There is a way to keep up to date. However, it is burdensome to have it always on one's mind; why, when, where, and who is current, and how soon might that person, place, or thing be on the bank of the rapids, kicking back?
I pity, and envy, those who can day-to-day pick and choose events that push boulders down the wash. So far I stay on the shore, with my tube around my waist, waiting my turn to float.
Mistakenly, I assume that my enviable patron journalists are polymaths, or doctorate librarians, and/or actuaries who speak 722 different languages. But that is my unreasonable super-imposition on journalists; a personal problem of mine.
For starters, any story has a future. And, how many stories are available? Considering the world population, it could be total of one person -- one voice.
That makes the numbers too large.
I certainly can't keep up with 6 billion per day. That's a biblical parameter. I look at the USA, and then a city like New York and all its 'burbs. Say that every dollar passed in any one day has a story attached. It still makes me cathartic that 9 million dollars pass from hand to hand before breakfast in New York. Figure bus fare, train transfer, cup of java, postage stamps, parking meter...
Forget about it.
Pretty soon we won't be able to forfeit a day in the life and times of the collective activity of 6 billion voices. Some voices louder than others, but still 6 billion voices on the next generation of "internet-like" parlay.
I hear it coming, like a steam locomotive, with a rhythm and slippage all its own.
So, before I continue on this, I wonder if anyone within the sound of my keyboard has a similar foresight? I'm all ears.
Democrat Ears: Much of what I am saying comes from the sociopathic nature of Presidential candidates in the era of inter-play dynamics of one person/one voice. I suppose Obama age wise has the edge on the internet curve. No wonder the shift has been so dramatic... he is the Paris Hilton of hitting all the high points every time he speaks. It reminds me very much of Joel Olstein non-stop speaking. It appears unscripted to older generations, therefore sort of charismatic, but to young people it represents the freedom perceived in divulging "what ever you want to" to perfect strangers throughout the world.
Obama wrote a letter with these excerpted standards of promissory agenda:
'Just as important, I have been listening to what all Americans have to say... I will never compromise on my commitment to equal rights for all LGBT Americans... But neither will I close my ears to the voices of those who still need to be convinced... That is the work we must do to move forward together. It is difficult. It is challenging. And it is necessary....'(http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/members)
See: Also
Democratic Underground"This is part of the letter touted as proof of Obama's commitment to LGBT Americans. In all sincerity, those of you who ridicule those of us who were offended by the McClurkin incident, can you understand why I question the necessity of including this paragraph in a letter "proving" his commitment to us?
"What does he mean that "just as important" are the "voices" of those who need to be convinced?
"Why in 2008 do we need to appease bigots, sexists, homophobes? I don't think their "voices" are just as important as ours. I would prefer he would say that those people can "move forward" with us if THEY choose to, but move forward we will.
"Now, have at it. Again, I will vote for whoever our nominee will be, and someone will be bound to call me a 'scab-picker' again, but so be it." (Feb 28,2008, Retrieved 06.15.2008, 12:15 AM at at
bluebear )
