Liberty wrote:Sheriff Joe reminds me of Sheila Jackson Lee in that he never met a media camera he didn't like. Well .. he might be a little smarter than Queen Sheila.
Most public figures like a media camera to some degree or other. For me, that's not so much an issue. They have a message to communicate, and they use the media to do it. I would too if I were in their shoes. The media
uses their camera subjects to get ratings and sell advertising. Why shouldn't the camera subjects
use the media in return to get their message out? What's important to me is what that person is doing/saying on camera, and secondly, whether or not those on-camera words/actions are consistent with the rest of the person's life.
Arpaio may spend more time in front of a camera than you or I, but A) I approve of what he says on camera; and B) what he says on camera is consistent with the rest of his life. So I don't know if Arpaio is a media hound as much as he is a public figure who, by virtue of being a public figure, finds himself in front of a camera more than the average bear; but I do believe that he's the real deal.
SJL on the other hand, who also spends a lot of time in front of a camera, is a liar, a profligate spender, a whacky conspiracy theorist, and a race-baiter who has never had a productive day in her life that didn't involve producing shiftless stupidity and intellectual dishonesty. I wouldn't hire her to pick up dog droppings. She's not qualified.
Joe Arpaio gets a lot of camera time, like I said in my previous post, because the liberal media thinks he's dangerous and outlandish and the public should be warned, and because the conservative media thinks he's a hero and should be recognized for it. I think that Joe Arpaio sees a media camera, and is able to look beyond who is wielding it and say to himself "If I speak to this camera, my message will get out beyond the confines of the oxygen deprived atmosphere of a newsroom to the American people, and they will be able to discern my message." Sheila Jackson Lee, on the other hand, actually doesn't get as much media attention as she
should have because she is an embarrassment to the liberal media, and they know it. If she got Joe Arpaio's amount of coverage, the public outrage against her would extend beyond Texas, and they can't have that because it would harm their favored party's chances in other states.
So I don't care if Arpaio gets in front of cameras or not. No, actually, I do care. I
want him in front of cameras because his message
needs to be spread, by whatever means, because his message resonates with people who give a rip about a society and political landscape gone out of control. But SJL also needs to get more camera time, because she
is the face of a certain segment of the democrat party, like it or not, and people need to be aware of what that segment stands for, so they can make informed voting decisions.
So I say, give them both a weekly one hour special on all the major networks for the next year, and let's see whether it helps conservatives and hurts liberals, or visa versa.
Any takers?
