Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

host · 09-06-2004, 01:14 AM

Yeah....the press has a liberal bias....why....they're maligning our Resident!
"I'm the commander... see, I don't need to explain. I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation." --Woodward's BUSH AT WAR
Ohhh....but you do have to explain to WE, THE PEOPLE, Mr. Resident....
through our surrogates, the members of the press !
Jefferson said:

"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them."

Do the sheeple in this country really think that Jefferson would react to Bush's abysmal efforts to engage in an open dialogue with the press any differently than I am if,
in light of what he wrote above, he encountered this of the "sitting"
president ? Is this man facing the people "to set them right as to facts" ? I think not: 
<a href="http://www.theweekbehind.com/articles/liars.html">
(As of April 2, 2004.....)
The net-net of Bush's first three years in office is one of the most closed off -- but "on message" -- administrations in history. So far, Bush has held only 11 press conferences -- compared with 77 by his father in the first three years of his administation, according to Frank Rich in The New York Times. Even Richard Nixon, deemed one of the most secretive presidents of our time, held 23 over the same period.</a> 
Because it is not pratical for individual citizens to engage the President in
question and answer sessions, unlike in the British parliamentary system, where PM Tony Blair is regularly required to participate in sometimes heated
and unscripted Q&A sessions with members of parliament, in the U.S., the
task falls solely to the press. Demands by the press to regularly question the
President in an open and spontaneous setting on subjects ranging from policy,
the state of the country, and on matters relating to the President's previous
assertions, and on his integrity, are not a privelege, they are a right !
Previous Presidents.....including Bush '43's own father, recognized this and
responded in a proper way; by regularly meeting with the press and answering
questions put to them. No only does Bush not provide this access by allowing the press to question him regularly, publically, and spontaneously, he restricts
all situations when he will be direct contact with citizens to pre-screened,
loyal audiences, and to numerous "public "appearances on military bases.
He controls the White House Press Core with thr threat of diminishing access
to any reporter who reports negatively about him, or asks him a question in
one of his rare press conferences that he perceives as casting him in a bad
light. 40 year veteran and most senior White House correspondent, Helen Thomas is no longer recognized when she attempts to question Bush, as
punishment, and as an example to other reporters. If the press actually had
a liberal bias, the issue of Bush's lack of press conferences ( 1/7 of those held by his father in the same amount of time in office) this issue would be much
more broadly reported, if for not other reason than to try to sway the opinion
of the citizenry to put signifigant pressure on Bush to regularly and spontaneously engage the press, since they represent the quest of the people to hold the President accountable and to stay informed. Bush is
reduced to performing in a carefully scripted manner, as his aircraft carrier
landing and his campaign appearances demonstrate. There is no open government and no effort by bush to meet the challenge to defend his policies and brief the country in the manner of past Presidents and founding
fathers, such as Jefferson invisioned. And the "liberal" press raises only
feeble objection, and encourages Bush's unprecedented and un-American
reclusiveness!

09-06-2004, 01:14 AM	#36 (permalink)
host Banned	<b>Yeah....the press has a liberal bias....why....they're maligning our Resident!</b><p> <i>"I'm the commander... see, I don't need to explain. I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation." </i><b>--Woodward's BUSH AT WAR</b><p> <b>Ohhh....but you do have to explain to WE, THE PEOPLE, Mr. Resident.... through our surrogates, the members of the press !</b><p> Jefferson said: <i> "And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them." </i> <b>Do the sheeple in this country really think that Jefferson<br> would react to Bush's abysmal efforts to engage in an open dialogue with the press any differently than I am if, in light of what he wrote above, he encountered this of the "sitting" president ? Is this man facing the people "to set them right as to facts" ? I think not:</b><br> <a href="http://www.theweekbehind.com/articles/liars.html"> (As of April 2, 2004.....) The net-net of Bush's first three years in office is one of the most closed off -- but "on message" -- administrations in history. So far, Bush has held only 11 press conferences -- compared with 77 by his father in the first three years of his administation, according to Frank Rich in The New York Times. Even Richard Nixon, deemed one of the most secretive presidents of our time, held 23 over the same period.</a><p><br><b> Because it is not pratical for individual citizens to engage the President in question and answer sessions, unlike in the British parliamentary system, where<br> PM Tony Blair is regularly required to participate in sometimes heated and unscripted Q&A sessions with members of parliament, in the U.S., the task falls solely to the press. Demands by the press to regularly question the President in an open and spontaneous setting on subjects ranging from policy, the state of the country, and on matters relating to the President's previous assertions, and on his integrity, are not a privelege, they are a right ! Previous Presidents.....including Bush '43's own father, recognized this and responded in a proper way; by regularly meeting with the press and answering questions put to them. No only does Bush not provide this access by allowing <br>the press to question him regularly, publically, and spontaneously, he restricts all situations when he will be direct contact with citizens to pre-screened, loyal audiences, and to numerous "public "appearances on military bases.<p> He controls the White House Press Core with thr threat of diminishing access to any reporter who reports negatively about him, or asks him a question in one of his rare press conferences that he perceives as casting him in a bad light. 40 year veteran and most senior White House correspondent, Helen Thomas<br> is no longer recognized when she attempts to question Bush, as punishment, and as an example to other reporters. If the press actually had a liberal bias, the issue of Bush's lack of press conferences ( 1/7 of those held by <br>his father in the same amount of time in office) this issue would be much more broadly reported, if for not other reason than to try to sway the opinion of the citizenry to put signifigant pressure on Bush to regularly and spontaneously <br>engage the press, since they represent the quest of the people to hold the President<br> accountable and to stay informed. Bush is reduced to performing in a carefully scripted manner, as his aircraft carrier landing and his campaign appearances demonstrate. There is no open government <br>and no effort by bush to meet the challenge to defend his policies and brief the country <br>in the manner of past Presidents and founding fathers, such as Jefferson invisioned. And the "liberal" press raises only feeble objection, and encourages Bush's unprecedented and un-American reclusiveness!</b>