We have "Truth in Advertising" laws. I suggest that we create "#Truth in #Politics" laws.

We have "Truth in Advertising" laws. I suggest that we create "Truth in Politicizing" laws. If a candidate or PAC lies about a candidate during a debate or a commercial, they would have to 1) pay for a commercial on which 2) they say they were wrong (I lied, I misquoted, I misunderstood...) about 'x', 3) but the truth is that my opponent...
 
Maybe then we would not have so much garbage going around and so much spinning in a way that it could hardly be called the truth anymore. Take it out of their campaign funds!

In a debate like tonight’s with each calling the other a liar over and over, how can we ultimately know the truth. Do you just stick with your Party? Do you wait and see how the media spins it? Whoever wins the poll? Do you check on sites that pretend to tell the truth but are highly politicized themselves, like MoveOn.org, FactCheck.com or BarackObama.com/TruthTeam. Just a hint here - his website is going to say he told the truth. You can't trust each candidate to check themselves.

We need outside sources. Go to statistics, to economic indicators for more than the past 4 years.  Go to newspaper reports or radio interviews - listen to the whole thing, not just the sound bites; look at governmental records.  I bet you can look up a whole lot of things stated in the debate that was immediately  contradicted by the other, go beyond the sound bites to the whole context; look at governmental records. I bet you can look up Licenses for drilling on Federal Lands somewhere. The question is not should we or should we not, but what is true about drilling there based on what these two (angry/frustrated/contradictory) men said.

Lot's of "Talk to the Hand" going on...

Too much work? Don’t want to do all that research? Then go ahead and vote on who is cuter, or who the news says wins the popularity contest, vote for who is more charming. None of that will matter in the Presidency, but what the heck. Even a straight party ticket without knowing the parties’ platforms is pretty worthless.

Or, if doing a little research is too much for you, then please, don’t vote.


Heather J. Kirk

#MittRomney Can't Put #PBS or #BigBird Out of Business - Even as President...Unless Listeners Stop Giving

Will Mitt Make Big Bird Disappear? Turns out cuts in federal funding would hardly make a dent. But why do so few listeners and watchers donate? I don’t have the answer, but let’s take a look at a few of the facts and a real life example.

Mitt Romney “threatened” to cut funding for Jim Lehr and Big Bird – or actually for PBS, but Big Bird has been used as the mascot to upset children around the country.

A silly example:

 

Would we really lose PBS if it did not get federal funding? (Note: there is a difference between federal and “public” funding)

National Public Radio (NPR) faced a similar situation not too long ago...and it is still going strong, because people who listen (the 'public' in ‘public radio’ and ‘public broadcasting’) are the largest portion of donors, and there are many other sources of funding.

I even heard Republican David Schweikert (Arizona Congressional District 6) say in an interview on KJZZ (our local NPR station) say that while he voted to cut national spending, he gives personally to KJZZ. I was impressed, especially since only 8% of listeners do.

I think people should look at and understand the way funding works before they fall for the gimmick (lie) that a lack of federal funding will put public broadcasting under. Government funds only account for 4.6% of NPR funs -real life example -down from 6% in 2009 - which means that 1.4% constitutes the reduction in NPR’s total budget by the cuts in federal funding).

Here’s a great visual: http://www.npr.org/about/aboutnpr/publicradiofinances.html   If we want Public Broadcasting so badly, we should be willing to pay for it - and in fact we do! At least 8% of us do - providing 39% of the budget. And by the way, "big bad corporations" also donate a good-sized chunk to National Public Radio (17%) - much more than the government in fact.

 

“Disclaimer: I do listen and I do give to public radio. I do not watch PBS – because I can’t receive it with my rabbit ear antennae. Which means I don’t “give” to cable either. Interesting that ao many people are up in arms about cutting federal funding to PBS, but don’t give to PBS, while they do give LOTS to commercial cable or satellite companies. Go figure…

Heather J. Kirk