From: coolidge@speaker.wpd.sgi.com (Don Coolidge)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Pinocchio's Nose
Date: 31 Dec 92 19:24:43 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: speaker.wpd.sgi.com

This may well be my last posting to a.f.d-q, since today is my last day
at SGI. As of Monday, I'll be at NeXT, and lord only knows which crazy
newsgroups will be accessible from there.

So, first, thanks to everyone who's brightened my day over the past many
months: Dhanesh, Maddi, Cat, Eric, Eric, the pope, Patrick, Herbert, 
Elizabeth, Ron (E., not P.), Anne...the list goes on and on, and I 
apologize to anyone inadvertently left off.

Second, thanks to everyone who's brightened my day in a slightly different,
lip-smacking, claw-sharpening way: GRANT CUNNINGHAM, the whole wonderful
gang at alleged.u, Jason, That Krueger Kid, Mike Van P (OK, I actually
*like* Mike, but just disagree with his politics), Ron (P., not E.),
both John Switzers, the whole robogang at alt.rush-limbaugh, the whole 
sinister gang at talk.politics.guns, ZAPHOD BEEBLEBROX...again, I apologize
to anybody inadvertently omitted :^)

Finally, a longish comment on this amazing election we've been through.

One of the first things Danoe had to say after the election results came in
was something to the effect of "...we tried to label Clinton a tax-and-spend
liberal, but it didn't stick...". One of the first things Marlin Fitzwater
had to say in comment on Bush's gracious concession was something to the
effect of "...We're not using campaign rhetoric anymore; the election's
over...".

Think about that. The Republican Party essentially baldly admitted that
its campaign was based entirely on lies. 

Did the media call them to account on that? No. 

Well, did they ever point out those lies during the campaign itself? 
Hardly ever, and never to any great effect or with any great persistence.

Why is this?

Damned if I know. But by not doing so, they totally abrogate their 
responsibility to the public.

The media try to be impartial. That's the wrong thing to do. What
they should be doing is trying to be unbiased. An unbiased perspective
will point out the good points of each side. It will also point out
when either side is lying. It may well come to favor one side over 
another, but that does not show a bias, it shows a value judgement. 
An impartial viewpoint, on the other hand, is inherently value-free.
It avoids values like Goerge Bush avoids broccoli. Its committment to 
refrain from showing favoritism prevents it from discussing any 
unbalanced facets of the campaign, so it cannot report about lies. 
This, of course, only encourages more lies.

We need media to be responsible again. We need them to take strong
positions on elections (and hats off to the Manchester Union Leader, 
whose editorial positions I despise, but which has always had the guts
to tell it like they see it).

When known lies are not reported, as in the 1980 campaign when Ronald
Reagan repeatedly talked about a Chicago welfare mother with umpty-ump
kids and three Cadillacs, the lies are accepted as facts. There was no
such woman. Did the media say so? No, they reported instead "...More
Welfare Controversy In The Campaign..."  The story was believed, and did 
a great deal of harm to the Carter campaign. Similarly, Bush dumped ( :^) 
all over Dukakis for not cleaning up Boston Harbor, but one crucial 
element in the delay of that cleanup was that the Reagan-Bush 
administration had repeatedly postponed the granting of promised funds
dedicated to that cleanup. Of course, nobody reported that, either.

When lies by public figures are unchallenged by the media, lies become
accepteble, even de rigeur. And elections far more frequently are won 
by the most convincing liars. We've seen the results of that sort of thing
for the past twelve years.

Probably the best thing to come out of twelve years of Republican deceit
and class warfare is this newsgroup. And, despite and with apologies to
the several warm friendships I've begun through this forum, it just plain
wasn't worth it. It'll take decades to recover from the Reagan-Bush economic
disaster, and it's possible we may never quite recover from the attacks on 
rights, freedoms, and the Constitution the past twelve years have featured. 

All we can do is try.

Happy New Year....

- Don Coolidge
coolidge@speaker.wpd.sgi.com

(As of Monday, January 4, I can almost certainly be reached at:
 don_coolidge@next.com
 or
 coolidge@next.com
)