excerpts:
- Jennifer Rubin thinks so. She’s right that the election won’t be decided by dog-eating claims or Julia-campaign-mockery. But she’s wrong if she suggests that we in the blogosphere should be ignoring those things.
- First, we’re winning on this stuff
- Second, the new media still doesn’t have the power to set the agenda, really.
- That last is the best reason of all. As I said when Obama was freshly elected, this is the blogosphere — if you’re not having fun, you’re doing it wrong!
Rubin has a few ideas that I like, for example:
- The gap between Obama's rhetoric and his performance.
- The president is confronted on his misleading language on energy policy and we see comprehensive reporting on the claims by energy producers that this administration is making it more difficult than ever to develop domestic oil supplies. The Post’s Glenn Kessler can serve as a guide:
- We see in print and on air coverage a side-by-side comparison of Obama’s high-minded 2008 rhetoric and his 2012 language.
- If 2008 was the election in which we saw journalistic sins of commission (blatant cheerleading for the president), 2012 is proving to be the election of omission in which the press turn a blind eye toward the president’s many failings.
I think our problems run a bit deeper. However, the current system is the only one we have and the current way is to bash the opponent as opposed to actually solving problems. On that score, Obama has fallen far short of his highminded rhetoric. As for Romney's campaign, it knocked out Gingrich's with negativity, and we still don't know what he is really all about. This blog is about solutions that are out there, if only we would just insist upon them, and get these politicians to actually do something about them.
No comments:
Post a Comment