Wednesday, August 20, 2008

grumble grumble part 2

Recent polls show that McCain is closing in on Obama, and the media could not love it more. I have noticed that the news coverage is directly linked to how well a candidate is doing in these surveys. The media tries to keep the race as tight as possible through their coverage to boost ratings. The news networks had a record season with the primaries.

Hillary went in as the presumed favorite, but then came along Obama, the underdog. Although I favored Obama in the primary I still noticed the bias towards him in the media. When he started to run away with the thing the pastor Wright "scandal" struck, and that's all the news could talk about. He was still able to eek out the win despite a lot of racially charged attacks and innuendo. I do think he ran an amazing campaign, but I don't think he could have done it without the initial boost from the media.

Fast-forward to now. Despite the huge lead Obama had over McCain coming off the primaries the gap has closed. I would credit the huge lead in the beginning to the media's glowing analysis of Obama, but I would also credit the cut in the lead to non-analysis of McCain and more coverage of attacks on Obama. I think the media has had a change of heart for two reasons. One is that the republicans are great at calling foul on the "liberal media." Second, and more importantly is that the media wants a closer race.

The news outlets have a streaming ticker of all the criticisms of Obama, but does not dramatize the missteps of McCain the same way it would for Obama. Like when McCain said he consider someone rich if they have an income of $5 million or more. Or when he referred to the Iraq-Pakistan border, which does not exist. Or when he admitted he "still needs to be educated" on economics. Any of these would doom Obama. But for McCain it's just another day, and another slip of the tongue.

My prediction is that the polls will remain pretty close through out the rest of the race, despite how well one candidate is doing over the other. I just hope that the media doesn't doom us to another 8 years of horrible leadership so they can reap the benefits of good ratings.

Update: No later than a couple hours after finishing this post I noticed a headline that sums it all up for me -

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jeOnTe0WG_AARBV3TCSKD70cSM5AD92M9GI01

Instead of a headline "Obama Targets McCains Policies" it's "McCain chides a newly feisty Obama as 'testy'" And this is coming from the AP, not even Fox News.

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

grumble grumble

This is a venting post, just needed to type it out. The Primaries- Hillary Clinton + Media in particular are annoying the bejesus out of me. Hillary is saying that she deserves the nomination because she has won the bigger states, but Barack has more pledged delegates and more actual votes. Hillary is saying she has more votes, but that's only including Michigan and Florida (which everyone agreed not to count before the voting), and Barack was not even on the ballot in Michigan. She is full of crap.
If she wants to be in the race that is fine, but she doesn't need to be ridiculous. And if she cares so much about the country you would think she would keep things a little more civil. I really think that if she led by as much as Barack does now she would call for him to bow out - to unify the party. He has never asked her to leave, which shows what kind of person he is (the good kind).

Last but not least, who are these a-holes who say they will vote for McCain if their choice democrat isn't nominated? Now, I can see why a republican or moderate might vote for McCain, but not someone who supports either of the democrats. Hillary and Barack are pretty similar with their policies. McCain is much different. It's like wanting the red apple but getting the green apple so instead you take the cheeseburger. It makes no sense, so I'm basically assuming that about half of democrats are either racist, sexist or sore losers. grumble grumble.

Thursday, October 11, 2007

Music

This will be my first blog. Don't include livejournal. That was a journal. This is a blog.

Music is similar to drugs, at least for me. "A chemical substance, such as a narcotic or hallucinogen, that affects the central nervous system, causing changes in behavior and often addiction," is the second definition in the American Heritage Dictionary. (I used it because it suits my point best). No other indirect action has such an influence on my mood. By "indirect' I mean not a specific event happening to me. Um... My dog dies: I am sad. I make some extra money: I am happy. I am stuck in traffic: I am annoyed. An event has a direct effect on me. Sad because I will never see or pet my dog again, who I loved. (my dog didn't really die) Happy because I don't have to worry as much about whether I have enough money to survive, and annoyed because I'm wasting my day in this god-damned car. But music skips the step of having a reason, and it just impacts me. I'm stuck in traffic: annoyed. A song that I love comes on: happy. It is difficult to decipher why the music gets rid of my rage.

I just did a short and insuffient search on "why music affects the brain?" but all the search results came back with were "does music affect the brain?" which I know the answer to already, yes. So, unfortunately this will be a completely opinion based entry. I have often thought, and less often said, that people listen to the genre of music which they want there life and feelings to be modeled after. People who listen to hardcore rap fantasize of living a hardcore life. People who listen to emo music want to live dramatic heart-wrenching lives. I refer to this as "Sountrack Syndrome," which I just made up. Movies would be lame without music telling the viewer how to feel, such is life, in which people somtimes look to music to direct thier feelings. example; My girlfriend broke up with me for a girl who looks like a fraggle, I think I'm sad. My GF broke up with me for a fraggle and I'm listening to Dashboard Confessionals, My life is tragic and it's ok to feel this way! You are probably saying, "You are just saying that because it's true for you." Yes, it is. I am constantly directing my mood with music. Usually torward the happy. I would not consider myself a depressed person, dependent on music to make my life worth life living. However, in the event of sadness, music can help bring me back. In the event of happiness, music can put me over the top, into outright giddiness.

As far as I am concerned this is all unique to me. I know people who "don't like music," people who are indifferent, and people who like only one kind, or one band. Social groups have an obvious impact on our musical tastes, does it outweigh our personal personal tastes, or are they so indistinguishable from each other that there is no point in arguing. Is there a teenage boy in Iran who just can't get enough Tim McGraw?

So, people want to live a certain life-style in order to exist within a social group and there is music to suit that style of life. I want to be an unique, thoughful, artsy, introspectiv person. I identify with similar people, and so we listen to similar music. It becomes part of the culture. The hard part, as I said before, is discerning where the music as a social glue leaves off and music as something that affects our feelinga, mood, brain, soul or whatever begins. Of course it is different for everyone. I'm speaking in generalities though, and generally speaking I have noticed that people listen to music to induce a feeling of drama.

My best argument against the "listen to how you want to feel" theory is that I can listen to music that is not particularly "happy," but be filled with joy. Man music is complicated, or our brains.

Sorry if that was hard to follow, but it was mostly. An exploration of a subject I think about often. That's what all of these little things will be. These blogs.