Pass the Lisinopril, please

I need to quit following politics. I mean, REALLY need to give it up. Just now I was watching the talking heads on TV debating the revival of the Fairness Doctrine. I listened to the same tired lines from the libs - "talk radio is all conservative, we need a balance, blah blah blah". Why do they always focus on talk radio? I haven't heard one word from the left regarding television (CNN, MSNBC, FOXNews, CNC, the big 3 networks, etc). Don't viewers of TV deserve 'balance'? Anyone who watches broadcast news/opinion with an open mind can realize that there is a HUGE bias in the media towards the left. Witness the near-Messianic presentation of Obama on the network news. Whereas Bush could do no right, Obama can do no wrong.

Now, dont get me started on George Bush. He did alot of stuff wrong - ALOT. But he did have some positive actions, such as trying on 12 different times to get Congress to fix the FHA/Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac mess. Of course, the Dems in Congress nixed him every time, but I never heard any of that mentioned on TV news.... NOT ONCE. With the exception of Fox News, the only media presenting another side of the political landscape is.... talk radio!! When the Iraq war was going badly, the TV peeps went after Bush like hyenas taking down a gazelle. But....when the troop surge actually began to work, when Iraq (at least so far) seemed to be stabilizing, the media response was "(yawn)".

The opposite applies to President Obama. He can do no wrong. Judging from the media coverage, I would have to conclude that Obama is greater than Jesus of Nazareth. (Pause to look for looming lightning from the sky...whew, none). Okay, I'm being facetious, a little, but there is a definite TV media bias towards the left (not including Fox, of course). So why not apply the Fairness Doctrine to TV, cable and whatnot? It seems the libs have a double standard, ha ha.

Okay, I went astray from my original intent here. So I was watching these guys debate the need for the revival of the Fairness Doctrine, and the opinions of the two idiots who were for it were just grating on my 'Free Marketplace/Libertarian" nerves. That meant my blood pressure was increasing. And then I came across a little article here detailing a bill sponsored by Texas' own illustrious cowboy senator John Cornyn. Check this video out:



And remember, this isn't a spoof -this political ad actually aired here in Texas. BTW, I didn't vote for Cornyn in 2008 or Rick Noriega, the dem opponent. I voted for Yvonne Schick, the Libertarian candidate. Anyway, so Big Bad John has sponsored a bill in the senate (s.436) that requires anyone who provides internet access to keep records of all users for 2 years, to aid in the effort to catch internet child porn people. A worthy goal - anyone who would do something like that to an innocent child deserves..well, they deserve a punishment that the Constitution would probably call 'cruel and unusual", but since the US Constitution doesn't mean much anymore these days, why not dole out some cruel and unusual punishment for pedophiles? In fact, we could offer a prize for the most creative sentence - send in your ideas today!

Oops, sorry, I went OT again. Anyway, like I said, catching pedocreeps is a worthy goal. But the bill sponsored by Cornyn would require ANYONE who provides internet access to keep records. This would naturally include Suddenlink, AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, and so on. But the language of the bill means it applies to those who have a home wi-fi network as well. Do you have a wireless network at home? Do you have 2 years worth of records of who accesses your network? I didn't think so. IMHO, Congress has no power to make you keep them, either. Read the constitution. As far as I can tell, the powers delegated to Congress don't include making you keep records of peeps who log on to your home wifi network. (Of course, there are a LOT of things Congress doesn't have the power to do, but they've done them anyway, Republican and Democrat alike - they've all equally pissed all over our Constitution this past century)

Oops, sorry - I got on my "Constitution" soapbox again. My point from all this is that listening to the Fairness Doctrine zombies got my BP jetting up, and then reading about s.436 caused a huge spike. I don't have any Lisinopril handy, so I've changed the channel and closed the Firefox tab with the s.436 article. I may have to watch the Carmina Burana video again.

I just re-read this a little, trying to proof it. When I get agitated about a topic, I tend to write in an aimless yet ranting style that has no theme, and can even be a bit hard to follow. I don't feel like rewriting this, so just pretend it all makes sense and flows evenly from paragraph to paragraph while I look for some Xanax.


(update)

I forgot to mention I fired off an indignant email to Senator John Wayne, uh, I mean, Cornyn. There was a 10,000 character limit, and I only used about 7,500. Anyway, check out this portion of the automated reply I just got:

If you need immediate assistance regarding an urgent problem you are experiencing with the federal government, visit the "Help With Federal Agencies" section of the website for details on how to proceed so that your difficulties are brought to my attention as soon as possible.

I wonder if the "Help With Federal Agencies" section of Cornyn's website has anything labeled "Help With A Tyrannical Federal Government That Refuses To Recognize The Rights Of The States And Does Not Recognize The Limits Imposed On The Federal Government By The 10th Amendment Of The US Constitution"?

I just looked -it doesn't. :(