|
So, anyone who agrees with you is following the 'facts' (as you see them, of course), and anyone who disagrees, or points out that apparently plenty of people disagree, has their integrity determined by the news cycle? Are you that incapable of recognizing that, though perhaps shocking to you, there are people who have different opinions than you do?
I posted about the poll numbers not because they tell me that I shouldn't care about Rev. Wright (or, at least, that Obama's speech was a sufficient response to the issue). I posted them, first and foremost, as a response to flstf's post, which was specifically about the effects of this and other controversies on how the voters view the candidates. Secondly, I posted the information because it shows that, clearly, there are plenty of others who would agree with some or all of what ratbastid, filtherton, or I am saying. That's not saying we form our opinions based on what others think, but it is saying that the opinions we're expressing shouldn't be treated like they're shocking statements.
There is a difference between forming opinions based on the news cycle and simply being aware of the news.
__________________
Le temps détruit tout
"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling
|