Liberal Forum

Skans » Today, 7:47 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 7:47 am

Exactly.  Content and presentation matters. I watch a lot more financial podcasts than I do political. There's hardly ever anything new to learn from a political podcast - at best, succinct reaffirmation of what you already know.  At worst, mind-numbingly annoying.

I would say that you are precisely correct - but that would be a little tighter lasso than I wanna throw. 

Instead, I will say you are GENERALLY correct. Most of what I watch is more affirming than informative. In its defense, it does draw from the background into the foreground alements which strengthen one's arguments and deepen one's understanding. And it is not at all uncommon that new facts are brought to light - though, again, they are inevitably affirming. 

An example is that I am fowllowing the Karen Read trial out of Canton, MA. I already know the judge and the prosecutor are corrupt, so the entire follow-along is by definition reaffirming. But every day that passes, the corruption becomes more obvious as the state's case becomes more precarious and exposed. So there's a truck-wreck element to it that is at once entertaining and aggravating. And underlying the entire circus is the wide-eyed wonder at the obviousness of the felonies being committed by all of the prosecutors - one of whom is the judge herself. That she is carrying water for the state is one thing - they all do (they just do it less obviously and with greater finesse). But that she is very openly preventing the defense from exposing police corruption makes the trial itself completely corrupt. On top of this, she is passing very obvious signals to the prosecution - she looks like a **** football coach communicating plays. And on top of that, she is openly soliciting objections which she then sustains without argument. And the defense is just sailing along - no remonstrations, just handing the **** more rope with the next question for her to sustain objections to. The defense attorneys clearly understand that the jury sees what they see. They know for a fact they're already many furlongs past reasonable doubt - and they're still in the prosecution phase of the trial. What they're playing for now, IMO, is disbarment and perhaps prison sentences for the opposing counsel and crooked judge - as well as for the dirty cops that murdered little Johnny.