destructive, gives no added value. It contradicts any possibility of promoting compromise. It’s not a good thing.
Your opinion?
I agree. Most news is provoking. Is that in the definition of news, to provoke rather than inform? I guess I'm confused. If that is the case, that news programs provoke more than inform then it's not news we watch it's entertainment. And in that case I will choose different entertainment and get my news in other ways.
ReplyDelete"Provoking", hmmm I like that word assessing some of the news broadcasts these days. And, already some of the ridiculous feedback because Barack Obama was the nation's choice over Mitt Romney has 'stepped over the line' of acceptability for our public airways in my estimation. The FCC is in charge, I'm thinking and may have to initiate an inquiry before it calms down so we can move Forward. Well, thanks for sharing your opinion.
ReplyDelete