At a time when our country is at war in Iraq, and theoretically in the middle of a “War on Terror”, shouldn’t the positions of the only two parties we essentially get to choose from be fullied aired on the American airwaves so that the populace can make the most informed decision possible?
Surely the conventions now are produced and scripted to appeal to mostly one segment of the voting populace (the middle), but still it seems to me that the more Americans get to see of both major political parties — even if they are striving to show only their best/most palatable face for four days — the better the chances are that the people might have a better understanding of the real issues at stake at a crucial moment in our nation’s history.
To that end, though the “breaking news” and “Fox News Alerts” may be at a minimum at the modern day Political Convention, it seems to me that the gathering itself, and the ideas presented throughout, ought to be “newsworthy” enough for the Networks to set aside 3 hours a night for 4 days every 4 four measly years even if it means a few dollars lost for their Corporate Parents and Shareholders.
News and Public Affairs has always been a loss-leader for the networks, but it was once the jewel in the crown for the nets, adding a certain prestige to these corporations who are, after all, making money by using our public airwaves.
In service to their country, and to their public, the networks ought to be airing these conventions whether they are, arguably enough, “infomercials” for the party interests or not.
Anything that can be done to aid the voting public in increasing their knowledge about what’s going on — ironically enough at a time when they are being fed more dis-information than ever before via the highly charged partisan media — would be a service to our country. Even if it means a few dollars lost for the Corporations and their Share Holders.
The biggest “news” at these conventions has become how the “news” business is failing our nation in the name of corporate greed disguised as “news” judgement — or in reality at this point, a lack thereof.
I agree with you. It should be on every night on the three major networks. However, there is always cable like C-span for the hardcore followers of politics. Sadly, most Americans do not pay attention to either party. We learned that a lot of Americans can’t even vote correctly. That may be good because even though voting is a right, one should be informed before one votes.
Last night was the real Democratic party on display with Sharpton and when the other speakers talked about the war on terror, not much applause. I thought I saw Shep (name ?) from FOX stick a finger in his mouth like "gag me" when he thought he was off camera as his partner Greta interviewed Albright.
The convention last night? BORING!!!!!!!!
Clinton was never boring.
Even if it was on the three networks, I do not think many would watch it anyway.
I still think Bush will win easily because he has been berated for months by every group, book, movie, TV show, hollywood celeb, 1000s of anti-Bush webpages, yet he is not been totally clobbered to death in the polls.
If we catch Osama, if we find the WMDs in Iraq or in some other country where they were moved to, it’s over for the Dems. You never know what may happen before the election.
The economy is booming and a famous person once said "It’s the economy stupid."
Paul,
The irony never ceases: "…one should be informed before one votes. "
1. "If we catch Osama…"
If shit were gold paying bills would be a bit cheaper. i think youj are missing the big picture of the capture Osama mantra. Pakistan is a political powderkeg. In the last elections the MMP put itself in a position to take power in the next election. The capture or kill of bin Laden would assure this. Their electoral victories are linked to the invasion of Afghanistan and the invasion of Iraq, Why fear the MMP? They promote the same political theology as the Taliban. If bin Laden is captured/killed the victory of the MMP is assured and these loons will have nuclear capability. We saw the same thing with the father of "Islam’s bomb" He was spreading the technology far and wide. When captured he was not punished. If he were, there goes Pakistan. i am not saying he won’t be captured but capturing bin Laden could be worse than not. Things may have been different if Afghanistan were handled differently or Iraq had not occurred.
2. "…if we find the WMDs in Iraq or in some other country where they were moved to…" What is it with you guys and the WMD? According to the man who investigated this issue, David Kat, the stockpiles of WMD were destroyed in the period after Gulf I and 1998. What’s more, again according to Kay, Iraq engaged in no WMD production in the 90s. And (two burst bubbles in one item) no one is really looking for them.
"When I had started out, I had made it a condition that ISG be exclusively focused on WMD (weapons of mass destruction)," he said. "That’s no longer so."
"He" is Kay.
And why look for them?
"Duelfer also has recently expressed skepticism that there are any weapons of mass destruction to be found in Iraq, and his appointment was seen by some as an indication that the Bush administration may now be trying to figure out why pre-war intelligence on Iraq was apparently so wrong."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/a...NGU84H6191.DTL
Well, we never know what may happen but we DO know that no WMD will be found.
Paul,
Another thing….you have the names of "the" communists and "the" socialists yet?