Many a time you have heard a scientist or even common peer use the term "non-renewable" resource. What does that mean, exactly? It means that whatever you take out of the environment will not return for millions of years. So, if we mill it all out at once, we won't be able to use it for one hundred thousand generations later. That is a very, very serious thing.
Some examples are: Oil, Natural Gas, and Uranium. If these and other natural gasses were not very important to the majority of the world today, depleting them would not be a problem. In fact, it would be smart. We would be throwing away resources if we didn't use them. Unfortunately for us, our entire world revolves around these things. Oil in particular controls the global economy, and makes it possible for many many people to live.
Now, depending on the scientist you ask, you will receive a slightly varied timetable. Some say we are almost out now. Some say a few thousand years. Something all of them agree on, however, is that it is soon. Too soon for comfort.
If we ran short, contention and even war might follow. Then, when it all disappeared entirely, the world economy will collapse, and the conditions of living all over the world would drop like a bowling pin in a strike. Millions upon millions would grow hungry, and a large percent would die. I know this sounds like a horror story too crazy to be true, but this is no lie.
What can we do about it? Well, the best solution would be to ease out of the focus of the economy on non-renewable resources. We can't just change it instantly, because that would cause collapse of the entire economy. We would have to move one step at a time to focusing on renewable and clean sources of revenue, and using them responsibly. I hope that someday people would realize that we need to do these things, but I suppose that topic will have to be discussed in my next post.
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Those Who Would Fool You
It is truly sad how many people in the world don't seem to care about what they do to their environments, but perhaps you could say that it is far sadder when people take these problems, and pretend to care about the world just to make a boatload of money, gain fame, and in a few cases, get revenge. They manipulate the people who want to make a difference and do what they think is right just to achieve their own ends. In this post, I will describe a few kinds of people that do that.
First, Politicians. These guys are unique because of the position they hold. They have a lot of public influence and a lot of connections. They are persuasive of large amounts of people, making them very dangerous to the common people who just happen to listen.
Perhaps the best example I could give is of Al Gore. After his close, and perhaps unfair, defeat by George Bush for the office of President of the United States, Al Gore lost his credibility as a politician. So, he changed his tactics to gather the public interest in him. Some say for money, others say revenge.
Al Gore took the center stage as the man who would start the issue of man-made global warming. He was rich, so he dropped down millions and millions in creating efficient energy, traveled the U.S. to speak in front of crowds, and even created a movie "An Inconvenient Truth". Al Gore certainly pulled out all the stops, and even created a system called Carbon Credits, where you pay for the emissions you caused by driving, buying manufactured items, and even breathing.
Sounds like a good guy, right? No, actually. At all of his presentation, and in his movie, Gore has shown computer-generated graphs. At first when you hear that last sentence, you think "Well, that sounds accurate." The only problem is that kind of graphs computers use. The accurate graph of climate change is logarithmic, or linear. The kind that computers use are called exponential. Exponential causes very drawn-out although technically correct graphs that would make the thing being graphed seem much more than it is.
Another problem with Gore is his Carbon Credit Program. He runs the company, so he receives all of the money. Thousands of, well, suckers pour their money into him, which allows him to afford a large house, a beach home, and a few gas-guzzling private jets. He often openly takes pride for paying for his Carbon Credits, but since he owns the company, he is basically paying himself, which proves how hypocritical he really is.
Second, Businessmen. This is a more obvious topic. Every day when you watch TV or surf the web or read the paper, you are assaulted with advertisements. Page after page of people trying to sell you things. It is an effective marketing tool. So is environmental danger.
Companies are always making the claim that they are "Going Green." That they are helping the environment by releasing products that reduce trash and come from efficient renewable sources. That sort of talk is very attractive to many people, and makes big business.
Unfortunately, it is not one hundred percent true what the companies and such tell you about their products. They like to manipulate facts, bend rules, and to do jobs only half-way. They are very good at what they do, and usually go undetected.
This post is getting long, so I will stop here. There are hundreds of different people that would like to use the environment to get you to give them something. They use a strange sense of guilt associated with the planet that they plant there to make you feel terrible, and be sympathetic to their cause. It is a new psychological game, and we need to see through it.
Take heart. For every man who would take advantage of you, there are three that are passionate about the environment and change for the better. We need to spread the word, and stop the hypocrites in their tracks.
First, Politicians. These guys are unique because of the position they hold. They have a lot of public influence and a lot of connections. They are persuasive of large amounts of people, making them very dangerous to the common people who just happen to listen.
Perhaps the best example I could give is of Al Gore. After his close, and perhaps unfair, defeat by George Bush for the office of President of the United States, Al Gore lost his credibility as a politician. So, he changed his tactics to gather the public interest in him. Some say for money, others say revenge.
Al Gore took the center stage as the man who would start the issue of man-made global warming. He was rich, so he dropped down millions and millions in creating efficient energy, traveled the U.S. to speak in front of crowds, and even created a movie "An Inconvenient Truth". Al Gore certainly pulled out all the stops, and even created a system called Carbon Credits, where you pay for the emissions you caused by driving, buying manufactured items, and even breathing.
Sounds like a good guy, right? No, actually. At all of his presentation, and in his movie, Gore has shown computer-generated graphs. At first when you hear that last sentence, you think "Well, that sounds accurate." The only problem is that kind of graphs computers use. The accurate graph of climate change is logarithmic, or linear. The kind that computers use are called exponential. Exponential causes very drawn-out although technically correct graphs that would make the thing being graphed seem much more than it is.
Another problem with Gore is his Carbon Credit Program. He runs the company, so he receives all of the money. Thousands of, well, suckers pour their money into him, which allows him to afford a large house, a beach home, and a few gas-guzzling private jets. He often openly takes pride for paying for his Carbon Credits, but since he owns the company, he is basically paying himself, which proves how hypocritical he really is.
Second, Businessmen. This is a more obvious topic. Every day when you watch TV or surf the web or read the paper, you are assaulted with advertisements. Page after page of people trying to sell you things. It is an effective marketing tool. So is environmental danger.
Companies are always making the claim that they are "Going Green." That they are helping the environment by releasing products that reduce trash and come from efficient renewable sources. That sort of talk is very attractive to many people, and makes big business.
Unfortunately, it is not one hundred percent true what the companies and such tell you about their products. They like to manipulate facts, bend rules, and to do jobs only half-way. They are very good at what they do, and usually go undetected.
This post is getting long, so I will stop here. There are hundreds of different people that would like to use the environment to get you to give them something. They use a strange sense of guilt associated with the planet that they plant there to make you feel terrible, and be sympathetic to their cause. It is a new psychological game, and we need to see through it.
Take heart. For every man who would take advantage of you, there are three that are passionate about the environment and change for the better. We need to spread the word, and stop the hypocrites in their tracks.
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Global Warming
Okay, with this section of my blog, I will just immediately hit it with a hammer right away with this hotly-debated subject for my first post. I guess I will start out with the science of the whole matter (it is the boring part, but it is required to understand some other aspects of the post).
There is a common misconception about the definition of the term "Global Warming." Many people believes that it is the process of the Earth heating because of human actions and emissions. Not so. Global Warming is simply a term to describe the whole Earth heating, whether it be caused naturally, astronomically, or by human actions. Global Cooling is the same idea, only relating to the Earth getting colder. Many people have drilled the wrong definitions into the heads of others so as to try to achieve their own ends.
The theory of Human-Caused Global Warming is simple. Carbon Dioxide and other emissions block the warmth of the sun from escaping the Earth after it bounces off of the surface. Sounds plausible, right? Unfortunately it is not. Venus is often used to symbolize this type of Global Warming. The truth is that Carbon Dioxide DOES block sunlight. But here's the catch. Venus has had a couple billion years to get the gas into its atmosphere. It has so much of it, we would have to burn all of the oil the world has ever had several thousand times in order to create that kind of Global Warming. Good news for us. The bad news is that Global Warmings can be very, very dangerous.
Back a hundred million years ago there was a time called the Permian. It was a time of great deserts and immense heat. It was a time of Global Warming. Scientists debate today over the cause. Some say meteor, others say volcano interference, and many other things. Some even consider that we have another sun that comes every 40 million years to cause mass extinction. Anyways, the Earth heated 10 Degrees. Only ten. That was enough to kill 90% of life on Earth. Why? Because there are rich deposits of heat-sensitive minerals in the ocean. When the Earth heated up 10 degrees, those minerals melted, creating a reaction that skyrocketed the temperature immensely.
Global Warming is very much real, and has happened before. However, our Earth's temperature is always raising and lowering by two or three degrees as result of several natural processes. It is much easier to trigger an Ice Age than Global Warming.
On the topic of Global Cooling, I think that it is another dangerous thing. Effect-wise, it would be most disastrous to us early on. We would lose crops, forest, and many other things that are almost necessary for our survival. Then, after all of that is gone, the effects would not be as bad. Much of life on Earth would be annihilated, but not all would be lost. We could endure that. In the long run, Global Cooling would not be as disastrous.
There are some people that would like you to feel guilty about "poisoning" the planet, and profit from that. Some are benign enough, but there are a couple who do what they do for gain and to get revenge on others, including the government. I will address some of them in my next post.
There is a common misconception about the definition of the term "Global Warming." Many people believes that it is the process of the Earth heating because of human actions and emissions. Not so. Global Warming is simply a term to describe the whole Earth heating, whether it be caused naturally, astronomically, or by human actions. Global Cooling is the same idea, only relating to the Earth getting colder. Many people have drilled the wrong definitions into the heads of others so as to try to achieve their own ends.
The theory of Human-Caused Global Warming is simple. Carbon Dioxide and other emissions block the warmth of the sun from escaping the Earth after it bounces off of the surface. Sounds plausible, right? Unfortunately it is not. Venus is often used to symbolize this type of Global Warming. The truth is that Carbon Dioxide DOES block sunlight. But here's the catch. Venus has had a couple billion years to get the gas into its atmosphere. It has so much of it, we would have to burn all of the oil the world has ever had several thousand times in order to create that kind of Global Warming. Good news for us. The bad news is that Global Warmings can be very, very dangerous.
Back a hundred million years ago there was a time called the Permian. It was a time of great deserts and immense heat. It was a time of Global Warming. Scientists debate today over the cause. Some say meteor, others say volcano interference, and many other things. Some even consider that we have another sun that comes every 40 million years to cause mass extinction. Anyways, the Earth heated 10 Degrees. Only ten. That was enough to kill 90% of life on Earth. Why? Because there are rich deposits of heat-sensitive minerals in the ocean. When the Earth heated up 10 degrees, those minerals melted, creating a reaction that skyrocketed the temperature immensely.
Global Warming is very much real, and has happened before. However, our Earth's temperature is always raising and lowering by two or three degrees as result of several natural processes. It is much easier to trigger an Ice Age than Global Warming.
On the topic of Global Cooling, I think that it is another dangerous thing. Effect-wise, it would be most disastrous to us early on. We would lose crops, forest, and many other things that are almost necessary for our survival. Then, after all of that is gone, the effects would not be as bad. Much of life on Earth would be annihilated, but not all would be lost. We could endure that. In the long run, Global Cooling would not be as disastrous.
There are some people that would like you to feel guilty about "poisoning" the planet, and profit from that. Some are benign enough, but there are a couple who do what they do for gain and to get revenge on others, including the government. I will address some of them in my next post.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Environment: An Overview
This is the first post in the Environment section of my blog. Thank you again to all those political people who have followed and read my previous posts.
When considering the environment is, one must ask a question. What is the environment? I know this may seem juvenile and obvious, it is a good statement, because no single person understands all known aspects of it. To put it simply, the environment is the world we live in. Whether it be a wild jungle, a flowing plain, a frozen summit, or even a row of apartment buildings, it is environment. Even those around you are environment. Everything we do, whether it be eat, sleep, drink, walk, or talk, it is connected with the environment. Like the topic or not, it is very important to you and your well being.
Why then, would we start to alter our environment, and make it harder for us to live? I believe that the answer can be found in ancient pre-history, when man first came to be. With our advanced brains and our grasping hands and swiveling thumbs, we are environment-altering machines. Our brains allow us to force an adaption using other parts of the environment without waiting for genetics to do the job. That is why humans are weak, slow land-walkers, because we don't need much strength to stab with a spear or shoot an arrow. This was a great thing back then. However, there is a bad side.
You see, nothing has ever been created like us before, so we are a whole new deal to nature, whose best response to us has really only been disease. Once we got out of small tribes, and started over-running the earth, nature couldn't keep up, because we alter the nature too quickly. That is not a problem in one or two small patches on the earth, but when the whole earth is consumed by us, there is no hope. We basically control nature now, although she does lose her temper now and again and smacks us with a hurricane or earthquake. We are just too far-spread and smart for our own or natures goods.
What does this mean then? MAJOR RESPONSIBILITY. We have to make sure to alter in the right ways for long-term survival, and replenish as much as we can.
Happily, many have realized this and gone on to campaign for great changes and actions. Unfortunately, there are those who realize this, and use it for their own gain. They create phony evidence, tell convincing lies, and pretend to be on the good side to further themselves. This blog will try to weed out some of the things they do. Also, many people who want good change are oppressed. Corporations have had a major influence in the environmental branch of government affairs. They bribe to have more rights to gain money, yet destroy or pollute many things. They lobby to gain support of major politicians. Yet again, I mention that we the people can change these things for the good
I hope that I will be able to accomplish what I want to in the next little while. Please enjoy and comment so that I can hear your opinions and better mine.
When considering the environment is, one must ask a question. What is the environment? I know this may seem juvenile and obvious, it is a good statement, because no single person understands all known aspects of it. To put it simply, the environment is the world we live in. Whether it be a wild jungle, a flowing plain, a frozen summit, or even a row of apartment buildings, it is environment. Even those around you are environment. Everything we do, whether it be eat, sleep, drink, walk, or talk, it is connected with the environment. Like the topic or not, it is very important to you and your well being.
Why then, would we start to alter our environment, and make it harder for us to live? I believe that the answer can be found in ancient pre-history, when man first came to be. With our advanced brains and our grasping hands and swiveling thumbs, we are environment-altering machines. Our brains allow us to force an adaption using other parts of the environment without waiting for genetics to do the job. That is why humans are weak, slow land-walkers, because we don't need much strength to stab with a spear or shoot an arrow. This was a great thing back then. However, there is a bad side.
You see, nothing has ever been created like us before, so we are a whole new deal to nature, whose best response to us has really only been disease. Once we got out of small tribes, and started over-running the earth, nature couldn't keep up, because we alter the nature too quickly. That is not a problem in one or two small patches on the earth, but when the whole earth is consumed by us, there is no hope. We basically control nature now, although she does lose her temper now and again and smacks us with a hurricane or earthquake. We are just too far-spread and smart for our own or natures goods.
What does this mean then? MAJOR RESPONSIBILITY. We have to make sure to alter in the right ways for long-term survival, and replenish as much as we can.
Happily, many have realized this and gone on to campaign for great changes and actions. Unfortunately, there are those who realize this, and use it for their own gain. They create phony evidence, tell convincing lies, and pretend to be on the good side to further themselves. This blog will try to weed out some of the things they do. Also, many people who want good change are oppressed. Corporations have had a major influence in the environmental branch of government affairs. They bribe to have more rights to gain money, yet destroy or pollute many things. They lobby to gain support of major politicians. Yet again, I mention that we the people can change these things for the good
I hope that I will be able to accomplish what I want to in the next little while. Please enjoy and comment so that I can hear your opinions and better mine.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
So What Can We Do?
For a few months have I posted my political opinions and facts. At times it felt like I was beating a dead horse, but thank you to all of you who have read and responded to many of my posts. As such, I am going to bring the politic-specific section of my blog to a close, for this blog is to help me get all of my ideas out there, not just about politics. I hope that you were enlightened by my work.
Now, you have heard my rants. My anger against corporations, my two cents on political parties, my disgust against the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I have also mentioned how all of my posts make up such a small portion of the mistakes and evils of the political world, that it is maybe only 1%. You may be feeling a little down on your country, for all of us have grown up with our own biased opinions of the U.S., and now that some of the truth has been revealed, you start to question your very being. This last post is to raise your hearts, and turn you towards a greater destiny and future.
America is truly a good country, full of opportunity and justice. We are the people, for which the government was originally created. Our constitution was created by the people, and for the people. United we stand, separate we fall. That is why we are the United States. There is great hope for the future if only we look towards it together. If all of the citizens realized the truth, and they act, we cannot fail. We have to build our future with our hands, and no matter how battered, bruised, or bloody they get, we have to press on.
You now have the knowledge. Increase it. Share it. Fight as hard as you can so that one day, we can have the bright future I have promised. There is a chair in Independence Hall. It has the engraving of half of a sun in the top of it. When the Declaration of Independence was signed, Benjamin Franklin saw the chair. He said that it could either be rising or setting. He decided that it was a rising sun. Now, is it a rising, or a setting sun? And if it is setting, can we endure the night until the break of dawn, and the beams of a better world. A single man can create rights for millions. So, how much good could millions of people do?
Thank you for all of your support. I am pleased to announce the subject of my next few weeks of posts. Environment.
Now, you have heard my rants. My anger against corporations, my two cents on political parties, my disgust against the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I have also mentioned how all of my posts make up such a small portion of the mistakes and evils of the political world, that it is maybe only 1%. You may be feeling a little down on your country, for all of us have grown up with our own biased opinions of the U.S., and now that some of the truth has been revealed, you start to question your very being. This last post is to raise your hearts, and turn you towards a greater destiny and future.
America is truly a good country, full of opportunity and justice. We are the people, for which the government was originally created. Our constitution was created by the people, and for the people. United we stand, separate we fall. That is why we are the United States. There is great hope for the future if only we look towards it together. If all of the citizens realized the truth, and they act, we cannot fail. We have to build our future with our hands, and no matter how battered, bruised, or bloody they get, we have to press on.
You now have the knowledge. Increase it. Share it. Fight as hard as you can so that one day, we can have the bright future I have promised. There is a chair in Independence Hall. It has the engraving of half of a sun in the top of it. When the Declaration of Independence was signed, Benjamin Franklin saw the chair. He said that it could either be rising or setting. He decided that it was a rising sun. Now, is it a rising, or a setting sun? And if it is setting, can we endure the night until the break of dawn, and the beams of a better world. A single man can create rights for millions. So, how much good could millions of people do?
Thank you for all of your support. I am pleased to announce the subject of my next few weeks of posts. Environment.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Is America Truly The Best?
For all of those sick of politics, or simply sick of me critisizing what you believe in, this is my second to last post on politics before I move on to another subject entirely. Now, I know that I have been putting down America and a lot of its practices and such, but I am not a hater. In fact, I am very grateful to have been born in this country, because it is a great country, and it has great opportunity possible for the generations. The question in the title might make my last few sentences seem hipocrytical, but although America is a good country, I don't believe that it is the best.
You and almost every other American child have heard your parents and other adults tell you about how great and marvelous America is, and how this and that are better that any other country's this and that. That we have such a great country that we rule the world, that we are the best. That they are proud to be an American. This is not new to you, I bet, and you probably would never guess that in any random country, be it France, Mongolia, Sudan, Congo, Paraguay, Canada, or any other country, that they do the exact same thing. Popular music tells the story of generations of pride in ones own country. Every country thinks that they are the best, and that they are better than the rest in every single way.
Why does everyone say such a thing? Why does everyone deny the existence of a country better than their own? Well, I guess the main reason is that, in your country, there are differences than in others. Different ways of talking, eating, and even using the restroom. You only want to mingle with things that you feel comfortable with, and those are the things you grew up with. You feel comfortable and ready for life in that country. Other country's traditions weird you out, make you feel uncomfortable, so that is why you think that your country is the best.
Now, in this endless mess of human drama and opinion, what is the best country? How do you determine which country is better than all the rest? The simple answer: you can't. There is no way to compare such opiniotated topics and come to a completely right conclusion. So, in a way, there is no best country. Every country is just another country, not a better or a worse one. A country can be good, but not better than another.
So now you have heard my scoop about comparing countries, its time to give the good news. We can do something about it. I don't know how much better I can describe it than in a RUSH song called Territories, as it affirms and explains my points probably better than I do, and the lyrics to it are found at this site. Read them and comment on them. http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/r/rush/territories.html
If you read the lyrics, you probably saw the last paragraph that reads:
Better the Pride that resides
In a citizen of the world
Than the pride that divides
When a colorful rag is unfurled
That is what you can do. Love the world, and have pride in it. Even better, love all of the humans on the planet, and feel prideful to be human. If there are aliens, feel prideful to be alive. On and on and on. You see, we need to realize that we can't divide ourselves into territories, and look through the spyglass in reverse. We need to realize that we are not alone and that we need to look ahead WITH other countries, and not racing to get into the lead.
You and almost every other American child have heard your parents and other adults tell you about how great and marvelous America is, and how this and that are better that any other country's this and that. That we have such a great country that we rule the world, that we are the best. That they are proud to be an American. This is not new to you, I bet, and you probably would never guess that in any random country, be it France, Mongolia, Sudan, Congo, Paraguay, Canada, or any other country, that they do the exact same thing. Popular music tells the story of generations of pride in ones own country. Every country thinks that they are the best, and that they are better than the rest in every single way.
Why does everyone say such a thing? Why does everyone deny the existence of a country better than their own? Well, I guess the main reason is that, in your country, there are differences than in others. Different ways of talking, eating, and even using the restroom. You only want to mingle with things that you feel comfortable with, and those are the things you grew up with. You feel comfortable and ready for life in that country. Other country's traditions weird you out, make you feel uncomfortable, so that is why you think that your country is the best.
Now, in this endless mess of human drama and opinion, what is the best country? How do you determine which country is better than all the rest? The simple answer: you can't. There is no way to compare such opiniotated topics and come to a completely right conclusion. So, in a way, there is no best country. Every country is just another country, not a better or a worse one. A country can be good, but not better than another.
So now you have heard my scoop about comparing countries, its time to give the good news. We can do something about it. I don't know how much better I can describe it than in a RUSH song called Territories, as it affirms and explains my points probably better than I do, and the lyrics to it are found at this site. Read them and comment on them. http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/r/rush/territories.html
If you read the lyrics, you probably saw the last paragraph that reads:
Better the Pride that resides
In a citizen of the world
Than the pride that divides
When a colorful rag is unfurled
That is what you can do. Love the world, and have pride in it. Even better, love all of the humans on the planet, and feel prideful to be human. If there are aliens, feel prideful to be alive. On and on and on. You see, we need to realize that we can't divide ourselves into territories, and look through the spyglass in reverse. We need to realize that we are not alone and that we need to look ahead WITH other countries, and not racing to get into the lead.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
A Truly "Savage" Political Media
I have been waiting to post this post on here for a very, very long time. For those of you who listen or have a relation that listenes to political talk radio, you will get my title. It refers to a talk radio program that features every day on KLO at 4:00 (if you live in Utah near Ogden). Its name is The Savage Nation, and it is hosted by one Michael Savage. My grandfather used to listen to him (before he passed away), so I got to hear his utterly lovely voice everyday. Enough sarcasm, for I will explain why him and other political talk shows are definately something you don't want to listen to.
In many of Savage's "discussions," he give opinions, and one or two fair points, but he is also a degrading, insulting, and insolent attention hog (although not matched by Bill O'Reily, which I will get into later). In every disscussion he has, he mocks and insults every Democrat known to man. For some reason, he has picked Nancy Pelosi to be the one who takes on the most mocking. Everything from a wrinkle on her face to the way he laughs, he insults and mocks. It sickens me that a man (dare I call him that?) who has an honest right-leaning Republican opinion feels he needs to show it by being insulting and mocking of the way people are instead of even their opinions!
Next up on the frying pan is one Laura Ingraham. She is also on KLO, but she is on at 7:00. She is a Repulican like Savage, but unlike him, she does not insult often. She is much more civilized and content with just giving opinions, but here is the catch with all people who give their opinions to the public: They can't deal with other people's opinions, and disregard evidence to do so. Laura is notorious for this, even though she is tame in the demoralizing of political officials department.
Now, the last one I am going to discuss is FOX NEWS. If you have ever watched it, it claims to be unbiased and fair, but is it? No, absolutely not. It is a Republican leaning newstation that provides what I like to call "Infotainment" instead of sheer facts. Each caster displays bias and thinks they have the dominant opinion. One of the worst is a man by the name of Bill O'Reily. He irritates me greatly. He won't let other people give opinions or evidence. Every time they try, he cuts them off and criticizes them, failing to give them a chance. I love it when someone puts Bill off guard, and is able to resist his cut-offs, and gives him back some of his own medicine.
Wow, rereading this post seems to mark me as either a Democrat or a hipocrite, but I hope I am neither. I haven't heard Democrat talk shows, but I believe that they would be just as bad as Republican ones. Remember, don't just take my word for it, listen to them a little and form your own opinions about them, and comment back what you believe.
In many of Savage's "discussions," he give opinions, and one or two fair points, but he is also a degrading, insulting, and insolent attention hog (although not matched by Bill O'Reily, which I will get into later). In every disscussion he has, he mocks and insults every Democrat known to man. For some reason, he has picked Nancy Pelosi to be the one who takes on the most mocking. Everything from a wrinkle on her face to the way he laughs, he insults and mocks. It sickens me that a man (dare I call him that?) who has an honest right-leaning Republican opinion feels he needs to show it by being insulting and mocking of the way people are instead of even their opinions!
Next up on the frying pan is one Laura Ingraham. She is also on KLO, but she is on at 7:00. She is a Repulican like Savage, but unlike him, she does not insult often. She is much more civilized and content with just giving opinions, but here is the catch with all people who give their opinions to the public: They can't deal with other people's opinions, and disregard evidence to do so. Laura is notorious for this, even though she is tame in the demoralizing of political officials department.
Now, the last one I am going to discuss is FOX NEWS. If you have ever watched it, it claims to be unbiased and fair, but is it? No, absolutely not. It is a Republican leaning newstation that provides what I like to call "Infotainment" instead of sheer facts. Each caster displays bias and thinks they have the dominant opinion. One of the worst is a man by the name of Bill O'Reily. He irritates me greatly. He won't let other people give opinions or evidence. Every time they try, he cuts them off and criticizes them, failing to give them a chance. I love it when someone puts Bill off guard, and is able to resist his cut-offs, and gives him back some of his own medicine.
Wow, rereading this post seems to mark me as either a Democrat or a hipocrite, but I hope I am neither. I haven't heard Democrat talk shows, but I believe that they would be just as bad as Republican ones. Remember, don't just take my word for it, listen to them a little and form your own opinions about them, and comment back what you believe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)