The bottom line, you don’t. Why? Because in most cases, truth doesn’t reveal itself. That which is politically correct isn’t necessarily truth. That which comes from our elected leaders isn’t necessarily truth. That which comes from the pulpits isn’t necessarily truth. That which comes from classrooms isn’t necessarily truth. That which you directly see, hear, touch, taste and smell? Well, sorry.
I like to listen to both sides of an argument. I’ll actually listen to Rush Limbaugh from time to time to get the “other side’s point of view”. He cracks me up when he says “You don’t have to think! I’ll do that for you!” (He REALLY says that! Of course, he also admits to doing his show with half his brain tied behind his back, which explains much of what he says!) At the same time, I realize how popular he still is. I want to tell his listening audience “NO! YOU HAVE TO THINK FOR YOURSELVES!” On the right wing side, yeah – Rush Limbaugh will tell you what to think. But on the left wing side, George Lakoff will be happy to do the same. Neither necessarily has the final truth, and both are far more concerned with convincing you that they do have that truth than in educating you to figure it out for yourself.
But both have their own web sites. Google either name and you quickly find them. We would all do well to look at both and totally agree with neither. Both became famous for their points of view and thus, make no mistake, both are trying to sell us something. I certainly can’t tell you what to buy, but I can tell you that it’s not hard to find flaws on both sides. I also recommend that anyone citing “facts” (like the Senate vote mentioned above) give references. If you can’t verify it, DISCOUNT IT!
I repeat, “NO! WE HAVE TO THINK FOR OURSELVES!” Listen to both sides and make up your own minds. I would ask one thing: don’t send me a one-sided e-mail, asking me to endorse it and send it on to at least 20 friends. I won’t do it. Hell, I’m not sure I even HAVE 20 friends. Just arm yourselves with as much information as your limited time allows and, at the end of it, it’s your choice.
As the Grail Knight in the Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade film would admonish, "choose wisely".
Most of the people who responded to my e-mail (and there were several) strongly backed the Gore position or at least had seeing the film high on their agenda. Some were even those I tended to associate with conservative views on most matters. One however, surprisingly turned out to be more questioning of our “former next President” and his views.
He isn’t one I would say is right wing in his politics (though we’ve had never had any real political conversations) and he didn’t go into a Rush Limbaugh-esque polemic about tree hugging, bleeding heart liberals. He merely brought up the existence of conflicting research that Gore said didn’t exist.
We exchanged a few e-mails and pretty much agreed that there’s a big problem in being a citizen who, if doing our job as a conscientious voter properly, has to stay up on the issues and vote for the candidates whose views reflect the actions we feel are in the best interests of humanity.
About a week or so ago, I got an e-mail forwarded by another good friend which contained information allegedly taken from an article “from the L. A. Times” that tore into the issue of immigration. It cited numerous statistics and anecdotes about how illegal immigrants are taking all kinds of advantage of us good Americans.
You’ve probably seen similar things about how illegal immigrants get all these medical, educational and welfare benefits, get preferential treatment when applying for jobs, and fly our flag upside down at soccer games between Mexico and the US. To make matters worse, it cited a vote taken in Congress to stop preferential treatment of illegal immigrants and the Democrats voted against it.
I wrote back to my friend who sent it asking which edition of the L. A. Times was this. I never heard back. I’m also left with lingering issues such as, what exactly was the wording of this supposed vote taken in Congress? What were the sources of the statistics cited in the supposed article in the L. A. Times? If my Congressfolk indeed voted against it, why? Perhaps most important, this seems like a very right wing stance, how does the left wing respond?
I e-mailed senators Boxer and Feinstein asking if they knew what vote was made. Ms. Boxer sent back a form e-mail basically expressing thanks for my concern about Illegal immigration and all the wonderful legislation she had voted for, sponsored, introduced, supported etc. on the subject, but never answered my question. Ms. Feinstein has yet to respond. I think I like her answer better.
What does this have to do with global warming? Well, as a citizen who likes to consider myself reasonably well informed and responsible, I’m left with one question on both issues: HOW THE HELL AM I SUPPOSED TO KNOW???
