How can the political left and the political right know two different 'truths'?

Tweet

Hello All, I imagine that many of us have asked this question; at least once or twice, right? So, how can it be that the left and the right know, absolutely know, two opposite truths? Perhaps the answer isn't as complex as we may think. Perhaps it has everything to do with what we're being told, or not told. Hmmm... Yesterday I shared with two of my associates (at separate times) my assessment on how 'upside down' the world is when it's the tabloids that are doing investigative journalism, and the serious newspapers like the NYT are knee-deep in conjecture and speculation. Neither had any idea what I was talking about. Both looked at me like I was speaking in Mandarin Chinese. So, I went on to explain how the "National Enquirer" should get at least a 'nod' for voluntarily 'tabling' the John Edwards affair and 'love child' story last December -- until they had more to go on -- at least some corroboration. Still, neither had any idea what I was talking about. So, I asked each, very directly, "Didn't you hear or read about the gossip/ allegations from last December suggesting that John Edwards had had an affair with a woman who worked on his campaign? Separately, each indicated that they never heard or read a word about the accusations. What's more, I have no reason to believe that either was being less than 100% honest! In all honesty, it's none of my business, AND I could care less what John Edwards, or anyone else for that matter, does in the privacy of their own bedroom. I do feel badly for Elizabeth Edwards, and their children. This kind of narcissistic nonsense is really difficult for kids to wrap their heads around. Yet, the affair itself is none of my business. What I do find intriguing, and care very deeply about is that two of my associates, whom I personally like very much, in spite of their unconcsious embrace of socialism, had never heard about Edwards' alleged affair. How could that be? I very distictly remember that questions about the affair were everywhere. Certainly, it was all over the tabloids, and it was all over the internet. I'm pretty sure that I remember hearing about it on the T.V. and radio as well. It was big news because -- if it was true, then the implications were very unflattering with respect to Edwards' trustworthiness or his lack thereof. Perhaps the bigger questions being asked related to his ability to keep his commitments to the office of the presidency if he was unable or unwilling to keep his commitments to his devoted wife, who was battling the fight of her life with cancer. On 12/19/2007 the Enquirer story broke, raising serious questions about Edward's character, and about a month and a half later, Edwards bailed out of the presidential race. OK, so why do I provide the time table? Well, because it's inconceivable to me that the accusations about the affair had no bearing on Edwards' decision to quit the race. Whether the claims were true or not, that kind of personal gossip has, time and again, been such a distraction to a political campaign, that a campaign typically sinks under the weight of the negativity that it causes. So, here are my questions for you: Is it possible that my two associates never heard a word about the affair BECAUSE of where they typically get their news? In other words, if they get their news primarily from far-left sources, is it possible that those sources provided zero mention of the Edwards affair allegations? If so, then it's conceivable to believe that many, many Americans were denied the informational link between the emergence of 'love child' allegations, and Edwards' abandon of the presidential race a scant few weeks later, right? Furthermore, if it's true that my associates knew nothing about the 'love child' allegations, or the possible link to Edwards' decision to quit the race, then aren't the news sources who failed to cover the allegations being wholly negligent toward their customers, and the nation as a whole? Is it possible that this glaring example of media negligence is directly responsible for the highly divisive state of our nation today? In other words, we know two totally different truths, because the media is manipulating what we're told. And, if so, how do we remedy or repair this fissure of a problem? The URLs below link to the original Enquirer story from last December. http://www.nationalenquirer.com/john_edwards_love_child/celebrity/64426 The Enquirerer's follow-up 'gotcha' story from yesterday. http://www.nationalenquirer.com/sen_john_edwards_caught_with_mistress_and_love_child_in_la_hotel/celebrity/65193 And Edwards' Louisiana announcement that he was dropping out of the presidential race. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/30/politics/main3768889.shtml?source=mostpop_story