Wednesday, 28 OCT 2015 :: political access to national debates

I didn't get to watch the Republican debate tonight... it wasn't available for free anywhere (TV or online).  I don't have cable.  Isn't a political debate for the future president of our country worth sharing with those who want to see it?  Maybe we need to make it a mandatory provision for getting a media license.

As a long-term low-income household,
the costs of access are a continual issue. 

We miss out on lots of thing... sometimes by choice, but usually because of costs.  Pay per view might have been a good road to go with time access for a very low price. I have never done a pay-per-view screening, but I am sure it can't be hard.  Maybe Netflix is a good option for reaching the poor.  I could go for the $.99 iTunes thing... they have video now, don't they?

It is irritating to miss all these events now that I am deeply concerned about the effects of our government on our lives.  My kids are grown, I can hardly work, and may not even make it to the next vote, but I am really upset by the financial issue that jeopardize our country's survival... and the care of the poor, and ill, and elderly.  I can't really comment on something I don't get to watch.

When access is denied once, you think it is just a temporary mistake.  But as each event becomes a forbidden access simply because of the cable TV issue, there is a bigger problem.  And it isn't always easy to know what that bigger issue is.  Is it a Republican versus Democrat problem? Or is it a Christian versus Atheist problem?  Or could it be a money problem....

I have been noticing a lot of things in the past many years about the change of government focus and the demise of Christian influence... things you don't always think about... like important meetings always being arranged on the nights most Christians are in church (Wednesdays).

I have also been noticing a slow effort to change our calendars so they start on Mondays and end on Sundays... ( was one place, I can't remember if is that way, or maybe Yahoo!... I don't frequent too many sites on a regular basis.  It might have been Facebook, or Twitter.  You might want to check FedEx... maybe even the US government. ) 

The decision to change a calendar is a subtle statement about the leadership of the company, their philosophies, their biases, etc.  Since the current calendar system is associated with Christ, the changes are a reflection of anti-GOD views.  Is it a little thing, or a big thing?

It is said that what we do speaks more about our real feelings than what we say.  (Actions speak louder than words.)  I would make sure certain things that reflect GOD were part of my business.  It is something we do... as humans, as groups, as citizens.

What the media does with a national debate is just the same kind of evidence.  It is a measured effort to keep the average voter ill-informed, especially Republican voters, so that the information they have or don't have is under control, managed, filtered. This happens every day, it just seems more evident attached to a big event like a political debate.

Just as I started to write this post, I remembered the debate and checked for some follow-up information, using a search engine.  The only link I noticed was at so I watched a few of the video briefs available.  I was able to watch a brief message of disappointment in CNBC by the GOP Chairman.  I saw the battle between Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio.  I watched a brief sample of Bobby Jindal. And later tried to watch some summary videos of the entire debate in less than 3 minutes.

One of the issues I noticed was comments by more than one candidate on the quality of questions being asked.  America is facing a number of serious issues in this campaign, but political drama seems to be the main goal.  After I heard those statements, I tried to remember what kind of questions the Democrats were asked in their debate. I couldn't remember...  I didn't see a lot of that debate either.

We always have to remember that the media is owned by liberal (Democratic) forces, so there is a bias against everything Republican.  I thought Rubio's comment about the media being the biggest Democratic Super-PAC in existence was important. There is only an argument about Super-PACs when there is a Republican villain... and never a mention about the Democratic Super-PACs.

Since I wasn't able to view the entire debate, I don't know if any of the candidates offered solutions to the serious issues we are facing as a country.

The other day I commented on a Facebook video that was shared onto my timeline about America already being a socialist country.  It was against Republican goals and theologies, and lifting up the social programs of the Democratic party. 

I wasn't able to comment on all the issues I saw in the video, including how bias affects the materials being present, so I eventually asked the person who shared the video how they would solve all these real problems that affect real people, often without money, or education, or health, or family.  The government has been taking over the tasks that should be handled within the church or community if they can't be handled by the family.  The government has never really done a good job at anything.  The problems get worse.

I found another post on Facebook recently, which I printed and mailed to one of my sons.  It was a list of the tax increases put in place by Obamacare and that were in effect as of the first of January this year.  The tax increases were very big.  I had never heard about the taxes attached to thousands of unread pages that were approved.  I told my son that there was going to be a tax revolt or the government was going to win the battle by taking over our lives, our work, and our wages...  we would have to be assigned jobs, not choose our own... and we would be lucky if we got paid minimum wage.  When the government went under, we would all go under.

I really don't understand how that kind of financial system works in a government-controlled country -- how do you pay wages using taxes and tax those wages again to make government income to pay wages again and then tax those wages......  it's a weird cycle......  I have heard that taxes are over 50% in European countries.

A country would have to generate income even if it was paying wages to its citizens and then taxing the wages it paid those citizens.  The government-owned companies that citizens work for would have to make products that sell and make a profit.  That sounds like capitalism to me... with the government making the profits instead of owners or shareholders.  Does anyone really think the government will do a better job?

If you have solutions to the problems we face as a nation, I would love to hear them... I have about a hundred (well, maybe 10-20) ideas myself.  This would be a good time to get them out in the open and considered.