Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
Host, what do you want from us?
|
Thanks for asking, jorgelito. From the larger "us", the potential American electorate, I want focus and reaction commensurate with the gravity of the situation.
I would like us to focus on how we know what we know, and then....on deciding what is most important to focus on,
(I think it would be about our prospects (progress) of passing as little debt and as much constitutional protection from authority as possible, and as great of degrees of political, social, and wealth equality.....on to future generations, as was passed to us by our grandparents....) and then to discuss it.
Matters of whether to wage war....or not, whether government should tax, cut spending, or borrow, who to tax and how much, the dynamics of wealth inequity and its causes, open forthright govenrment, vs secretive and uinaccountable, intrusive government, should all be greater concerns to voters, than American Idol, Britney Spears, or the NBA finals, NFL Superbowl, or other pop cultural distractions.
Because we don't focus on these issues, we don't demand nothing less than open, accountable government and an aggressive, inquisitive press corps, always skeptical and challenging of authority, and the politcians and the corporate owners of the press (and of the politicians) know it, and exploit us, using that knowledge.
The lack of focus by the public opens the door for invasion of Iraq, growing wealth inequity, mushrooming national debt, closed ,secretive government, borrowing (and spending as general revenue)of surplus social security payroll deductions, and what Scott McClelland claims in his book:
Quote:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwa...lan/index.html
.....In a minimally rational world, this extraordinary passage, from the new book by Scott McClellan, would forever slay the single most ludicrous myth in our political culture: The "Liberal Media":
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Scott mcClellan
If anything, the national press corps was probably "too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq.
The collapse of the administration's rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. . . . In this case, the "liberal media" didn't live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served.
|
Just consider how remarkable that is. George Bush's own Press Secretary criticizes the American media for being "too deferential" to the Government. He lays the blame for Bush's ability to propagandize the nation on the media's uncritical dissemination of the Republican administration's falsehoods. And most notably of all, McClellan actually uses cynical scare quotes when invoking the phrase which, in conventional political discourse, is deemed the most unassailable truth of all: The Liberal Media.
How much longer can this preposterous myth be sustained when even the White House Spokesman not only mocks the phrase but derides the media for being "too deferential" to the right-wing Government "in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during [his] years in Washington"? If one were to set about with the goal of debunking the "Liberal Media" myth -- as Eric Alterman specifically did four years ago and other media critics have more generally done before that -- one couldn't dream up evidence more conclusive than McClellan's admissions. .....
|
This being a "politics" forum, I wish for greatest interest and reaction to issues and events with the most serious implications. "Square one", is as described above. Our greatest concern should be the implications of what the man who was the president's press secretary....a man with recent six years experience responding to challenges of the white house press corps, wrote about them....and it's not....not here, or anywhere !
I want us here to be concerned about what we know, and how we know it, and we're not.
If the corporate media "bringing us the news", is compliant to, or a tool of power and wealth, where does that leave us?
I think McClellan's opinion of the press, leaves us to work harder to find out what we really know, and how we know it, than we did when we thought that the press was "too liberal", but we're not.
More of us here believe that it is not the press's job to find out the secrets of the powerful, confront them about the secrets, and then report their findings to the public.
I would like us here to all be skeptical of both McCain and Obama..... not as partisans, but as informed, curious participants, with high ethical standards and low tolerance for questionable conduct, compromised judgment, dubious scources of money and of political influence. Who do these two guys who want to be our president, "owe"? Who "greased" the rails they rode to rise be the contenders for the office of president, they are now?
We could be discussing how much it matters where they decided to go for the money and influence required to get them to where they are now.... the winner will be appointing approx. 3000 people to staff and operate the executive branch....
do these men have good character, and are they most likley good judges of who has good character.....or not?But I did this thread because I don't think we even attempt to prioritize the issues we devote the most attention on here, we just kind of fall into exchanging posts, and it sinks to a level, IMO, more fitting for a general discussion in a country not clearly at a critical, political/economic/foreign policy crossroads.
I don't think we've reacted to the "bombshell" from Scott McClellan and from the NY Times reporting about the major broadcast networks unqualified presentation of pentagon propaganda puppets....nearly 5000 appearances "on air". Everyday that the broadcast networks continue not to report this "lapse", since the April 20, NY Times article about this "psy-op" confirms how serious of a betrayal to the public trust, these "sock puppet", "retired generals on TEEVEE", really was.