It was more than entertaining to hear callers on the Mitch Hank Show vent over Scott Walker's criticism of protesters attending his soap box speech in Iowa.
I put a few of the callers together, including "Stand with Walker" supporters who still hate the 1st Amendment and the whole idea of protesting the government.
I came across this interesting "cover story:"
This is something that really has to be examined and brought out to the voting public. With corporate media what it is, I'm surprised the WSJ reporter would bring this to light. I think Walker is trying to do what George Bush was able to do, control the media and in doing so, the perception people are allowed to have of him. He can't be allowed to be asked questions that would get him off-message, because this is all about being an infomercial, which the media will play along with. Didn't work out that well in Britain at Chatham House, though, did it?
ReplyDeleteIt all becomes whether the candidate is viewed as being a nice guy, someone the voter could relate to on a personality level: forget about policies or ideas, it's all about whether you're liked more than the others in this week's popularity poll. Walker's a "fighter" and a "winner," just how his voters wish to view themselves.
Besides, does Walker actually carry out the things he campaigns for? The things he really stands for would not be too popular if he came right out and said them.
Let's hope and pray our media can stop playing along with this game and get serious about this. Our final choices in November 2016 should not be between tweedledum and tweedledee, with Deez Nuts as the protest vote.