With increasing frequency I find myself distressed whenever I ponder the time, however limited, that I've just invested in reading the political press.
"I think it’s the most blatantly dishonest performance by a presidential candidate I’ve ever seen," says Newt Gingrich about Mitt Romney to the Washington Post in one story just perused; and "It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product ... He would proof it," says a former secretary for Ron Paul's newsletters, in another story scoured.
Reading both pieces in full, I don't know ... maybe two or three minutes of my life transpired? And in what way was my knowledge of current events enriched? How was the world about me thrown into a more enlightened relief? Simply put, what did I learn?
I "learned" that Newt Gingrich is a wretched liar, and that a publisher of political newsletters read his own newsletters.
Right. Nothing. Two, three minutes -- poof, gone, irretrievable. It rather makes one want to crawl off to a closet -- equipped with only a flashlight and an armful of Shakespeare -- and then forget the whole, monotonous, repetitious scene.
You learned nothing that you didn't intuitively know before...admit it, no surprise or shock to you really. Sorry to say but 'them's the breaks' in the political world in the last decade.
Posted by: caribbeanobserver | January 28, 2012 at 01:49 AM