Here is how disconnected Americans are

[nadinbrzezinski]

Conversation with one of our local grognards, who did not vote mind you. He was insulted by two people trying to buy an office...

So he was ranting against the HCR. I asked... well you have grandkids right?

Yeah... I do. One of them has diabetes (pre-existing condition) and is 22 (would be off parents policy)

So you realize your kid has insurance and is still in his parents insurance because of the HCR?

No, it is part of the policy.

So I calmly spent the twenty minutes explaining this.

He was shocked, surprised... et al. He finally had an aha moment.... and yes he would have been one of those seniors voting GOP on Tuesday but both Fiorina and Whitman were too much to take.

But this is how disconnected they are. So I prodded, you watch FOX?

They tell the truth.

Yet they never mentioned this?

Well, no, but they did tell me how expensive this is.

You are aware the GOP wants TO SLASH your medicare and social security, A few of them even ran, and WERE ELECTED on a platform that SS and medicare are not constitutional and they want to get rid of it... period.

But...

No, serious, they ran on that platform...

That was the end of the conversation. I don't think he will stop watching fox, I expect to have this conversation like clockwork in six months...and for him to still rail against Lib'ruls... at least, not that I encourage this... he did not vote because two women running for office and spending in one case 140 million of their own money was too much to take.Yes, it is the fact that these two were women. I suspect if they were men, it would be fine. But this is what we face. I call it not willful ignorance, but disconnected from reality... and it hurts...

It is also cognitive dissonance... and large swaths of the population have it, in spades.

Part of it is the anti intellectualism that is pervasive. Part of it is deep in the cultural DNA. We will never be like Europe... forget it... it is NOT part of the national DNA... unless you are talking of that place in the 1930s. That we are going, and in fact we are there.

And like them, we still think we are free...

[Hepburn]

1. KnR...

...and the vote came out -0-.

Why in the hell would anyone unRec this thread??? :shrug:

[LiberalEsto]

2. Fox is toxic

Total mind-poison.

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. It is but this is not just fox

Americans have had, for a long time mind you, longer than Fox, this disconnect.

We are not a country, but in some ways a collection of individuals. It is part of the far more toxic american creed.

If Americans knew their history (see about anti intellectualism) instead of myth... and actually understood where we actually came from...

We are a nation that descended from slaves, and not just AM, also whites... a nation of convicts and a nation of immigrants... that is far from the american creed? Isn't it? Instead we love John Wayne. Don't get me wrong, his movies are good... but they are pure, sheer myth making.

[glinda]

10. There are not enough outlets in the public's face explaining things to them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. It goes beyond that

even if this is a large part of it.

[glinda]

18. Agree but ignorance was the main attribute of everyone. Voting or not voting.

[cutlassmama]

3. They blindly listen to Faux Noise and think it's the truth. They are dangerous

to this country.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. See above as to why this is not just fox

it is deep in the national DNA

[deutsey]

4. If he's anything like the conservatives I usually befuddle with facts

He'll forget everything you said.

I've literally had the exact same discussion with this one guy over and over (with me having the last word because his talking points only go so far)...each time it's like our previous discussion never occurred.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Like I said, I will have this conversation again

like clockwork, in six months.

I've had it a few times before. At least the fact that medicare IS a government service FINALLY sunk in.

[spanone]

6. politically, truth is dead. people are voting against their own self interests

[gratuitous]

9. Look forward to explaining things over and over again

One of the killer lies out there this cycle was "so-and-so voted to cut Medicare by $500 billion!" I thought that was a strange thing to condemn someone for, particularly from the "small government" crowd. But where did this "cut" in Medicare come from? It turns out that health care reform is projected to save Medicare some $500 billion in the next 10 years through better system management and efficiency. So a $500 billion saving gets turned into a "cut" once the Republican Noise Machine gets ahold of it.

But who's going to track the truth of that down? Certainly not nadinbrzezinski's local grognard.

[Hawkowl]

11. 1984 Orwellian brain washing

I'd argue that it is much, much deeper than cognitive dissonance. I think Ailes and Murdock view Orwell's book "1984" as a blueprint for society. Specifically, televisions in every public place spewing their lies 24/7. Through sheer volume of repetition and by beautiful packaging with colorful, exciting graphics and beautiful porn star like spokespeople, the people will believe anything you tell them.

All this is under the guise of free speech, so it is hard to argue against prohibiting it. I believe a solution is a combination of the Fairness Doctrine and breaking apart the "news" monopolies. Limiting ownership of the number of TV, radio stations, newspapers, magazines, and internet outlets that one single company can own. I believe the media is the problem that needs to be fixed first. For without it, people will not know the truth.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. That is part of it

[marions ghost]

14. +++++

but how to fix it?

Welcome to Murdochistan.

[felix_numinous]

15. You planted a seed

-people's stubbornness and pride often do not allow them to admit their worldview is a mistaken when first confronted with the truth. I have a Repub sibling who took years to admit (in private) that he 'may have been' wrong about his previous opinions. He has been an interesting reference point for my communication skills all these years.

He is very stubborn. In 2003 I told him that Bush and his administration were criminals, Halliburton was a front for Cheney's war crimes, and that this truth would come out. (He forced me into a rant at a huge family reunion, but I think I retained my dignity!) He did finally do his homework like I encouraged him to do, so he found out the truth. I never shamed him or embarrassed him, but just asked him to do his own research, he has a computer so he did.

He is still a Repub but I never continued talking politics with him so I ceased being an influence on him, and he returned to the Fox. He socializes with conservatives so he is influenced by them. I think what he and I have in common is that we both abhor injustice, but he has to be convinced who the criminals really are.

[starroute]

16. I keep thinking about the 1960's teach-ins

Not that you'd get guys like the one described in the OP to go to one -- but I think it starts with providing the facts and the arguments to the people who want them and moving outward from there.

I'm becoming increasingly convinced we need a Movement -- liberals are notorious for pinning all their hopes on the next election while the right is taking over the debate -- and this is certainly one place to start.

What's more, we've got all sorts of resources now that didn't exist 45 years ago, from YouTube to podcasts to streaming audio. (My son told me yesterday that he and a friend are doing a podcast on roleplaying games -- and that you can distribute them as free downloads through iTunes.)

If the American people, even the well-meaning ones, are painfully ill-informed, it's our first job to inform them. And it doesn't take a lot of time or money or waiting on the politicians to make the first move.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teach-in

A teach-in is similar to a general educational forum on any complicated issue, usually an issue involving current political affairs. The main difference between a teach-in and a seminar is the refusal to limit the discussion to a specific frame of time or an academic scope of the topic. Teach-ins are meant to be practical, participatory, and oriented toward action. While they include experts lecturing on the area of their expertise, discussion and questions from the audience are welcome. "Teach ins" were popularized during the U.S. government's involvement in Vietnam. As an example, a teach-in at the University of Michigan in May 1965 began with a discussion of the Vietnam war draft and ended with the logistics of a takeover of the University. ...

The first major teach-in was organized by Students for a Democratic Society at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor on March 24–25, 1965. The event was attended by about 3,500 and consisted of debates, lectures, movies, and musical events aimed at protesting the war. ...

The largest Vietnam teach-in was held on May 21–23, 1965 at UC Berkeley. The event was organized by the Vietnam Day Committee (VDC), an organizing group founded ex-grad student (sociology) Jerry Rubin, UCB Professor Stephen Smale (Mathematics), and others. The 36 hour event was held on a playing field where Zellerbach Auditorium is now located. From 10-30,000 people turned out.

Participants in the event included: Dr. Benjamin Spock; veteran socialist leader Norman Thomas; novelist Norman Mailer; and independent journalist I. F. Stone. Other speakers included: California Assemblymen Willie Brown, William Stanton and John Burton; Dave Dellinger (political activist); James Aronson (National Guardian magazine); philosopher Alan Watts; comedian Dick Gregory; Paul Krassner (editor, The Realist) ... Performers included: folk singer Phil Ochs; improv group, The Committee and others. The proceedings were recorded and broadcast, many of them live, by Berkeley FM station KPFA.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. Yes we need a movement

and we need to show up (no not at elections at your congressman's meetings with placards) and be loud about it.

That the tea partiers are doing correctly

[MrScorpio]

19. And that's how the game is won and lost, people nt

[bobbolink]

20. If Obama and the Dems described it so poorly that they can be drowned out by one network,

then That is the problem.

[KossackRealityCheck]

21. I had a similar conversation with the local pizza shop owner nt

[Mimosa]

22. The Fairness Doctrine must be restored for broadcasting

It actually worked back in the 1950s and 1960s.

[gkhouston]

23. +1,000,000. I remember the news of the '60s. I tell my child that what's on

the air these days is mostly "news to keep you stupid".

[KharmaTrain]

24. Not About This It Wouldn't...

The Fairness Doctrine had nothing to do with news coverage. It pertained to mandated public service programming that no longer is required (most of it ran during graveyard weekend hours) or to assure all candidates would be able to get their commercials on stations at a low rate. News wasn't, nor can't be covered by equal time as there can be an endless number of opinions on an issue.

What was different in the 50s and 60s was the limited amount of broadcast news that was available. Most networks offered 15 and then 30 minutes a night with little room for opinion...it bred a generation of reporters who stuck to facts rather than spin...get the most information out in the limited time they had. That changed with the 24/7 cable channels. They have tons of time to waste and its cheaper to do it loading up on pundits and talking heads who've learned to spin and distort; encouraged by networks who see "news" and entertainment and a profit center. Facts and news departments are money losers...talking heads and food fights make big money. It's the free market.

The big question is the definition of "fairness"...whose fairness? Yours? Mine? Rupert Murdochs? It's why the name "fairness doctrine" never really properly described what it did.

[Mimosa]

25. Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly and Glenn Beck are propaganda

Too many people believe their lies. There's simply no really counter arguments and information on TV or the radio. MSNBC isn't enough.

[tomp]

27. yeah? how you gonna do that?

it doesn't seem to be on obama's radar, and all 95 promised votes for net neutrality were defeated in this election.

we don't need the fairness doctrine, we need the truth.

obama could, if he chose to, spout that truth every day from his bully pulpit.

but the thing he seems to speak loudest about is some imagined route to "progress" through compromise with repubs.

we don't need the fairness doctrine, we need democrats with teeth, and then we might get the fairness doctrine.

[tomp]

26. disconnected is one word for it.

frankly, i concur with churchill on the flaws of democracy--take just one look at the average voter.

and politicians know this and exploit it.