Stupid spell checker. "Mead" should read "media."
Some people on here disagree with Obama on many policy issues. I am one of them. Others, presumably Democrats or liberals, will then claim that those opposing Obama are influenced by Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, etc.
During the 1980s, we had a big conservative movement. During the early 1990s, we had another big conservative movement where Republicans took over the House and Senate. In 2000 and 2004, a conservative man was elected President. Even if you suggest he lost 2000, still, half of all voters selected him.
In the 80s and for both elections of Reagan, Fox News did not exist, talk radio was not what it is today, and Rush Limbaugh's show didn't come until 1988. In 1994, when Republicans were voted in such great numbers that they took over the House and Senate, Fox News was brand new, Sean Hannity was hardly anybody back then, and Mark Levin didn't exist on radio. By 2000 and 2004, Fox News' ratings were beating the competition, and yet conservatives still had to fight for both of those elections even though the "conservative media influence" would have been considerable back then.
SO, Obama supporters, is it possible that maybe some conservatives can think for themselves, and actually dislike Obama's policies for good, principled reasons? Conservatism has been around a lot longer than Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, and many would argue it's been around longer than modern-day liberalism.
You know what I think? I think those Obama supporters who think my brain and the brains of others are controlled by conservative Mead believe this as a defense mechanism. Otherwise, they'd have to come up with real reasons to defend their candidate, which is hard to do unless you acknowledge ignorance or a belief in socialism.
I also think that it's some liberals who are victims of media influence, not the other way around.
NOTE: I know not all liberals suggest conservatives are media slaves, and I know many liberals can support their own beliefs if not the Presidents.
Some people on here disagree with Obama on many policy issues. I am one of them. Others, presumably Democrats or liberals, will then claim that those opposing Obama are influenced by Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, etc.
During the 1980s, we had a big conservative movement. During the early 1990s, we had another big conservative movement where Republicans took over the House and Senate. In 2000 and 2004, a conservative man was elected President. Even if you suggest he lost 2000, still, half of all voters selected him.
In the 80s and for both elections of Reagan, Fox News did not exist, talk radio was not what it is today, and Rush Limbaugh's show didn't come until 1988. In 1994, when Republicans were voted in such great numbers that they took over the House and Senate, Fox News was brand new, Sean Hannity was hardly anybody back then, and Mark Levin didn't exist on radio. By 2000 and 2004, Fox News' ratings were beating the competition, and yet conservatives still had to fight for both of those elections even though the "conservative media influence" would have been considerable back then.
SO, Obama supporters, is it possible that maybe some conservatives can think for themselves, and actually dislike Obama's policies for good, principled reasons? Conservatism has been around a lot longer than Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, and many would argue it's been around longer than modern-day liberalism.
You know what I think? I think those Obama supporters who think my brain and the brains of others are controlled by conservative Mead believe this as a defense mechanism. Otherwise, they'd have to come up with real reasons to defend their candidate, which is hard to do unless you acknowledge ignorance or a belief in socialism.
I also think that it's some liberals who are victims of media influence, not the other way around.
NOTE: I know not all liberals suggest conservatives are media slaves, and I know many liberals can support their own beliefs if not the Presidents.