Stick to football and cheerleaders
I wish I could be like Jon Stewart, not because I aspire to host a tv show, but because of his ability to make jokes about the frustrating injustices that come from the American government. These things make me furious, but Stewart can make light of them.
Anyway, in Gregg Easterbrook’s sports column for ESPN, he dedicated a few paragraphs to complaining about the politics of oil consumption, particularly how American auto manufacturers are requesting billions to fund research and development to improve gas mileage. He complains that the mainstream press covers stories during “dramatic” legislation, but then disappears. He cites Thomas Friedman’s “important” new book about politicians not reacting to oil waste and how it gets into the hands of “Moscow, and to the oil sheiks who support anti-Western and anti-Israel terrorism.”
He goes on to describe how young people should be “outraged” at the government for allowing the national debt to swell from US$5 trillion in 1997 to $10 trillion today. “The old are acting irresponsibly -- spending like crazy but unwilling to tax themselves, then handing the bill to the young. If the young were spending borrowed money like crazy, the old would be lecturing them. How come in Washington, the old can get away with behavior that would be called reckless for the young?”
Rather than blaming the young, who are often powerless to enact change, he should do something about it himself. As an established writer, he has more ability to do something about politics than young people, who are often handcuffed by job insecurity in their fledgling careers. And young people are also held back by the same issues as those older than them, namely that they want a house and family and might also have college loans to pay.
Why is Easterbrook so shocked that young people aren’t so angry about America’s $10 trillion debt? What 20-year-old understands the impact of this? The federal government’s budget is quite complicated. Most economists can’t agree on it, so why would a young person know what to do about it?
Today’s media melting pot is so confusing...with entertainment and information mixed together, where pictures of cheerleaders and touchdowns fit with politics (as in Easterbrook’s column), where news presenters move seamlessly from one actress’ pregnancy to dead troops, while journalists themselves cannot decipher between truth and lies.
How could any normal young person understand the complexities of the modern world when the information they receive is so jumbled?
I also have trouble with Easterbrook's wording and arguments. Really, what does the efficiency of automobiles have to do with Moscow? Does anyone fill up a gas tank, and think, “Damn. Gas prices went up. Those bastards in Russia are really benefiting from my SUV.” And why should anyone feel worse about Russia making money than big oil companies simply because they were at one time exclusively American companies?
And who are “oil sheiks?” Do they give a sermon at the mosque on Friday and then visit the oil field? Do they preach about the Islamic virtues of extracting crude? What does that term mean?
Actually, most of the people in power in the Persian Gulf want only to do business, and don’t really care whether it’s with America or not; they’d like very much to do business with American companies.
On a personal level, in my experience in Egypt, I’ve found most people love Americans, love many parts of American lifestyles, but disagree with the American government’s foreign policy. Does that make them anti-American? If I disagree with the Chinese government’s human rights policy, does that make me anti-Chinese? If I disagree with Silvio Berlusconi’s conflict of interest to own media companies and lead the Italian government, does that make me anti-Italian?
And finally, what does anti-Israel terrorists have to do with any of this? How did Easterbrook find a way to connect automobile fuel efficiency to bombings in Israel?
One last note: According the AP, former Clinton fundraiser Lynn Forester de Rothschild is backing McCain because Obama has problems connecting with average Americans. What would she know about average Americans? She lives in New York and London and is married to an international banker with a royal family name.
I've seen this expression "elitist" come up repeatedly in the press. It's amazing how easily the media picks up on buzz words to help politicians keep the spin cycle moving in their campaigns.
Anyway, in Gregg Easterbrook’s sports column for ESPN, he dedicated a few paragraphs to complaining about the politics of oil consumption, particularly how American auto manufacturers are requesting billions to fund research and development to improve gas mileage. He complains that the mainstream press covers stories during “dramatic” legislation, but then disappears. He cites Thomas Friedman’s “important” new book about politicians not reacting to oil waste and how it gets into the hands of “Moscow, and to the oil sheiks who support anti-Western and anti-Israel terrorism.”
He goes on to describe how young people should be “outraged” at the government for allowing the national debt to swell from US$5 trillion in 1997 to $10 trillion today. “The old are acting irresponsibly -- spending like crazy but unwilling to tax themselves, then handing the bill to the young. If the young were spending borrowed money like crazy, the old would be lecturing them. How come in Washington, the old can get away with behavior that would be called reckless for the young?”
Rather than blaming the young, who are often powerless to enact change, he should do something about it himself. As an established writer, he has more ability to do something about politics than young people, who are often handcuffed by job insecurity in their fledgling careers. And young people are also held back by the same issues as those older than them, namely that they want a house and family and might also have college loans to pay.
Why is Easterbrook so shocked that young people aren’t so angry about America’s $10 trillion debt? What 20-year-old understands the impact of this? The federal government’s budget is quite complicated. Most economists can’t agree on it, so why would a young person know what to do about it?
Today’s media melting pot is so confusing...with entertainment and information mixed together, where pictures of cheerleaders and touchdowns fit with politics (as in Easterbrook’s column), where news presenters move seamlessly from one actress’ pregnancy to dead troops, while journalists themselves cannot decipher between truth and lies.
How could any normal young person understand the complexities of the modern world when the information they receive is so jumbled?
I also have trouble with Easterbrook's wording and arguments. Really, what does the efficiency of automobiles have to do with Moscow? Does anyone fill up a gas tank, and think, “Damn. Gas prices went up. Those bastards in Russia are really benefiting from my SUV.” And why should anyone feel worse about Russia making money than big oil companies simply because they were at one time exclusively American companies?
And who are “oil sheiks?” Do they give a sermon at the mosque on Friday and then visit the oil field? Do they preach about the Islamic virtues of extracting crude? What does that term mean?
Actually, most of the people in power in the Persian Gulf want only to do business, and don’t really care whether it’s with America or not; they’d like very much to do business with American companies.
On a personal level, in my experience in Egypt, I’ve found most people love Americans, love many parts of American lifestyles, but disagree with the American government’s foreign policy. Does that make them anti-American? If I disagree with the Chinese government’s human rights policy, does that make me anti-Chinese? If I disagree with Silvio Berlusconi’s conflict of interest to own media companies and lead the Italian government, does that make me anti-Italian?
And finally, what does anti-Israel terrorists have to do with any of this? How did Easterbrook find a way to connect automobile fuel efficiency to bombings in Israel?
One last note: According the AP, former Clinton fundraiser Lynn Forester de Rothschild is backing McCain because Obama has problems connecting with average Americans. What would she know about average Americans? She lives in New York and London and is married to an international banker with a royal family name.
I've seen this expression "elitist" come up repeatedly in the press. It's amazing how easily the media picks up on buzz words to help politicians keep the spin cycle moving in their campaigns.
Labels: deficit, gas prices, media melting pot
posted by Andrew Bossone at
6:23 PM
0 Comments
