We don't have TV. No cable, satellite, or broadcast TV at our place. Generally, I'm happy about that, although I do miss watching sports.
But I'm most happy because I'm not submitted to the endless parade of sound-bites that serve as "news". This weekend at the conference hotel and airports I've caught CNN several news cycles.
Yuck. It's as if the pressure to have 24-hour news has created a monster that can not possibly be fed with worthwhile content. So, the network has to generate "news" by finding any "interesting", "controversial", or "surprising" thing said by anyone even tangentially related to Sens. McCain, Obama or Clinton.
I mean, does anyone really think McCain or his people WANT another terrorist attack on US soil simply to give him a bump in the polls? I can't imagine that is true. And, I think it's generally agreed that McCain's foreign policy/military experience exceeds Obama. So, why is it "news" that one of McCain's "people" suggested a terrorist attack would help McCain?
Or, even worse, how is it news that Gen. Wesley Clark suggests McCain's military background is not exactly a qualification for President? I concur with the Op/Ed in today's Post...enough focusing on minor policy changes and inconsequential comments by surrogates. There are serious and fundamental issues on the table for this election. Let's get down to the hard work of analyzing the very different alternatives presented by McCain & Obama and quit looking for the "faux-pas de jour".