“Media Reform” Activists Cheer Obama
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | June 8, 2008
The only major policy criticisms of Obama concerned his recent pro-Israel speech before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
Minneapolis: Dropping any pretense of objectivity and non-partisanship, the “National Conference for Media Reform” on Saturday night turned into a Barack Obama-for-President rally, as left-wing media figure Arianna Huffington denounced Senator and presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain as a “Trojan horse for the right” who had “sold his soul” to become president.
Several speakers, including Federal Communications Commissioner Michael Copps, used the Obama campaign slogan, “Yes, we can,” as they urged the thousands of “progressives” in the audience to bring “change” to Washington, D.C.
One speaker, Sylvia Rivera, who runs a Mexican art museum, had the audience saying “Yes, we can” in Spanish. “Forty years from now,” she said, “we will marvel at how we elected our first black president.”
Huffington, who runs the far-left Huffington Post website, said that Obama would win the White House in November as long as “the fear-mongering of the right” on national security affairs was kept in check and “zero tolerance” was practiced for attacks on Obama’s patriotism and loyalty to the U.S. Another problem, she stated, was that “the media are still in love with John McCain” and it is imperative to make sure the media “fall out of love” with him.
If all of this is done, she predicted a “landslide” for Democrats in November.
Meanwhile, a Canadian, Naomi Klein, who writes for the British Guardian and The Nation magazine, told the conference that Hillary Clinton’s endorsement of Obama was “a partial victory for the forum gathered here tonight.” She said that Clinton was the candidate of the establishment and that her “coronation” had been derailed.
It was only a partial victory, she explained, because pressure has to continue to be placed on Obama as he campaigns and then as president to endorse and carry out a detailed plan for completely withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. She said, “Iraq was the decisive issue of the campaign. Clinton supported it. Obama didn’t.”
Referring to Clinton’s loss, Klein said, “Somebody paid a price [for Iraq] at last.”
She said that Obama has to “earn the incredible trust he has been given” and warned that “the establishment” will try to “assert control” over him.
Klein, a critic of what she calls “disaster capitalism,” said that Obama’s support from Wall Street financial interests was a problem and griped that Democrats, rather than Republicans, were now getting more campaign dollars from the “arms industry.”
Nevertheless, under pressure from a “radicalized” populace, Klein said, that Obama could not only get the U.S. out of Iraq but carry out a “Green New Deal” and transform the U.S. economy. But she cautioned that Obama hasn’t yet articulated a “green agenda” that “is a match for our climate crisis.”
Klein received a standing ovation from the conference participants.
By comparison to Huffington and Klein, the speeches of Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan and disgraced former CBS Evening News anchorman Dan Rather, which were delivered as part of the same “Media Reform Begins With Me” Saturday evening program, seemed mild and almost dull.
Dorgan wants the federal government to decide who shall own media properties and whether they are serving the “public interest.” He is the “progressive” point man for “media reform” in the Senate and bragged about how he had gotten Republican Senator Trent Lott to go along with his efforts. Lott recently resigned to become a lobbyist.
Rather, who left CBS News after he used forged documents in an effort to smear President Bush before the 2004 election, portrayed himself as one of the crowd, saying that we have to “take back the press for the American people.” But only about half the crowd gave his lackluster speech a standing ovation.
Rather, who now anchors a show on the obscure HDNet channnel, talked about the failings of the press, without alluding to his own journalistic scandal. He said that he had just interviewed former Bush press secretary Scott McClellan, who charges in his new book, What Happened, that the media were “overly deferential” to the White House in the run-up to the Iraq War. “He’s right, and we didn’t need Scott McClellan telling us so,” said Rather.
Indeed, some “progressives” in the audience told this columnist that they consider Rather to have been one of those “deferential” news people and wondered why he had even been invited to the conference.
The answer apparently lies in Rather’s tendency, since he was forced out of CBS News, to take pot shots at the owners of what are called the “corporate media.” This fits nicely in line with what the conference sponsor, the Free Press, wants people to believe about the sources of all of our media problems today. These are problems that can only be solved, speakers repeatedly said, with more and bigger government.
The “media reform“ movement has been funded by Democratic moneybags George Soros, a billionaire and convicted inside trader, and liberal foundations such as the Wallace Global Fund, named for FDR’s pro-communist Vice President Henry Wallace.
Earlier in the day, Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), who sits on a House committee with jurisdiction over the Federal Communications Commission, told this columnist that he favors the return of the so-called Fairness Doctrine, in order to restore “balance” to the airwaves. Such a measure was used under the Kennedy and Johnson Administrations to intimidate and regulate the content of conservative commentators and broadcasters.
Return of the Fairness Doctrine or other measures to limit and control conservative speech could come about because Doyle predicted that the November elections will result in Democrats in the House increasing their numbers from 235 to 265 and in the Senate to close to 60, in addition to Obama‘s predicted win.
“It’s time to put a cop back on the beat,” demanded Democratic FCC commissioner Copps, in framing the “media reform” debate. With Obama in the White House, Democrats would also have a majority. The other current Democrat on the FCC is Jonathan Adelstein, another speaker at the “media reform” conference and the one who introduced Dorgan. A President Obama would appoint the FCC chairman, giving Democrats a 3-2 edge.
As they see it, of course, the “cop” on the beat is going to be the FCC, regulating and dictating media ownership rules, enforcing broadcaster compliance with the “public interest,” and control over the flow of news and information over the Internet. The latter is euphemistically and misleadingly called “net neutrality” or “Internet freedom.”
As explained by Tim Wu, a Columbia Law School Professor who coined the term “net neutrality” and is chairman of Free Press, the U.S. Constitution is flawed because the founders did not anticipate the problem of “the abuse of private power.” The Bill of Rights was merely designed to protect people against government and the founders were concerned about the exercise of “public power,” he explained to the conference.
This is their rationale for using the powers of the federal government, through the FCC and Congress, to control the media. It is significant and telling that the Broadcaster Freedom Act, which would prevent the return of the Fairness Doctrine, was not endorsed by any speaker at the conference. The obvious reason is that the conference organizers want to use the government to silence voices objecting to their vision of what America should be.
The proof was in the lineup of speakers at conference events, panels, and workshops, which prompted even some participants to question why conservatives had been deliberately excluded. The slant was so dramatic that this columnist was singled out for daring to ask a critical question during the question-and-answer session following a panel on the dangers of “hate speech.” This panel featured attacks on such media figures as Lou Dobbs of CNN, a critic of illegal immigration.
One panel member, John Trasviña of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said in an interview that his group was considering various legal and legislative options against “hate speech,” including the return of the federal Fairness Doctrine.
The panel also featured a Department of Justice official, Mark Kappelhoff, who had previously served as legislative counsel for the ACLU. He described federal prosecution of those who perpetrate hate crimes. Asked if he had ever uncovered hoaxes by those claiming to have been victimized by alleged hate crimes, Kappelhoff said that he couldn’t comment.
The one-sided panels reflect the kind of media coverage that the Free Press is seeking for the rest of us.
Arianna Stassinopoulos Huffington, who acquired her wealth from her homosexual ex-husband Michael Huffington and once traveled in Republican circles, is now a leading light in the “progressive” movement and boasted of hiring former Washington Post reporter Thomas Edsall to do “investigative” stories for her.
But she has a strange view of the role of the media. She denounced “equal time for lies,” which is apparently the basis for two chapters in her new book, and decried the tendency of some in the media to cover both sides of issues like man-made global warming. The debate on this controversy has gone on for too long, she said.
Her new book concerns the “lunatic fringe,” which is how she now regards the right. But lunatics were all over this conference. Compact discs were for sale featuring the views of communist Angela Davis (on the topic of “How the Change Happens”) and members of the Revolutionary Communist Party distributed their newspaper, Revolution, to participants. A Planned Parenthood booth distributed condoms.
In a dramatic development, one panel featured a homosexual blogger, Mike Rogers, who charged that Florida Republican governor and possible McCain running mate Charlie Crist was a closeted homosexual. Asked for proof, he said it was on his website, BlogActive.com (Crist has denied the accusation but pro-family organizations, including Peter LaBarbera’s Americans for Truth, take the allegation seriously).
After Huffington’s partisan attack on McCain and plea for a Democratic Party takeover of the White House, emcee Lizz Winstead declared that the Free Press did not endorse or oppose any candidate for public office. She apparently made the statement in order to protect the legal non-profit status of the organization.
But Winstead, co-creator of The Daily Show, made the claim while laughing and smiling throughout. Indeed, by this point it had become quite clear, if it was not already apparent, that the “National Conference for Media Reform” had become an arm of the Obama-for-President campaign and was probably designed that way.
The only major policy criticisms of Obama concerned his recent pro-Israel speech before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). This contradicted his previous support for individuals and groups associated with the Arab and Palestinian cause.
In this context, some audience members at a panel titled “Corporate Media Confidential,” complained that “nothing negative about Israel” appears in the press. “We need to weaken the power of AIPAC,” said one, to strong applause. Another decried “our obsession with Israel.”
Panel member Cliff Schecter, author of the anti-McCain book, The Real McCain, urged Jewish groups to “come out for peace.” Another panel member, Jeff Cohen, who founded Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, said that he was labeled “the PLO Jew” when he worked in the media. Cohen had been a producer for Phil Donahue’s political talk show on MSNBC.
Asked if any pro-Israel views were going to be represented on any of the panels at the conference, panel moderator and Free Press official Craig Aaron insisted that everybody was pro-Israel.
As the conference was concluding on Sunday, with panels on such topics as “Holding local broadcast stations accountable at the FCC,” it had also become absolutely clear that the “media reform” movement has emerged as a critical part of the partisan political effort to help the Democratic Party gain absolute and total political power on the federal level and use that power to silence conservative and Republican voices in the media.
Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report and can be reached at (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
32 Comments
Again, thank you Cliff for articulately covering the conference. I hate party lines because they just give politicians excuses to control and protect their views from the public. People are not even the topic of discussion at these forums. Its just bashing conservatives and Republicans, while promoting their poster boy. Nobody has sat back and realized that the Bush administration messed up in their party but it doesn’t insinuate that ALL people in the same party line are the same.
All this conference in my eyes is doing is flipping the pole instead of balancing it for Americans. For example if the Fairness Doctrine is passed and more and more conservative talk radio hosts are silenced it will lead to a system of corrupt censoring that is not apart of freedom of speech.
Our sensitive left and Democrats seemed inable to take criticism and seek retaliation with policy reform. If your pissing me off because of something you say on the radio I simply excercise my rights and turn you off. And in doing so I am also respecting your right to free speech. But these people don’t get it. They’ll never agree to disagree.
Case in point, I read many articles posted michaelsavage.com not because I agree with Michael Savage on all of his issues (even though he is mostly correct on his assessments) but because he brings awareness to important issues in our country and abroad. To me that is more patriotic than any media base today. If CNN or NBC or MSNBC chose to use those articles and put the effort in pursuing those stories the people of this country would actually start to trust what they watch.
I would rather stand by people I don’t agree with but that respect themselves and my right to freedom, then stand next to people who claim to be on my side but unrightfully discriminate and silence any who oppose their views.
Amazing in half a century this country has gone down the shitter so quick. I’m only 23 and have seen atleast 3 or more major revolutions of ideologic change. No wonder I’m rebellious, the more they try to silence me the louder I’ll get. :0
Justin, you are half way there. When you can realize that the Rep/Con (so-called) are working hand in glove with the ‘other side’ to get this country dismantled, then we have a chance.
The media has been for Obama since day one. When they were bashing others, they were either promoting him, or strangely silent.
If there is some media reform, it will mean silencing anyone who speaks out against this corporate owned government.
If Obama is elected, as I fear, I’m thinking there are going to be things happening in this country that will not be to everyone’s liking, but I’m thinking mainstream media will be just fine with it. They have been with outsourcing, the selling of the US to foreign companies, illegal immigration and this war - so I’m thinking they are going to be fine with what an Obama administration might bring.
They don’t want people like Savage speaking out against these things - it’s not conservatism they fear - it’s truth.
Mainstream media would be “fine with it”? The truth is feared?
Let me ask you to really consider the following..
(Assuming we all “drink the same juice”)
Did you catch the tiny amount of time that the “conservative media” and the so - called left wing media spent covering the fact that the Senate report released Thursday concluded that the Bush administration didn’t base their decisions on “false information from intelligience”...they made up, ommitted or did not share the information with us.
Where is the outrage? Did we (I mean the country and conservatives) vote for Bush because we were told that anyone who dissented against him was not patriotic? Did we think he was truthful? Did we find it kind of cute that he preferred bar-b-qued food and hacked up the English Language? Did we think god was on his side and declared him to have the right to declare an “axis of evil”? Did we believe that he was going to “smoke out the terrorists”? If you did, and most did, we were all drinking the cool-aid that conservative talk shows and other media have warned us about..but the didn’t mean theres. Where is the outrage?
If you think this is a joke, consider how people who left the Bush administration had character assassinations without a discussion of the merits of their claims, (look up the transcripts of the so-called truth seeking conservatives..I recently did). The dissendents (or so called nazi -appeasers were right all along, huh?) The conservative media didn’t tell me about the un-precedented levels of lobbyists that paid for his campaign in the Bush administration…(Clinton had 5…Bush had over 100)
If you don’t care that 4000 plus people died, than fine, but I will tell you, I listned to the savage nation, I have Rush’s books and even Bill O’Reillys. I listened to people get “hannitized”, and be told they were “good Americans” by Sean. “We don’t need a national coalition”, “Who wants a hybrid…I want a car that actually moves when I hit the gas”..“There is a war on values”,etc. Democrats are tax and spend people”...huh?
This isn’t about Republican or Democrat…please consider who is “really looking out for you”...they sure is hell failed under the guise of fair and balanced. Our constitution ripped apart…no, this is not a democrat thing…look at judge napalitanos book..and under the guise of immenent danger that was not imminent! Where is the outrage? The left wing, George Soros sponsored organizations were right all along I guess. I don’t need to say who I am voting for, but my decision won’t be based on anything that the aforementioned people tell me! (And a lot of people feel the way I do…Thank God!)
We need to really consider our sources of information and hold them accountable…but as they have proven, don’t put your blind faith in these guys…the so-called George soros sponsored organizations turned out to be right all along..at least about that. Where is the outrage?
I am trying to make the argument, that any body who doesn’t listen and seek alternate point of views is not patriotic, or American, and I will say, we are certainly not doing any favors by not demanding real “fair and balanced”. I don’t want someone pandering to what they think my point of view is, so that they can get my vote, and do the opposite…this is un-American.
During the 60s/Vietnam era, there was a popular poster that read: Just because you have silenced a person, that doesn’t mean you have convinced that person. (I believe it read “man” and “him,” but I have been married to a lovely, intelligent woman for 30+ years, so wish to be inclusive. Men, the secret to getting along with your wives: get them talking…and actually LISTEN to them. Having done so, they are much more likely to listen to what you say, and the two of you can work together. If not, you’re probably married to the wrong woman or vice-versa.)
I seriously doubt that anyone’s views were changed during this “conference.” I should imagine that most people paid little, if any attention to the same ol’ same ol’ that such venues provide.
The lefties are just getting their panties in a bunch because conservatives have a constitutional right to disagree with or outright ignore them. Be thankful for small blessings!
“Media reform”? How Orwellian! Double plus ungood. Silencing the right, which is the mission of our mainstream media, is probably WAY down on the list of the average American’s wish list, with oil prices much higher. A big tax increase is probably way down on the average American’s wish list as well. Obama is repeating Walter “One State” Mondale’s strategy of campaigning on tax increases in ‘84. (For republicans, this is double plus good.)
I believe that where once people actually fell for the nonsense of ANWR being a scenic park (it is much more like the surface of the moon; the scenic pictures were taken elsewhere), $4 gas is a much bigger concern. Plus those native Alaskans would love to get the jobs that drilling ANWR would provide.
And, I read, $4 is the magic number. At $3 gas, Americans went on about like they did before, but when it hit $4, they woke up and started changing their driving habits. To work and home again? Yes. Sunday drives through the countryside? No.
As gas was going to 4, my wife and I were making visits across the state on weekends as my father, a teen Marine in WW II, was failing and passed without a long, drawn-out painful death. Yeah, the gas cost a bundle, but one has to prioritize.
But I would prefer to see gas at $5 than to see Congress try to manipulate our free market system of economics, setting profit levels for oil co’s in the near future if possible. What co’s will they go after next? It was Microsoft and Big Tobacco in the 90s, so there is a precedent.
Look on the bright side: Venezuela is one of our biggest sources of oil, but they produce an inferior, “sour” crude, which as it just so happens, America has the ability to refine, where most other countries lack this ability.
Now, if the libs will simply stop taking most of the good alternatives off the table, eg, ANWR, perhaps we could have a meaningful energy policy.
Of course the libs in the MSM will continue to play favorites (democrats), but they’re losing business in doing so, hence the increased Internet presence.
As always, I don’t “like” either party, but will vote a straight-republican ticket to vote against democrats, NOT for republicans, the lesser of two evils vote. (The republicans are spineless slugs caving to the left, although hope remains that they will come to their senses.) The difference is between seeing a pile of dog doo and actually stepping in it having seen it beforehand!
Watch your step.
Denise: Have you read a variety of reactions to the report? Others are howling in displeasure at the onesided and biased report put out by democrat members of the committee. Critics have pointed out how the position and reports of other nations concurring with those of our country regarding the dangers from Iraq were ignored in the report.
Does it worry you about committees in our congress who act in this manner?
According to the scripture, the EU under Islam will rule the world..it also says, all nations will go against Israel, the left and right are the same, work together, get together and most people are blind to that fact. Scripture also says many will be destroyed for lack of knowlege. If only they would like prophecy never fails in G-d’s word, and everything so far has always happened as it says it will, and there is nothing new under the sun,and what HE did once will, andis doing again as it is written. It also says, the god of this world (satan) rules all governments and that evil would be called good and good evil..another way to say PC. Truth is what G-d said, not what anyone thinks it is..Here we have most have bowed to Islam, even Prince Charles etc..along with joining old Rick Warren and His sun worshipers and the POPE,,,scripture says apostasy is in the church too, so don’t get hot and bothered,,just repeading what G-d has told us…Does anyone wonder why the L-rd says like in the days of Noah were so it would be like that doday.? wickedness, new age and hell itself,bringing in one religion to rule,,but how can they believe HIS KINGDOM is here when HE said, MY KINGDOM is NOT OF THIS World..People have been dumbed down in the churches, government, schools and all else..but they best remember only G-d can save, men never saved anyone..
Let us also not forget that there are people at Time Warner who work with NewsCorp who are trying to help undermine anything NewsCorp does (FOX News, Network FOX, FOX Sports Net, Speed TV, FX, FOX Movie Channel). These people are Leigh Gallgher, Adam Lashinsky, Nina Easton, Frank Cleindo, Pam Oliver, Dick Stockton, Larry McReynolds, Matt Yocum, Kyle Petty, and Ralph Sheheen. They also have former double agents like Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, Skip Caray, Pete van Wieren, and Jane Hall.
America needs to wake up and realize we have a fifth column so hell bent on destroying us that they will use their side to infiltrate our side (Hello John McCain!).
I didn’t hear the Congressional report on the so called ‘flawed’ intelligence, but I have been past outrage since the morning of 9/12 when I realized this government had not closed our borders. It grew when the government forgot about Bin Laden (who was supposed to be responsible for 9/11) and decided somehow Iraq was the greatest threat on the planet and that they were plotting dastardly things against the US - all the while still leaving our borders open.
Any time the government and the media try so hard to sell something as they did the invasion of Iraq - we need to put the brakes on and ask questions.
As a lifelong Texan and 3rd generation (that goes back 75 years) Republican, I knew the Bush family was neither conservative nor Republican.
So, no, I didn’t buy his pretense at being a Texan, a rancher, a governor or presidential material. His professed Christianity is between him and God - all I can judge is his actions. No, the actions didn’t impress me.
Yes, many conservatives, I mean real conservatives, voted for him they felt they had no where else to go. Whether those who call themselves liberals know it or not, they are being led down the same garden path. They are so upset with Pres. Bush that they will vote for anyone who calls himself liberal, and not look beyond the label.
I agree we need alternative views - but we don’t have it. We might have what some call conservative or liberal views - but look around and ask yourself what that means.
Does it mean the media told us the truth about Iraq? They knew.
Does it mean the media is telling us the truth about the huge numbers of HB workers and how corporations are working around the law to bring them in to replace Americans?
Does it mean they are telling us that we, the taxpayers, are still having our money confiscated to give subsidies to oil companies?
Does it mean that when the President sits there and signs a ‘farm subsidy’ bill surrounded by a fresh faced family and kids, that most of the money will go to big agri conglomerates?
Are they telling you about how many illegal aliens are truly here? Are they telling you about the actual cost to the US taxpayers in terms of jobs, welfare benefits, crime?
We are hearing that if an employer uses E-verify, they are honest. I just saw a quote from a Pilgrim’s Industry spokesman that said E-verify did not detect stolen ID’s. A little tidbit the media and the government is keeping from us. So if an illegal has stolen someone’s ID, they are home free. Think that information is lost on them?
Actually, everyone should listen to, watch, and read news from every viewpoint (should news have a viewpoint?), and apply common sense and the picture will emerge. I actually used to watch Free Speech TV. That’s where I learned that Mexican farm workers (illegals?) had gotten a government permit to operate a small area radio station. This was supposedly to be able to broadcast weather conditions - right? We all believe that.
The false premise in all this argument about ‘fair and balanced’ is that the government can make it happen. It can’t. We won’t get fair and balanced, we will get government propaganda.
We, the people, can make a difference in this country. We still have purchasing power, for a while, we had better use it to our advantage. It is our weapon, our only weapon. Right now the elections are controlled, at least at the Presidential level.
We should spend our money wisely. We are buying the rope that hangs us by doing business with the corporations that are paying politicians to destroy this nation.
They can’t buy politicians to work against us and this country if we don’t buy cheap Chinese goods, if we don’t buy from companies that import unnecessary workers, if we don’t buy from companies that are hiring illegals, if we cut way back on our oil consumption, pay attention to our taxes and try to keep more for ourselves (legally, of course). We can’t do stop altogether, but we can cut way back and make better choices.
We can do it, but it won’t be done on a governmental level, through the ballot right now. Money is the fuel of this corrupt government - our money.
So, no, I didn’t drink the Kool-aid, but many times got some very nasty flak because I suggested the emperor had no clothes.
June 9, 2008
Dear Mr. Kincaid,
Before continuing to confront the issue of the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” I think it would be helpful and advisable to review the court case of Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission, 395 U.S. 367 (1969) where the “Fairness Doctrine” was used to gag Reverend Billy James Hargis and his radio station, WGCB. You probably have information of this case and Rev. Hargis in your files. Anyone else interested in the proposed return of the “Fairness Doctrine” will also want to review this decision.
I thought I had something on Rev. Hargis in my Master’s Project, “The Conservative Newsletter in the U.S.A.—A Directory and Review” (Central Michigan University, September, 1975), but I don’t. He must not have been running a regular newsletter. But I do recall getting quite a bit of information from his organizations while I was President of the Republican Club at Lake Superior State College (now Lake Superior State University) in 1970-1973. If memory serves me correctly, his organization broke up in a personal scandal around 1974.
If needs be, I might still have some material in my file of source materials for the Master’s Project if needs be. But since I have been looking for a job here in Jennifer Granholm’s “Peepuls Republic of Mishigun” for over five years and am destitute, I would appreciate some help on copying expenses if you need the material.
I just did NOT watch a PBS program on the 60s which visibly was done from a trendy “New Left” standpoint. I am irritated that no one has set out to document the youth Conservative movement of the 60s. And what little mention has been made is unfairly negative and seriously simplistic. We had a very lively and surprisingly diverse movement in those days which actually held together longer and was in many ways more influential than the so-called “New Left.” But we made less noise. But that’s another matter.
Best wishes.
Sincerely,
Gary J. Mallast
(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Please God, tell me that the people of this country are not going begging to this government asking, ‘Please Sirs/Madams, may we have a fair media?’
The government cannot legislate a fair and accurate media. It can’t be done. The ‘fairness and accuracy’ would be left up to the government!!!!
Surely, that isn’t what we want.
Hitler would have been happy to have had a country of people so willing to allow government (read that politicians) decide what is fair and accurate reporting.
Please, please think about this—-
Denise,
Please clarify if you would, what you were saying in your post. With all the questions you posted I wasn’t sure what your arguement or case was. If it was, ‘why is their an outrage because of the conference’ then I’ll try responding to that.
Its a concern when any organization whether they are liberal, conservative whatever tries to silence the other or control the airwaves. That I believe is where the outrage comes from.
From not just the media but from posts I’ve read I think people are getting the wrong idea about conservative talk radio. It seems people think those that support them mean that they are always right.
If you listen to Savage he speaks very openly with people of different backgrounds including Muslims who share his views. Granted he has his moments where he cuts people off he thinks are bigoting or ‘liberals’ and that might be some of his problems but atleast he has a better sense of the issues nationally then most liberal shows that censor everyone who disagrees with them.
But that is just an example, overall every radio show has its bugs it could probably fix to make it more appeasing to the others but this IS America, if you don’t like what someone says then turn off the radio! The major problem is that the media through televised news has became a huge industry. Almost every American has a T.V. if not 2 or more. And most of them watch news, instead of reading or listening to it. So then the question rises, who controls those forms of media? These corporations that are seem to have more on their agenda then simply reporting news. THATs the outrage. Free speech is free speech but to use these media bases, that have the trust of most Americans, to promote or demote a presidential candidate with illegitimate and limited information to the public is simply dishonest.
Seems like the USA is going into the marxist path. Total left wing control of the press, the public school and all public life.
People who have the truth on their side don’t try to censor opposing views (darwinists, muslims, moonbats, etc).
Corrections, additions, and follow-up.
Frank Cliendo should be spelled as “Frank Caliendo” and I forgot to add Bernard Goldberg to the current News Corp - Time Warner employment.
Let us also not forget that the “Fairness Doctrine” does have its roots (IMO) in Karl Marx’s “The Communist Manifesto” (1848) when one of Marx’s tennants was control of all communications (newspaper, magazine, texting, radio, television, and Internet). They say that it could be applied to radio and TV only, but can also be applied to the Internet including Wikipedia for which I am an editor (User:Miller17CU94 - ranked 556 as of May 23, 2008 in terms of edits). One of Obama’s presidential platforms is to get “fairness” in the media.
Other media that have called for the elimination of other media are a former Air America radio personality in Sacramento calling for the reinstatement of “The Fairness Doctrine” or on ESPN’s “Around The Horn” in March 2004, “Chicago Sun-Times” sports columnist Jay Mariotti called for the elimination of FOX Sports Net (which no doubt would make DNC chair Dr. Howard Dean happey since Dean has called for the elimination of FOX News Channel). You also have Keith Olbermann and his ongoing war with FOX News (he was fired from FOX Sports in 2001).
Something else to think about.
If you don’t act now and expose all your misgivings to Obama, all flies will vote for him and the first nightsoil seating in White House.
I apologize for my inarticulate rant the other night…I should have proof read!
I recognize that some of us have been critical and have filtered the information that comes their way from all sources. To make my point, I was using the recent Senate minority report to show that many people don’t even know about it. This is BIG news.
BTW, what do I think about committees in congress who slant their investigations in a partisan way? I say that in the first Senate report done on the topic of flawed intelligience, there was a Republican majority on that committee who was coming up for re-election. The same criticisms were toward them in the first round of “investigative” reporting. So who is right? When the preponderance of evidence from the unprecedented amount of people who left the administration all say the same thing, from Generals, to Republican Congress members, to CIA officials, to now Press Secretaries, red flags should go up. The “conservative” voices instead focused on the character of these people and how they were not patriotic.
I recall this is not what Fox said when Dick Morris came to Fox. This is not what they said when George Stephanopolous wrote his book. For those of you who recognize this, I am not speaking to you…In fact, I am making the case that the costs are much higher when it comes to war.
Why am I so angry? Because the conservative talking heads (Of course maybe not all…) present their opinion as facts, and are the “Propoganda machine”. They have done nothing but make fun of conspiracy theories, while at the same time making a case for a “vast left wing conspiracy” fueled by the likes of George Soros.
What did I mean by “where is the outrage”? I meant why are we not outraged at our news sources for doing the exact thing they accuse liberals of doing…only one hundred times worse!
I am now convinced, as some alluded to in earlier posts, that leaving the press as it is, under the guise of “capitalism” is just as dangerous, (or maybe more so if you look at the past eight years) as having the Government involved. I guess there is no hope….because the same conservative talking heads will convince us that the Government is trying to promote communism (does the name McCarthy ring a bell?), and will point to the crazy court cases, the ACLU, and talk about how people are trying to God out of schools, etc., etc., . These are all things that are good to debate, as the Founding Fathers intended us to. We will debate whether Al Gore is a hypocrite, but not read his books, and be convinced he has nothing credible to say, just as we talked about the aforementioned being anti-american.
Is the government the answer? Instinctively, I would have said, “No way!” Now, I am not so sure, I think I will have to read some more books about it, refer to the cases above. I will do the American thing, and learn more about the people mentioned in the article. I will learn what their motives are and not dismiss them automatically as communists, socialists, or anything else. If I have learned anything in th past eight years, I learned that I will question any thing that the right wing talking heads tell me not to! I would encourage all of us to do the same for the sake of putting some integrity back into this democracy!
Denise: ““I guess there is no hope….because the same conservative talking heads will convince us that the Government is trying to promote communism
(does the name McCarthy ring a bell?)...”
You drank the kool aid on this McCarthy reference, as McCarthy was routinely ridiculed when he was entirely correct.
Examples: They got the wrong Annie Lee Moss (as there were six listings in the phone book under that name).
Nope. They got the right one…and she held communist party meetings in her home. If memory serves, she was removed from a sensitive position at the DOD.
McCarthy got into mischief during the House UnAmerican Activies Committee (HUAC), although I believe that this wasn’t the correct name of the committee, ie, HCUA.
Note: HOUSE UnAmerican Activites Committee. Senator McCarthy was in the Senate, as you may note in his honorific, Senator.
The list of [differing numbers] in the State Dept is a clusterf*ck, but an interesting read. This issue was muddied by the press.
Edmund R Morrow did a hit piece on McCarthy. McCarthy had proven that one of Murrow’s friends (Alger Hiss, I believe; proven by Soviet records) was a communist.
The list goes on, but you won’t get the true story from George Clooney’s movie re Murrow.
Assistant Roy Cohn, on the other hand, was a real piece of work!
McCarthy was right: there were (and are) communists in our State Dept…and one running for president at the mome having just sewn up the nomination.
Denise:
I encourage you to read more in order to make sense of the battle raging over whose opinion is Truth. In the end, it is only one’s ability to observe Reality, weigh facts and integrate those facts using logic and reason that enable one to make the judgments required to sustain one’s life as an independent human being.
The current political battle is being fought, not over the end goal (collectivism and control of the people by the few thugs who seize power), but over the means to enslave people. That is, whether enslavement by control of people’s thoughts or by control of their actions.
What this fog of battle obscures most is the fact that this nation was founded on a philosophy which is opposed to their goal: that individuals have a basic right to life, and that to sustain their lives they must have the freedom to act on their own volition and judgment.
The Constitution is a social (political) contract designed not to create “democracy” (tyranny of the masses) but to restrict the government’s control over the citizens and to protect the individual from the tyranny of both the government and the majority. The Constitution’s philosophy is the sacred right of the individual to live life as he chooses.
The only economic system that enables this political contract to be realized is Capitalism. Capitalism is the only system that nurtures the creation of wealth. Nations that chose Socialism, Nazism (another form of socialism), and Communism have proven beyond doubt that collectivism is in fact slavery, destroys wealth, and creates only universal poverty and suffering.
An excellent collection of essays by Ayn Rand, Alan Greenspan, and others on this subject is “Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.”
ladytexan:
When you rail against “ownership of the government by corporations” you are confusing the result with the cause. What you are describing is what Ayn Rand called “the politics of pull.”
The cause is government regulation, which in turn is the conflation of economic power with political power. When the government (Congress) creates regulations and laws which specify how one can do business and how much profit from that business one can keep, the only rational response from businessmen is to try to get laws and regulations enacted which favor them and cripple their competitors. That is the source of corruption, pure and simple.
Yes, you are right, there was an infiltration in the congress, and the White House. Ann Coulter’s book, which I read and have in a box somewhere in my house, “Treason”, goes into great detail about the way “Liberals consistently side with the enemies” under the guise of saving liberties.
This doesn’t take away from my original point…in fact, by reminding me of her book, it confirms my point. She did not invoke Bobby kennedy as being a staff lawyer for McCarthy, or the fact that half of the members in McCarthy’s own Senate Subcommittee on governmental Operations were democrats, nor did she invoke the fact that Democrats were members of the controversial House’s Un-American Activities Committee. In fact, I would say, Ann consistently scares people into the idea that all of the left are communist sympathizers, therefore, their dissent is not to be heard, because they are not - patriotic. This is not true, obviously! Out of fear that this MAY be true, we risk, well, becoming communist ironically!
Ann was wrong about the war. Maybe there are merits to this communist claim at times (ACLU and many other examples), but don’t discount information just because of what you are being scared into either. Out of fear of looking like we were not patriotic, and out of fear of appearing to be terrorist sympathizers, the media shut us up.
This is why I invoked McCarthy’s name. The same tactics were used by our media in getting us not to question anything, when clearly they should have been questioned.And those who did, were right to question them, not because they were terrorists, not because they hate their country, but because that is what we do as Americans. On the right, we got this wrong.
Thank you for your response. I understand what your point was and I appreciate it,and it didn’t fall on deaf ears. I have already been through that thought process however. I have been reading a lot about our Founding Fathers lately, and I just see clear as day, that under the guise of being anti-socialist, anti-communist, pro-military, and pro-God, we elected an administration that was the complete opposite of all of these things. How did it happen?
Examine the process by which we got to this point, and the fear that was behind it. Don’t let it happen again. (It will, but don’t let it)!
Yes, I agree that government is controlling the media.
One very important thing we should realize is that this didn’t just begin with this administration.
The news media was the propaganda arm to push through all manner of restrictive and controlling laws and regulations under the guise of Civil Rights.
The news media was complicit in the scare tactics to get gun control started - it is being put in place piece by piece.
The news media was complicit in the scare tactics to give more and more control to local and federal law enforcement in the name of a War on Drugs.
The news media has been there for everything that the politicians have wanted to do to dismantle this free republic. It doesn’t matter whether you have so called liberals or conservatives in power.
Please, please look at this and realize the politicians are not our friends. This administration could not have done what it has without the help of the ‘other side’. No administration could have done what it has without the other side helping. One so called party doesn’t suddenly become totally ineffectual because they are not in the majority.
I beg everyone to not fall for the lib vs. cons type rhetoric we hear. It is us vs. the politicians.
We do not have capitalism in this country. WE have an unholy alliance between corporations and government. The government is running interference for the corporations while they steam roller the people of this country - and the world.
Yes, free society is what we need, but not a free for all society. There must be some limitations. When one person’s freedoms infringes on another’s - then someone has to call foul. That’s what we are supposed to do as a government of, for and by the people. Sadly, it’s of politicians purchased by corporations, for the advancement of corporations and by corporations.
I’m thinking we are just now getting the stories about the ‘flawed intelligence’ and ‘fairness doctrine’ because the next phase of the dismantling needs it in order to get things done they do not want the people to know about. No government should have the right to control the press - either way.
If we see how the people were manipulated into this war, can’t we see how they are being manipulated into allowing - begging, even, the government to decide what is ‘appropriate’ for us to hear and see?
What is be suggested as a ‘fix’ is exactly what has been happening for years. First they present outrage at something that happens, then
they begin to beat the drums to line up the people. This is what they are doing.
Are they going to limit the internet as well? They have wanted to get their hands on it since people began talking. Wanta bet there will be something in there about controlling it?
No doubt corporations buy politicians in order to get favorable laws - that’s the problem in a nutshell.
To suggest there is a jusfication is wrong.
One more thought -
Laws are there for a long time, usually forever.
Do we really want those kinds of rules and regulations in place for any future administration?
Our government can change every 4 years.
How dangerous is a law like this in the hands of someone even more dangerous than what we have seen so far?
“We do not have capitalism in this country. WE have an unholy alliance between corporations and government. The government is running interference for the corporations while they steam roller the people of this country - and the world.”
I agree we do not have true Capitalism, but again, I think you are confusing result with cause and mis-identifying the unjust actor. The politicians are driving the steamroller.
Corporations (businessmen, actually, as corporations are an artificial entity) have to play along and do whatever they can to influence the politicians to avoid being imprisoned and to preserve the business. This is obviously true when as you point out the laws are constantly and arbitrarily changing at the whim of politicians and pull of the businessman’s competitors.
What was legal yesterday becomes something businessmen can go to jail for today, particularly when lawmakers and regulators see an opportunity to grab more wealth or expand government power. When government grabs wealth through fines and taxes, they are stealing from the stockholders and employees and endangering the existence of the wealth creation machine.
Government is killing the goose that lays the golden eggs and eating/burning the seed corn of further wealth creation. Government does NOT create wealth: it consumes wealth (currently on the order of 40% of Gross Domestic Product). This is exactly why economic power and political power must be kept separate.
I am not making an argument for anarchy. There must be some regulations and laws, but those must be limited to what is required to preserve the individual’s rights to life, property, and safety.
I had had enough! After the Gainesville Sun (Gainesville, FL) did not cover the Rev Wright story (at all), but then did a “follow-up” story that showed locals were behind Obama even after Wright, including a quoted university professor, I submitted a letter to the editor and then created and ordered the following bumpersticker:
“The U.S. Media: Biased & Determined to Elect our Next President. Ethics have left the profession.”
From the day Obama threw his hat into the ring, the press has campaigned for him, covered for him and made sure that any McCain coverage was negative. A biased press with an agenda is NO BETTER than a government-run press! Our media has hit a new low and I can’t see it getting any better. As a former jounalism major, a former far left liberal (and active N.O.W. member), I am thoroughly disgusted. The liberals “own” NBC, CBS, CNN, often ABC, always NPR and most newspapers across this country. They want it all and they will NOT stop until the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” is passed and conservatives are silenced (after an Obama win that they should call their own). So much for free markets and professional journalists:)
Too much discussion.
Can’t you see that the Democratic Party is not the one we used to know?
The major force behind the Democratic Party is the Communist Party of the USA and the Democratic Socialists of America, Progressive Alliance, women’s movement, all the NGOs, civil rights leaders, Rainbow/Push, trade unions, and so on.
From the website of DSA, you can see that they are Third Parties who selected Democratic Party as their host and their goal since 1990s is to dominate that Party.
Now we seeing the fruits of their Labor while the Republicans are sleeping. Republican supporters have been timid to defend the Bush Administration. Now, everybody have joined the bandwagon, even Pres. Bush is under threat of the being impeached, if these people get their hands on him, they would even love to put him in jail, if not hang. Kicinick is lap-dog of the Chicago DSA.
In summary, Communists have already successfully invaded America.
Because after the Cold War, the principle now is something like this: Communism is no longer a threat to the Democracy and they can already exist in America since freedom also includes freedom of ideology. Example is California licensing a Communist Party using the same argument.
Why high turnouts of new voters from young Americans, these are trained young activists. CSA and the rests all have Youth Sectors and they are efficiently working in many of the Universities.
Professor Tribe who was the main attorney on that infamous Third Party case with the Supreme Court, was main influential Professor to Obama. After his loss, the DSA and other parties had only one option: exist within Democratic Party. DSA’s Harrington shamelessly elaborated that in his Article published at http://www.dsausa.org.
There is only excessive discussion when there is no solution in sight. Sorry just had to comment on that.
Anyways, I did want to bring up again the question of “Loost Change” which was produced soon after the 9/11 attacks. I have my personal views on it but am curious what others think and why.
This video raised too many question that have not been answered and I find it imperative that they be atleast discussed and persude.
John, You are trying to rationalize something that is very wrong.
The idea that corporations spend their time being frightened of the government doesn’t make sense. They OWN the government. Why should they be frightened? Only the ones who don’t pony up have to be frightened. Perhaps one corporation wants to be rid of competition and uses the government to do it.
When you understand that corporations ARE the government and that is the end goal - on a world wide basis, then you will understand.
No, corporations are not aritificial entities - they are real, they are powerful. They are not being taxed to death, regulated to death, corporations are doing fine. They are, indeed, becoming less and less in number, morphing into each other, but larger and larger in power and scope.
No way can illegality be justified, and no one really looking at the picture can think that this government is harming corporations - just the opposite.
RodPatrick, You are right, this is not the Democratic Party of my childhood - but then this is not the Republican Party of my childhood either. Actually, it is one party. They are putting on a charade for our benefit, one time one will be bad guy and one time the other.
It seems to me when the people of this country began to place their faith in the government to provide all things for them, we begin to loose it.
That seems to coincide with the time people of this country began to place their faith in one party or the other. Everyone chose sides and lined up behind one party or the other and voted party rather than person, we begin to loose.
When we allowed a political party to tell us how to vote, how to think - we became sheep for the slaughter.
Coroprations once upon a time did own government,
but today learned individuals can and do stand up
to both of them, and can sometimes win.
I would think with China set to attack the US before the 2009 Olympics begins, Democrats would have sounded alarms if and only if they really want to win the White House and Congress. They would not be preaching to the choir!
Dan Rather, as keynote speaker in and of itself was just plain wrong as was Huffington for that matter.
Baroque has to come up with a sound economic strategy to stop Americans from starving to death
when China attacks our fragile econonmy to gain Taiwan, and to my estimation to also take a swipe
at Japan.
China’s prediction to build new cities, when I first heard it I often wondered aloud where the land was going to come from, but when an Army general in China prophecied that cities east of Xian would be destroyed: I never forsaw Chinese taking Nikola Tesla’s stolen inventions form America to give birth to earthquakes, tsunamis, twister, hurricanes, cyclones, and an occasional magnetic levitational device to make automobiles,
airplanes and trains which are today controlled by computers which can cause fatal accidents.
Yes, a right-wing TROJAN HORSE would be mighty welcomed…
A muzzie TROJAN HORSE, on the other hand, will be a disaster….
June 8 at 7:37 pm | #1 | Link
Why vote? The media is electing the next president.