meembo- if you want to reject the premice of a post, hit the back button. While you are saying this post isn't relevent, you are also saying condescending to complain that these threads are more or less valid to others is wrong of host. Let me simplifiy that. You are rejecting host's thread and questioning his post, and for what? Beacuse host is rejecting other psots and questioning their relevancy. Mayeb you should consider the fact that you may have more in common with his beliefs that you think.
KMA, you know what host's beliefs are. Anyone who frequents Politics is aware. His beliefs bear no weight in the issue brought fourth in this thread. He is pointing out that peoples interests tend to shift towards the entertaining more than the persoanlly relevant. It's a valid suggestion that deserves honest responses. Just fyi, host is a lot like me. The main differences I can see are 1. he is much better at finding sources, 2. he has been into politics longer, and therefore is more likely to see the 'big pictures' of politics, and 3. he is a little angrier (is that a word?). Aside from that almost all of our beliefs coincide. We both recognise very disturbing trends in politics and the midns of those effected by politics. We both recognise that certian finalities are upon us, but no one is willing to admit the elephant in the room. That is what this post is about. Host is trying desperatly to help people to figure this out for themselves. Don't condem him for that. You can disagree with him, of course. Let's show him the respect he deserves.
That being said... YES! There is a trend in people not only of America but in many places around the world to tend to avoid the most rpessing realities, because they are unplesant, and pay attention to the entertaining; that which cannot effect us personally. This trend was brought on by mediasim (*coined term), or the movement towards being drones that are influenced, if not controled, by the various forms of media. What does this mean? You watch CNN's report on the Michael Jackson trial religiously, but you don't know abut the Bush administration blacking out almost all the information in hundreds of documents before releasing them to a conservative organization looking into President Clinton's controversial pardons four years ago on his last day in office. The scarey part: the news report I just read about this came from FOX NEWS. It's not the media is trying to control us by not showing us what's really going on. The truth finds it's way to all he media outlets. What's bad is that people are more likely to want to know what the little boy said about molestation from someone who was famous 20 years ago, as opposed to something RELEVANT. I'll just post that article about the cover up below in case anyone wants to read it.
Quote:
Bush Administration Blacks Out Clinton Docs
Foxnews.com
Saturday, March 19, 2005
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration blacked out almost all the information in hundreds of documents before releasing them to a conservative organization looking into President Clinton's (search)controversial pardons four years ago on his last day in office.
The only items not deleted from the material are the names of the person who wrote the document and the person it was sent to.
The government accountability group Judicial Watch (search) said Friday that it received the Justice Department documents following a court battle that featured a Republican administration fighting to keep secret documents generated by its Democratic predecessor.
The Bush White House (search) has argued that releasing pardon-related documents would have a chilling effect on internal discussions leading up to presidential action on such requests.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton (search) called it an instance of the Bush administration covering up a Clinton administration scandal.
The group plans to return to court to challenge the deletions, which cover nearly everything that is written on a total of 915 pages...
A federal appeals court ruled a year ago in the case that the White House can't claim Justice Department records are covered by a special exemption from the law reserved for presidential communications.
Among the 140 people Clinton pardoned on Jan. 20, 2001 was fugitive financier Marc Rich. Rich's wife, a Democratic fund-raiser, contributed $450,000 to Clinton's presidential library foundation and more than $100,000 to Hillary Rodham Clinton's U.S. Senate campaign.
Rich's name does not appear on any of the 915 pages.
The department invoked exemptions under the Freedom of Information Act (search) that allow deletions for reasons such as documents being part of internal deliberations or containing personal information.
|