We can assume Jose has quit reading the
NY Times as well, then, if plagiarism disturbs him so.
Unfortunately, we the people are left to find our facts, sans spin, where we can. The truth almost always resides in a mix of inputs, combined with observing what is going on in the world with clear eyes, as free of ideology as possible.
Unfortunately, ideologues are often in charge, not only of our country's laws and coffers, but of the media. And ideologues are almost always immune to feedback.
Ideologues of all political ilk tend to use the scattershot method of interaction ... isolated incidents, non sequiturs, ignoring the big picture in favor of a skewed sort of rabid attachment to an idea or a person who represents that idea, regardless of what actually is playing out in front of them.
Ideologues consistently avoid addressing the larger issues, like personal freedom, system sustainability, linking life choices to consequences, thinking a problem through creatively, and constructing systems of government that serve most, best, or that get government out of issues entirely when it makes sense to do so.
It stuns me beyond belief to see ACA expecting young, healthy folk to pony up in the years when they're trying to get their careers going, raise families and buy homes. All while the government racks up more debt for them and their children and grandchildren, ad infinitum, to pay off. And to launch this one-party-voted-in bill in our enfeebled economy ... idiotic.
I don't talk with ideologues anymore beyond polite hellos and trivial topics, because they glaze over when you use words like sustainability and competence. If the ideologue is liberal, he/she will pepper you with little digs about George Bush, under their erroneous assumption that if you believe competence and sustainability are important, and you don't think our current administration is competent, you must have approved of everything George Bush did, and, from that, that you approve of everything the Tea Party does. Crazy leaps, designed, I guess, to shut down any real discussion and protect the ideologue from really having to think about the flimsy façade of an unworkable idea he is trying to hold up as something to admire and to govern a nation by.
I spend my effortful conversation time these days with those who can engage in dialogue and talk without leaping to assumptions based on perceptions of one another's political leanings.
I saw a bumper sticker the other day that read "Where was the Tea Party when Bush was overspending?" Does that mean the car owner approves of the Tea Party and hopes they'll stop Obama's overspending? The back and forths and fingerpointing and ping-pong insults based on party and perceptions do no one any good, and keep our attention off solutions.
Unfortunately, I have a sick and sinking feeling that truly competent people, who could lead effectively, avoid public office. And that if such a person did arise, and seek office, their signal would be drowned out by the screech and static of ideologues.
