Skip to main content

Please, think before you post.

Just yesterday, a family member of mine posted on Facebook how the GOP needed someone better than Trump or Palin. Of course she was referring to their appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC.

In my comment to her post, I asked what specific issue she had with Palin. One of her other FB friends and I started a back-and-forth about politics in general. One of her friends agreed with my post that too many people dislike Sarah Palin, but when pushed, cannot give a reason why.

My family member finally deleted her initial comment, and thus all of the posts saying that she was just trying to be funny. How funny is it to throw something derogatory out there, without even a generalization as to why you don't like a potential candidate, and then delete it when challenged?

Have we become such a non-thinking society that we cannot have a civil discourse about issues? "Being funny" has become, it appears to me, the news source of choice for a lot of Americans. From Bill Maher, to Colbert, it seems that so many young people take what they hear at face value without any thought at all.

Admittedly, I watch FOX News a lot. I also tune in to CNN and MSNBC to see how they are reporting similar issues. More importantly, I try to ask myself if what I've heard is accurate and balanced. If it doesn't pass the smell test, then I research it on my own.

The bottom line frustration for me is this: If you are going to disparage a person, policy, or action, don't share it with me unless you are prepared to discuss it, and in many cases, back it up with facts or examples. Disliking someone or something because it is in vogue holds no merit. It is symptomatic of the careless way many express their views, which when challenged, we learn usually equates to them not having a view at all. By throwing out vague, unsubstantiated comments on FB or other social media, demonstrates an ignorance and naivete that, unfortunatly, permeates our society. Everyone is entitled to [their] own opinion, but not [their] own facts (Daniel Patrick Moynihan).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America This, in my opinion is where our focus should be. Throughout our country's great history, we have slowly given many of those rights rightfully reserved to the States respectively to our Federal Government. Using the current debate as an example, if a state decides to have universal health coverage, so be it. If they can make it work, good for them. I do not believe it can work and I believe that any state that attempted it would become bankrupt (can anyone say CALIFORNIA?) quickly. Nonetheless, it should be a state's choice...it is the State's right! Our fifty United States need to take their rights back. Individually, as their citizens, through their legislators decide.
I'm finally out of the Army and can now fully speak my mind about how I feel about the direction our country is going. Tonight on Hannity , I caught former Marine Corporal David Hedrick as he explained his views on universal health care and located his appearance at a town hall meeting on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/HedrickDavid . What he says, in a nutshell is what I have been saying for quite some time, look at 1936-37 Germany for a history lesson! The problem with Hitler and WWII is that whenever someone hears the word "Nazi", they immediately think of the Holocaust and concentration camps. These are valid thoughts and atrocities that should never be forgotten. However, what everyone seems to forget is that NAZI is actually an acronym for National Socialist Worker's Party . This is what is meant when comparing the direction our Nation is moving to the Nazis of Germany. Not the Nazis of WWII, rather the Nazis as they led their country into the war. WWI wa

Oil vs. Immigration

Which direction does our President want to go? He is adamant that he wants comprehensive immigration reform, then secure our borders. Yet he wants to stop the oil flow, and then focus on clean-up. Do you see the parallel? It appears that there is a lack of consistency within our President's management philosophy. The cliche, first, stop the bleeding has been used often to describe the situation with our southern border. Yet our leadership refuses to devote anything other than a token amount of National Guard Soldiers to the problem, insisting that we need immigration reform first. Yet sensibly, he is focusing on stopping the oil flow before we begin the clean up. A lot of effort is being placed on mitigating the impact on the oil that has escaped thus far, which again is sensible. Why not take the same tact with our border issues? I have no idea how to stop the oil. I feel for the people along our coastlines that will be so terribly impacted by this tragedy...however, have no dou