By now, those of us numbered among the sentient (or who live with one as I do) have had ample time to ruminate on that old chestnut, 'everyone's a critic.' Except, perhaps, that 'other guy' who is running for the office of the President of the United States of America, the former Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Mitt (isn't actually short for anything) Romney.
What has me scratching my head at the moment is, after having managed to step on genitalia some of his most bitter critics, and many of his previously ardent supporters, do not believe he even has, how the Mitt Wit seems to think he had the last word on all of this. And having it on ABC News was the best way to turn the page.
This isn't political polemics on how many years of tax returns to release, or a riddle involving how many Kenyans or Kansasites it takes to become a citizen. An American ambassador, staff members of his embassy and others have all lost their lives over religion, beliefs and believers. And one of the two guys who wants to be President becomes a snark for political advantage. Or so he hoped.
I have no numbers to prove this statement but believe it to be true: more people have died in religious wars than from ALL other warfare waged on this planet since we crawled from the slime, or Eve was cleaved from under Adam's rib, or the aliens dropped us off here on their way to a really good party somewhere else in the galaxy.
Into all of this we have Fox News, as close to an Old Testament abomination as this brave new world is capable of delivering via cable, Internet or satellite along with Glenn Beck and/or The Blaze which is The Beckster in print form proving Gutenberg will have things to answer for on the Last Day. And then you have this new age news note.
Translation: You just say it/write it. No one knows enough to seek corroboration from two independent sources which is the standard for attribution by the much-despised 'lame stream media,' not that any corroboration exists most of the time anyway nor does anyone know how to tell the difference between a strongly worded opinion and the actual facts the opinion is pretending to be.
That's the great thing about so much of the technological and media convergence. I can troll the dial or the web and find, and sometimes even build, a news service that panders to my prejudices and blindness. I need never see/hear stories that could vex or upset me or which contradict my the world is flat perspective on as complex a subject as international relations. Mother Jones can score what it thinks are critically important communication points, but it's really an air ball.
The observation by Huck Finn's father, of sorts, from the Pre-Smart Phone Age of Earth has ne'er been more true; and in the information age, only the speed of travel has benefited from the infusion of technology more than the fine art of prevarication. Not knowing enough about the relationships between the nations of the world is ignorance. Being proud to not know anything about them is arrogance. I sure as heck don't need any more of either in The District, supplied by anyone.
I was, and remain, a disillusioned supporter of President Barack Obama and have worked hard to maintain an open mind on alternatives and possibilities. Just about any chance to get me to reconsider my ballot for November disappeared this week in the wake of Romney Ruminations faster than Seamus does when Mitt backs the car out of the garage and yells 'Here, boy!"