How to Break the American Trance

November 30, 2002 3:07 PM

How to Break the American Trance.From a speech given by 92-year-old Doris "Granny D" Haddock, who walked across the U.S. in 1999-2000 for campaign finance reform: "On my long walk across America, a man driving a garbage truck told me that the biggest problem facing America today was the inheritance tax. I didn't have to ask him if he had a radio in his truck." [more inside]
posted by RylandDotNet (53 comments total)

"And the reptilism trickles down further, to the weaker minds listening to talk radio or silly enough to spend too much time watching cable television news – people who buy the lies, who are simply suckered into forking over their own political best interests to the con artists who attempt to pick their pockets at the same moment they are pointing out others who, they say, are the real trouble makers. About 25 percent of our people are susceptible to this kind of con, and they then give us problems by standing against any reasonable reforms. They have been spiritually twisted by the cheap poison of a hundred Rush Limbaughs into the angry, unthinking agents of the superrich."

"Granny D" has articulated an interesting point that has niggled at me for years - why the hell does Joe Sixpack, with a $300 a week job, 5 kids, and a rented house, give a flying fuck about the inheritance tax, or indeed any of the crap that comes out of Rush Limbaugh's mouth?
posted by RylandDotNet at 3:10 PM on November 30, 2002

Why was this posted? So you can vent?
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 3:20 PM on November 30, 2002

The working poor buy into the conservative free market agenda for the same reason they buy lottery tickets. They know they're getting screwed but at least they have hope for a better future. Kill a man's hope with secured poverty and you are guilty of far more than a swindle.
posted by paleocon at 3:27 PM on November 30, 2002

I hate the small font.
posted by nyxxxx at 3:32 PM on November 30, 2002

Wrong thread, nyxxxx.
posted by RylandDotNet at 3:35 PM on November 30, 2002

Wow, Granny doesn't pull any punches does she? This is a great indictment of the current state of affairs in America. She calls it just as it is. Al Gore said something similar about the media just the other day, but Granny D said it better.

nyxxxx: I also hate the small font because it makes the two posts look like one big post. The small font is the FPP above this link.

steve: Maybe he posted this because so you can rant?
posted by elwoodwiles at 3:37 PM on November 30, 2002

Link to liberal news site with liberal op-ed. Liberal mefians champion it, conservatives deride it (does anyone read it?). Rinse, repeat.
posted by owillis at 3:43 PM on November 30, 2002

No, the Reagan business hero was the corporate takeover artist.

Are you sure Michael Moore didn't write this?
posted by hama7 at 3:50 PM on November 30, 2002

Preach on Granny, tell it like it is. All so called conservatives should read this and take a good look at themselves and what they believe in, and why.
posted by Eyegore at 4:24 PM on November 30, 2002

Steve_at_Linnwood:

You never fail to disappoint. Seems to me that "venting" does more than sitting idly by.
posted by sharksandwich at 4:38 PM on November 30, 2002

Seems to me that one's own weblog would be the appropriate place for constructive "venting", not MetaFilter...
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 4:44 PM on November 30, 2002

I'm surprised that no no one has a problem with Granny implying that garbage collectors and contractors are dumb people. Seems like the kind of thing we stupid, talk-radio-listening Republicans would say.
posted by TheFarSeid at 4:48 PM on November 30, 2002

I found the speech interesting, well written & thought provoking; by way of contrast, I found S_@_L's comments predictable, and unworthy of posting. Steve, everyone here knows what you think (which is really indicative of a loud mouth & poor impulse control). If you have nothing to contribute to a thread, why post?
posted by jonson at 4:48 PM on November 30, 2002

What jonson said. Articulate, heartfelt statements of position from fresh sources should, it seems to me, be welcomed as FPPs. Tired, predictable snipes should not be welcomed anywhere.
posted by stonerose at 5:28 PM on November 30, 2002

Seems to me that one's own weblog would be the appropriate place for constructive "venting", not MetaFilter...

I'll remember that next time you post yet another corporatist apologetics FPP, Steve. If you've got a criticism of the article to make (something besides "yet another example of liberal media blah blah blah", I mean), please make it. I know you think she's wrong, but why?
posted by RylandDotNet at 5:38 PM on November 30, 2002

Rush Limbaugh has as much right to speak as Granny. This is still America, right?
The problem is most people aren't taught critical thinking skills. The Lord knows I sure need them here on Metafilter.
posted by konolia at 5:48 PM on November 30, 2002

Articulate, heartfelt statements of position from fresh sources should, it seems to me, be welcomed as FPPs. Tired, predictable snipes should not be welcomed anywhere.

While I mean no offense, it seems there is more than a dollop of desire for conformity with one's own opinions in determining which is which. I personally see little in this speech that is intended to persuade anyone who does not already agree with her that her viewpoint is the most virtuous and rational one possible. Because of that, I do not see the point of posting it, other than to hearten those who agree, and antagonise those who do not.

Please, though, don't by any means construe this as a condemnation of political debate per se. Rather, I hope to provoke precisely that - persuasive and rational debate, rather than fiery rhetoric leveled by both sides at one another to little effect other than to alienate the uncommitted audience which both sides are ostensibly trying to 'convert'.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 5:54 PM on November 30, 2002

I'm surprised that no no one has a problem with Granny implying that garbage collectors and contractors are dumb people. Seems like the kind of thing we stupid, talk-radio-listening Republicans would say.

I think the point is that we are all stupid. We all get a mite misty once the wreaths are hung, the lights splayed, the canned Bing gets to playing. Oh to be a family! It's all stupidity, I'm coming to realize. If herd-like behavior can be called stupidity then hell yeah, each and every one of us falls for it at one time to another. Christmas is a great time to go out to your local mall and observe it on your own. You'll find none of us can help it. And especially if there is no alternative to annual commercialized holidays, insofar as an entire populous can get misty once a year about "the way things were when I was a kid or a young parent" all at the bidding of the corporate stores and shopping centers who merely have to pop in various CDs to have the moment advertise itself. Herd mentality. Talk-radio listening Republicans and usually democratic voting old grandmothers get caught in the whirlwind every once in awhile. Much like a ruffian trashman does.

Why don't we all take the cue and try not being so stupid for a change?
posted by crasspastor at 6:09 PM on November 30, 2002

[shedding a tear of joy] Land sakes! I think I found my long-lost third Granny. It's great to see someone with some real fire in the belly instead of the same old bulls**t on the hoof, no matter the age.

You go, Granny D!
posted by dakotadusk at 6:09 PM on November 30, 2002

Seems to me that one's own weblog would be the appropriate place for constructive "venting", not MetaFilter

It seems to me that people have been on the "inappropriate post" war path quite a bit lately. Wouldn't it be easier to just skip over the posts you find gratuitous, uninteresting, etc...?

It's not hate speech, it's not a self link, it's not a "news-filter" piece, so what's the problem?
posted by buz46 at 6:32 PM on November 30, 2002

In Fox News, even reporters in local regions are told how to slant each story hard to the right.

What a bitch. If you're going to make an accusation like that, you'd better offer proof. Just another hateful speech, spewing bile against Republicans, that is long on rhetoric and short on facts. Is metafilter a place for interesting discussion about interesting subjects, or is it a giant liberal circle jerk, where articles are posted daily that rant against President Bush, and all things conservative.

The funny thing is, that this type of rhetoric isn't working. Not on any level. The democrats keep losing, and their only explanation, is that the American people are either brainwashed by that evil Fox News, or simply too dumb to understand the issues.

Where here's a third explanation. Maybe the democrats are simply wrong. Wrong about national healthcare. Wrong about the death penalty. Wrong about affirmative action. Wrong about gays adopting children. Wrong about prayer in school. Wrong about legalizing drugs. Wrong about a vast number of social issues that a great number of Americans feel strongly about.

Liberals lost the election two years ago, and they lost again earlier this month. Please get over it, and stop taking it out on Metafilter. Surely there must be better places to spout your bitterness.
posted by Beholder at 7:06 PM on November 30, 2002

Why don't we all take the cue and try not being so stupid for a change?

'M-kay. You go first.

"why the hell does Joe Sixpack, with a $300 a week job, 5 kids, and a rented house, give a flying fuck about the inheritance tax,"

Why should anybody comment on a post which begins with an insulting sneer toward hardworking people who have no business contemplating the complexities of the inheiritance tax because they're too poor and dumb. Wow.
posted by hama7 at 7:07 PM on November 30, 2002

God, I am so tired of all the ills of the world being blamed on corporations. Yes, there is a great disparity of wealth between rich and poor, but the fact remains is that we are all far richer than we were 20 years ago. Corporations do need regulation, but it should be recognized that they do enrich their stockholders and the general economy.
posted by mr. man at 7:11 PM on November 30, 2002

but the fact remains is that we are all far richer than we were 20 years ago.

[spin zone]
Percentage of all families living in poverty in 1979: 8.2%.
Percentage of all families living in poverty in 2001: 8.2%.
[source: US census bureau]
[\spin zone]

There is no real trend that captures the lowest income situation (you could quote different numbers from that source to paint a rosier picture), other than that in absolute numbers, we've gone from 4.9 million such families to about 6 million. Quietest. Pep rally. Ever. There is a correlation with the economy, but last I checked the trickle-down vs. social services debate is ongoing.
posted by eddydamascene at 8:11 PM on November 30, 2002

who have no business contemplating the complexities of the inheiritance tax

They are not contemplating the tax, hama7. They've been had.

But what's worse, hama7, if you seem bright enough to see the scam, and yet you trudge forward like a good soldier, when not one policy of the Republicans has made your life better.

Why do you insist on sticking up for the Club, when you're not even allowed in the door?
posted by the fire you left me at 8:15 PM on November 30, 2002

Why do you insist on sticking up for the Club, when you're not even allowed in the door?

That's exactly the way I should have articulated it. I did, as someone pointed out above, imply that someone who drives a garbage truck couldn't possibly understand the issues. This is clearly not the case.

It all just reminds me of that scene in Life of Brian, the guy hanging in the dungeon, defending the Romans with his every breath. "Terrific race, the Romans. Terrific."
posted by RylandDotNet at 8:31 PM on November 30, 2002

Why do you insist on sticking up for the Club, when you're not even allowed in the door?

As with any rightist apologist, it's the true belief that if you scrub enough toilets, lick enough dog shit off their boots, rise up through the ranks (in an internet community for instance) on a tide of disingenuineness, even you too can become successful. The problem is, you're only successful when they say you've arrived, when the deem you worthy of feeling nothing at the sight of the subjugation of your fellow man and acting on it. You have to be born into the club Hama7. Anything else is running their errands.

Mkay yo?
posted by crasspastor at 8:48 PM on November 30, 2002

Excuse me. When they deem you worthy of being one they can trust to consistently feel nothing at the sight of the subjugation of your fellow man and also then act upon it as well.
posted by crasspastor at 8:51 PM on November 30, 2002

I'm loving Granny D, and I love the fact that she invited the old school conservatives to join her in the fight. Neo Cons look out Granny D is coming to getcha, and we all know old ladies ain't nothin to fuck with.
posted by jbou at 8:52 PM on November 30, 2002

Neo Cons look out Granny D is coming to getcha, and we all know old ladies ain't nothin to fuck with.

Yeah, she's a real ass kicker.
posted by Beholder at 9:04 PM on November 30, 2002

Gosh. America is sooooo terrible. Republicans are evil. Talk show hosts ruin everything. Geez, now this is really an unusual, unique FPP.

Perhaps the reason Republicans seem to have started winning an awful lot of elections has something to do with many of the attitudes in full view in this thread.

"Either you hate conservatives, or you are too stupid to understand that you should."

Guess what, a lot of truck drivers and garbage collectors do vote Republican - as well as a good number of people who used to be truck drivers and garbage collectors, and have exerted effort, and now make more money than they did. I realize how much success is hated by the Granny D's of the world ... but most of middle America doesn't want to be in some conceptual "Club" with an "inside" and an "outside" ... they want to work hard, take some risks, and see the chance of a payoff. They don't believe America, or a company, owes them a living. And certainly wouldn't try childish guilt-trips for not having one provided.
posted by MidasMulligan at 9:14 PM on November 30, 2002

Kill a man's hope with secured poverty and you are guilty of far more than a swindle.

I heard you on the first sentence, paleocon, but not on that last one.

The inheritance tax falls mostly on the owners of vast fortunes, despite all the propaganda about it how cripples small farmers. Like there's any small farmers left!

Richard Nixon, who I vilified at the time, once toyed with the idea of experimenting with a guaranteed annual income. The theory was, if people wanted to suck it all up in booze or drugs, fine, let them--but no mas after they ran through it. But if they wanted to use it to get a leg up, well, there it was.

That, if anything, should show you how far to the right we drifted. Can you imagine Bill Clinton making the suggestion? Impeachment, hell, Henry Hyde would have led a posse of congressmen to the White House to burn him, Hillary and, hopefully, George Stephanapoulos at the stake. And, apart from Bill and Hillary, I wouldn't have complained.

I personally see little in this speech that is intended to persuade anyone who does not already agree with her that her viewpoint is the most virtuous and rational one possible.

Well, yeah, but that applies to every comment, too. But since we all care deeply about some things and have big egos, to boot, at least around here, we tend to poke sticks into the wheels of each other's bikes. I guess we're all humans, eh? (A big shout out to the Great White North there! We care about your Canadian content, honest!))

Unless, of course if we're being above-it-all webblogging Eisenhower Republicans with a God's eye view.


For a fact, however, I find Granny D a total pain in the ass.
posted by y2karl at 9:17 PM on November 30, 2002

Enjoy it while it lasts, Beholder. Your ilk will have successfully screwed up our country enough that the few sheep we need to look up from the grass and come stands next to us will do so by 2004, 2006 at the latest.

The thing that scares me is how swiftly the freako religious/freako anti-environment conservatives are getting things done now. Who knows if 2006 will be too late on several fronts.

Oh well, I don't have any kids, it's all of yours who will pay the price.

On preview: Hey Midas, a lot of us lib'ruls actually are successful and enjoy having money...we just don't want to trash the world anymore than it already is and we certainly don't want to live in a theocracy.

You ever stop to consider the irony of an intolerant religious conservative declaring a "war" on intolerant religious conservatives? I have and it would be hilarious if it wasn't so scary.
posted by zaack at 9:19 PM on November 30, 2002

Good to hear of GrannyD - as in the fact that she's among the living.

RylanDotNet - I was glad to be reminded of this woman, but there are other ways to frame such things, as in: "92 year old New Hampshire woman who walked across US to promote reform of US campaign finance system, now warns of encroaching police state." -- not that different in some ways from your post, but language which pushes buttons (intentionally or not) can be counterproductive.

So: what an incredible story! Where's her republican counterpart? Doesn't exist, you say? Why not? I heard GrannyD speak. She said that she had suffered from emphysema every day since she quit smoking ....until she decided to walk across the US.....What balls! (er...umm...ovaries)

I liked this quote from a speech of hers:

"It happens quickly and moves swiftly. It is nothing for the forces of raw power to discredit the proper law enforcement agencies and set up new ones, run by political cronies, and with prisons and police of their own to surpress and arrest those who dare protest. It is nothing for raw power to thumb its nose at the interests of world peace or the earth's environment for the sake of corporate expansion and political power. It is nothing for raw power to mistake the flowering of political ideas and dissent in democracy's garden as a dangerous tangle of garden plots and disloyalties. It can happen quickly. It can happen in America. Open your eyes."
"

This quote brings to mind the alleged network of FEMA prison camps across the US

In very recent history, the US gov. suspended the rights of over a hundred thousand US citizens and put them in concentration camps (Japanese Americans during WW2). This sort of thing is far from unthinkable given the force of the new "Patriot Act".

I think we now need a hundred Dolores Haddocks, all jabbing their umbrellas at the voracious maw of power.
posted by troutfishing at 9:21 PM on November 30, 2002

Oh, Midas, put a sock in it for once. A stupid post and a stupid thread doesn't need your same old same old stentorian Johnny One Note bellowing.

You did much better in the Is Islam Evil? post up there--nuance trumps tired retread rhetoric every time.

And, Beholder, frankly, you're full of shit--I'd like to see even Midas to 100% sign off on your

Wrong about affirmative action.
Wrong about gays adopting children.
Wrong about prayer in school.
Wrong about legalizing drugs.

agenda here, for instance.

Unless I'm wrong. Oh, Midas?
posted by y2karl at 9:44 PM on November 30, 2002

I think we now need a hundred Dolores Haddocks, all jabbing their umbrellas at the voracious maw of power.

Yeah, drop her into the middle of Baghdad, and see how long she last. If the Republicans were one percent as evil as she implies, she'd be whacked tomorrow, and buried under a golf course.

I remember Oliver Stone being asked in an interview, that if the US was being controlled by these secret evil forces, then why was he being allowed to make millions of dollars exposing them. He squirmed like a three legged dog, trying to dig up a bone.

We know what Fascism is, because we see it in Iraq, so when liberal alarmist start yapping about concentration camps, we need only look at real Fascist like Saddam Hussein, to see how full of shit they truly are.
posted by Beholder at 9:54 PM on November 30, 2002

Y2karl> I appreciate it. As for my 'Canadian content', I don't like Bush one bit, nor Gore. I personally try not to countenance 'Gore would do ____' scenarios too seriously, as I see little actual difference between the two men, other than which party apparatus puts words in the mouth of which. I mean no offense to your political viewpoints, but I genuinely see little difference in actual practice (as opposed to theory and speech) between the two parties.

I have a surprisingly depressing feeling that Gore would be doing the same thing as Bush is right now - only that he would not be critiqued to the same extent. In that regard, I suppose I support Bush insofar as he is under greater scrutiny by the public and concerned individuals - he manages to hide just enough to stay afloat politically, but it's the fact that Bush is a magnet for criticism more than his policies that makes me say that. I'd rather have a poor president who is criticised constantly for being a poor president than a poor president who would only be criticised occasionally for being a poor president.

Still, saying that one prefers Bush to Gore or vice versa is like stating one's preference on whether one wishes to be shot in the gut or the kneecap to me.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 9:59 PM on November 30, 2002

They don't believe America, or a company, owes them a living. And certainly wouldn't try childish guilt-trips for not having one provided.

No they don't owe us, but companies who set up offshore accounts to avoid taxes, but still benefit from our need to consume should be told to sell their goods, and services elsewhere. Companies that have bailed on this country , and have helped themselves to cheap labor overseas should be held accountable for not helping this country move forward in a positive way. A shrinking middle class is not good for the health of this country. I'm all for people going for it, and making the best life for themselves, but as Granny D pointed out the small business person is going away, and has been replaced by the sleazy politician buying, accounting scandal having, job moving corporate greedheads, and that's not right. It's time to end the Neo Con circle jerk that's going on in this country.
posted by jbou at 9:59 PM on November 30, 2002

Percentage of all families living in poverty in 1979: 8.2%.
Percentage of all families living in poverty in 2001: 8.2%.

The poverty threshold for a family of four in 2001 was set at $18,104. While I'm no economist, I tend to believe that there are other families who make more, but would be considered struggling. The number of families that have a difficult time surviving day-to-day, I believe, is much higher than ten percent.

Oh, and adjusted for inflation, the poverty threshold of 1982 was above the rate that it stands at today. Not by a tremendous amount ($18,447 vs $18,104), but when you're talking $18,000 a year, every penny counts.
posted by dogmatic at 10:00 PM on November 30, 2002

Yeah, drop her into the middle of Baghdad, and see how long she last.

what exactly would that prove?
posted by mcsweetie at 10:07 PM on November 30, 2002

And, Beholder, frankly, you're full of shit

Yeah, and as usual, it's a liberal that makes the first personal attack. That's ok though. I forgive you.
posted by Beholder at 10:08 PM on November 30, 2002

Beholder - Are you denying the existance of WW2 US concentration camps (for Japanese Americans)? Or just saying that the contemporary recrudescence of such phenemenon is unlikey? - if so, why?
posted by troutfishing at 10:13 PM on November 30, 2002

Ha! More fun with Historical Poverty Tables and the Inflation Calculator.

Turns out that that family of four in 1979 (the year quoted above as a benchmark for poverty today), adjusted for inflation, would have to have made $19353.17 to be considered in poverty . . . That's a whopping $1250 above today's poverty threshold.

Go team!
posted by dogmatic at 10:16 PM on November 30, 2002

Yeah, and as usual, it's a liberal that makes the first personal attack.

I didn't say you weren't nice to cats, dogs, kids, wives or neighbors--just misinformed and misopinionated.
posted by y2karl at 10:30 PM on November 30, 2002

As far as Fox news is concerned, there's no question that the viewpoints and stories chosen originate from a more conservative point of view, which is fine by me. What bothers me is how very blurred the line seems to be between commentary and (attempted unbiased) reporting.

I don't trust Bush's boys (Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld) further than I can throw them, but for me these rapidly and vastly expanded police-state-like powers are dangerous in anyones' hands. Rumsfeld says trust me, nothing bad'll happen, but I'm just as worried about the next gang of pols that are going to be awarded the same new sweeping powers.

The research may show that even the poorest are getting richer by and by, trickle down or no. I still hold that it's not the differences in absolute wealth, but rather the relative wealth that causes the most social tension. Whether the have-nots have an iota more purchasing power than their great-great grandparents will be moot when they're living, disenfranchised, under curfew in crime-infested cities so toxic that most kids end up with asthma or cancer. And that'll just be the US.
posted by kahboom at 10:34 PM on November 30, 2002

As far as Fox news is concerned, there's no question that the viewpoints and stories chosen originate from a more conservative point of view, which is fine by me. What bothers me is how very blurred the line seems to be between commentary and (attempted unbiased) reporting.

CNN does the same thing from the liberal perspective, and so does PBS. Attack Fox News all you want. It's not going to work. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. Liberals no longer have a lock on the US media.
posted by Beholder at 10:45 PM on November 30, 2002

crime-infested cities

This crime, according to reputable--FBI and academic--statistics, and not the fearmongering of the Right and TV news, is so much less than in the 60s, 70s, 80s or even 90s, since crime rates have been trending down for decades. But what are facts when compared to rhetoric?

Especially when rhetoric can be used to suggest we need a Strong Leader--and a Big Police State, too--to clean out the scum without any hampering bureaucratic red tape, hmm?
posted by y2karl at 10:52 PM on November 30, 2002

Attack Fox News all you want. It's not going to work.

Huh? I just like my commentary and reporting a little more separate. That way, it's easier for me to draw my own conclusions, rather than having to rely on someone else's.
posted by kahboom at 11:07 PM on November 30, 2002

Oh, Midas, put a sock in it for once. A stupid post and a stupid thread doesn't need your same old same old stentorian Johnny One Note bellowing.

Goodness ... why not? I see many, many "Republicans = evil" threads here weekly. One out of every couple of dozen do I even bother to post to. I generally am not a "one-note" singer unless I'm commenting on the same old "one-note" song ... but when I do, the comments are usually - and purposefully - as one-sided, free of nuance, and reductionist as the FPP itself is.

Posts in which the initial links, and comments, do contain some intelligence, and do set a tone in which reasoned, adult discourse is invited - are quite interesting, but unfortunately quite rare.

But if someone starts a thread by suggesting that a speech full of tired rhetoric will wake America from a "trance", what does that invite? Other than the suggestion that the last election was America "waking from a trance" ... the trance that the Granny D's of the world have had the electorate in for quite some time.

You want a more elevated discussion, it is not my occasional responses to "stupid posts and stupid threads" you need to address, it is the posts and threads themselves that could well make use of the sock.
posted by MidasMulligan at 11:15 PM on November 30, 2002

The research may show that even the poorest are getting richer by and by, trickle down or no.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your comment, but dogmatic showed that someone at the threshold of poverty in 2001 makes less than their counterpart in 1979 -- i.e. the census definition of poverty (which the dept. of health and human services uses for planning) does not keep pace with inflation. However, from this summary from the Institute for Research on Poverty at Wisconsin on 'Who is Poor?', I found a footnote: Thus data on income and poverty after 1987 may not be comparable to data in earlier years because of the changes in the methods used by the Census Bureau to process survey results. Se la vie. Here is some more discussion on the flexibility of the poverty line definition, which addresses income disparity in a way [from the HHS reference page]. Another good reference is the Joint Center for Poverty Research at Northwestern and U. Chicago -- both centers are sponsored in part by HHS.

Liberals no longer have a lock on the US media.

Most newspapers have an ideological counterpart. From what I've read, however, those that spring up in response to a perceived bias tend to overcompensate.
posted by eddydamascene at 11:38 PM on November 30, 2002

In terms of the "Liberal Bias" of most major media outlets, my impression is that CNN, NBC, ABC, etc. are quite centrist in their approach. I think we can all agree that Fox is right-leaning (perhaps it's so far right-leaning that most center-leaning media outlets appear ultra-liberal by comparison?).

Fox News--------CNN-------Common Dreams ?
posted by kahboom at 11:40 PM on November 30, 2002

I've seen research that shows the buying-power of Americans dropping, and others showing it growing. It very much depends on what goods they've deemed "necessary for survival" at the time of the measuring...

When considering income gaps globally, however- in 1960, according to the UNDP, the richest fifth of the world's population had incomes 30 times greater than the poorest fifth. By 1990, that gap had grown to 60x. (Human Devel. Rept. 1992) I'd like to see if this process is as exaggerated domestically in the US as it is amongst nations in general.

I guess my main point was that although it may be tough to measure whether _everyone_ will make more money eventually, given a laissez-faire approach to world economics - the tensions caused by income and quality-of-life inequalities may well be our greatest challenge in the coming decades...
posted by kahboom at 11:49 PM on November 30, 2002

kahboom: Fox is certainly more right-wing that CNN is left wing, but all the other major networks skew slightly to left of center. And CommonDreams is way, way to the left.

Let me try: (with left/right being left/right on the page):

CommonDreams----NPR----CNN, etc.----[no one]----[no one]----Fox----National Review
left                         near left    center left           center       center right   near right            right

And may God forgive me for formatting using spaces.

I realize not everyone is going to agree with this ranking. </understatement> But if you even sort of agree, can you think of anyone in the 'center right' slot, among major media? I can't.
posted by Slithy_Tove at 12:01 AM on December 1, 2002