Centre Media Values

neoConMen

2006-12-02T11:33:00.000-05:00

It is bizarre to see the Bush economic acolytes, the GOP pundits on cable news, and the Wall Street Journal celebrating the current stock market having posted “new highs.” As though--in a country so ravaged by inequality of wealth as ours now is--the stock market could ever serve serve as a fair representation of well-being for most average families. That said, --accepting the stock market for what it is and what it is not--let's examine whether what we see today is truly an economic miracle, a touchstone for validation of the current regime’s economic policies.

On Nov 29 the S&P 500 Index had advanced about 51.5 points from its close on January 20, 2001--the day before Bush’s First Inaugural.

That’s a cumulative gain of 3.8%--in 6 years! And yes, atop that 3.8% "gain” we should pile another 1.5% (net after tax) per year in dividends.

We are now about 2 months shy of Bush’s 6th complete year “in office.” So that cumulative dividend stash has grown to a whopping 9%.

Presto! Cue the Herald Trumpets! We now celebrate a combined investment gain of 13% in 5 years and 10 months: a total return of 2.2% per year!

By all means, let's ignore such ephemeral factors as inflation, job loss, stagnant wages and inequality in wealth. Is ANYONE spending LESS than 13% MORE than 6 years ago for that famous basket of life's incidentals—including food, heat, electric and gas, insurance, dental and health care, mortgage or rent, and school taxes and tuition?

For some perspective:

During the 8-year tenure of the previous occupant of the White House, we experienced a 200% gain in the S&P 500 Index--and yes, for dividends you can also add another 11% net.

OK, since we’re short-changed by missing-out on the last 26 months of Bush’s Economic Miracle, let’s take away that last 60% of the total gains under Clinton.
So we’re left with a much tighter race: +13% under Bush and +151% under Clinton.

Close, but no cigar.

Centre Media Values

2006-12-02T01:17:00.000-05:00

Glen Greenwald has an excellent post today (Dec 1, 2006) on the insideous role that Tom Friedman played from his conspicuous perch on the Opinion page of the New York Times in selling Bush's Iraq War. This is a small excerpt. Read the entire critique on Greenwald's blog.

Friday, December 01, 2006
The Tom Friedman disease consumes Establishment Washington

(updated below)

Someone e-mailed me several days ago to say that while it is fruitful and necessary to chronicle the dishonest historical record of pundits and political figures when it comes to Iraq, I deserve to be chastised for failing to devote enough attention to the person who, by far, was most responsible for selling the war to centrists and liberal "hawks" and thereby creating "consensus" support for Bush's war -- Tom Friedman, from his New York Times perch as "the nation's preeminent centrist foreign policy genius."

That criticism immediately struck me as valid, and so I spent the day yesterday and today reading every Tom Friedman column beginning in mid-2002 through the present regarding Iraq. That body of work is extraordinary. Friedman is truly one of the most frivolous, dishonest, and morally bankrupt public intellectuals burdening this country. Yet he is, of course, still today, one of the most universally revered figures around, despite -- amazingly enough, I think it's more accurate to say "because of" -- his advocacy of the invasion of Iraq, likely the greatest strategic foreign policy disaster in America's history.
--------------

Centre Media Values

2006-11-18T01:04:00.000-05:00

NOW they tell us! Oh for a courageous--or even an honest, critical press? What-pray tell-has Dick Meyer of CBS News.com been doing with his time for the last 12 years? This is precisely why we need a a robust, independent and non-corporate -controlled media.

"Good Riddance To The Gingrichites
WASHINGTON, Nov. 16, 2006(CBS) This commentary was written by CBSNews.com's Dick Meyer.

This is a story I should have written 12 years ago when the "Contract with America" Republicans captured the House in 1994. I apologize.

Really, it's just a simple thesis: The men who ran the Republican Party in the House of Representatives for the past 12 years were a group of weirdos. Together, they comprised one of the oddest legislative power cliques in our history. And for 12 years, the media didn't call a duck a duck, because that's not something we're supposed to do.

I'm not talking about the policies of the Contract for America crowd, but the character. I'm confident that 99 percent of the population — if they could see these politicians up close, if they watched their speeches and looked at their biographies — would agree, no matter what their politics or predilections.

I'm confident that if historians ever spend the time on it, they'll confirm my thesis. Same with forensic psychiatrists. I have discussed this with scores of politicians, staffers, consultants and reporters since 1994 and have found few dissenters.

Politicians in this country get a bad rap. For the most part, they are like any high-achieving group in America, with roughly the same distribution of pathologies and virtues. But the leaders of the GOP House didn't fit the personality profile of American politicians, and they didn't deviate in a good way. It was the Chess Club on steroids.

The iconic figures of this era were Newt Gingrich, Richard Armey and Tom Delay. They were zealous advocates of free markets, low taxes and the pursuit of wealth; they were hawks and often bellicose; they were brutal critics of big government.

Yet none of these guys had success in capitalism. None made any real money before coming to Congress. None of them spent a day in uniform. And they all spent the bulk of their adult careers getting paychecks from the big government they claimed to despise. Two resigned in disgrace.

Having these guys in charge of a radical conservative agenda was like, well, putting Mark Foley in charge of the Missing and Exploited Children Caucus. Indeed, Foley was elected in the Class of '94 and is not an inappropriate symbol of their regime.

More than the others, Newton Leroy Gingrich lived out a very special hypocrisy. In addition to the above biographical dissonance, Gingrich was one of the most sharp-tongued, articulate and persuasive attack dogs in modern politics. His favorite target was the supposed immorality and corruption of the Democratic Party. With soaring rhetoric, he condemned his opponents as anti-American and dangerous to our country's family values — "grotesque" was a favorite word.

Yet this was a man who was divorced twice — the first time when his wife was hospitalized for cancer treatment, the second time after an affair was revealed.

Gingrich made his bones in the party by relentlessly attacking Democratic corruption, yet he was hounded from office because of a series of serious ethics questions. He posed as a reformer of the House, yet championed a series of deforms that made the legislative process more closed, more conducive to hiding special interest favors and less a forum for genuine debate.

And he did it all with epic sanctimony.

These squirrelly guys attracted and promoted to power similarly odd colleagues: birds of a feather, you know, stick together. Bill Clinton of Monica Lewinsky fame had no more zealous and moralistic critic than Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana, who ran a then-powerful committee. In the course of his crusade, Burton was forced to admit he had actually fathered a child in an extramarital affair.

The man who led the House Judiciary Committee impeachment hearings with equal, if saner, bloodlust was Rep. Henry Hyde. In the midst of this, Hyde was forced to admit to a five-year affair.

When Gingrich stepped down, Republicans turned to a master Louisiana pork-barreller, Robert Livingston. That lasted a day or so, until Livingston (you guessed it) admitted to having extramarital affairs.

Livingston was succeeded by Dennis Hastert, perhaps the most, well, conventional of the GOP leaders of his era. Still, Hastert was a hawk with no military service and a defender of the rich with no money or experience in business.

In this year's election cycle, House Republicans were justly vilified for their subservience to the corruptions of Jack Abramoff and Tom DeLay's entire K Street project. While extreme, there have been many other periods of extreme corruption in Congress.

What marked this Republican cadre was not their corruption, but the chips on their shoulders.

It was a localized condition. It didn't spread to the Senate. The Republican leaders there — again, suspend your ideology and just look at biography — were pretty typical American politicians.

Bob Dole, Trent Lott and Bill Frist were not acting out in office. They were not ideologues and did not use the rhetoric of the righteous. The colleagues that wielded the most power — like McCain, Simpson, Lugar, Specter, Stevens, Warner — have had long runs of service in several arenas relatively free of public and private embarrassment and hypocrisy — and even some substantial accomplishments pre-Senate.

History reveals that great leaders and intellectuals often appear in clusters, inspiring and motivating each other to extraordinary achievement. American historians have focused on this in recent books looking at the "founding brothers," Lincoln's "team of rivals," the 19th-century pragmatist philosophers called "the metaphysical club," Roosevelt's New Dealers and Kennedy's "best and the brightest."

The opposite is also true.

What's next for the House is of course uncertain, but an undistinguished chapter has come to a close. Good riddance."

Dick Meyer is the editorial director of CBSNews.com, based in Washington.

Centre Media Values

2006-10-14T09:46:00.000-04:00

Just three weeks before the election and the Republican "ground game" heats up (This courtesy of Billmon on .

October 13, 2006
Paranoia Watch

Some Republican strategists are increasingly upset with what they consider the overconfidence of President Bush and his senior advisers about the midterm elections November 7 -- a concern aggravated by the president's news conference this week.

"They aren't even planning for if they lose," says a GOP insider who informally counsels the West Wing.

U.S. News and World Report
Bush Is Said to Have No Plan if GOP Loses
October 13, 2006

The aircraft carrier Eisenhower, accompanied by the guided-missile cruiser USS Anzio, guided-missile destroyer USS Ramage, guided-missile destroyer USS Mason and the fast-attack submarine USS Newport News, is, as I write, making its way to the Straits of Hormuz off Iran. The ships will be in place to strike Iran by the end of the month. It may be a bluff. It may be a feint. It may be a simple show of American power. But I doubt it.

Chris Hedges
Does Bush Think War With Iran is Preordained?
October 10, 2006
Posted by billmon at 09:29 PM

Centre Media Values

2006-10-04T14:13:00.000-04:00

Friends--Keith Obberman of MSNBC is one of the few nationally prominent media commentators who has consistently brought a critical perspective to reporting on the Iraq war as well as corruption, malfeasance and incompetence in the Bush Administration and the Republican-controlled Congress.

Below is a disturbing warning from Jeff Cohen, founder of the media watch group, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting.
-----------------------------------------

Is Olbermann On Thin Ice?
Jeff Cohen
October 04, 2006

Jeff Cohen is the founder of the media watch group Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting , and author of Cable News Confidential: My Misadventures in Corporate Media.

I fear for Keith Olbermann.

Like so many others who hunger for some journalistic independence on TV news, I often marvel at Olbermann’s dogged reporting and unique commentary. In a cable news environment of conformity and conservatism, the MSNBC host takes on the Bush administration for “demonizing dissent,” for abusing our constitutional traditions, for “taking cynical advantage of the unanimity and love [following 9/11], and transmuting it into fraudulent war and needless death.”

Only Olbermann talks about Team Bush “monstrously transforming [9/11 unity] into fear and suspicion, and turning that fear into the campaign slogan of three elections.” He was virtually alone on TV news in seriously reporting on 2004 election irregularities in Ohio, and in exploring the pre-Iraq war Downing Street Memos indicating White House deception. In recent months, his prime targets seem to have evolved from softer ones like Bill O’Reilly to bigger game: Bush and his minions.

It’s worth noting that strong criticism of an extremist presidency hardly makes Olbermann a leftist.I remember Olbermann as the whimsical sports guy on ESPN. I remember his first go-round on MSNBC in 1998 when he could have sued his bosses for repetitive stress disorder for having to host scores of Lewinsky episodes on the road to Clinton’s impeachment—an impeachment that may well have been impossible if not for the complicity of TV news.

It’s obvious his bosses at MSNBC/NBC/GE never envisioned the increasingly bold Olbermann of recent months. It’s likely that Olbermann himself could not have foreseen his current role as the lone voice of those who feel assaulted by a cable news business dominated by the O’Reillys and Hannitys.

So why do I fear for Olbermann? Because I know his bosses. In the runup to the Iraq war, I too worked for MSNBC—as an on-air pundit and a senior producer on the primetime “Donahue” show.

As I detail in my new book Cable News Confidential: My Misadventures in Corporate Media, the suits at MSNBC/NBC muzzled us and ultimately terminated us. They feared independent journalism and serious dissent. They smeared Bush critics, with MSNBC’s editor-in-chief at the time, the late Jerry Nachman, actually going on air—without evidence—to accuse Iraq WMD skeptic Scott Ritter of being a paid agent of Saddam Hussein.

Olbermann has been gaining in audience ratings. That provides him some security, but perhaps not enough.

When “Donahue” was terminated three weeks before the Iraq invasion, it was MSNBC’s most watched program. Canceling your top-rated show doesn’t happen often, but it happened to “Donahue.” Who knows what will happen to Olbermann?

With “Donahue,” management cared less about building up audience than tamping down dissent. While independent outlets and blogs were soaring in audience by questioning the rush to war, our bosses imposed straightjackets on us that prevented similar growth.

In the last months of “Donahue,” management gave us strict orders: if we booked a guest who was antiwar, we needed two who were pro-war. If we booked two guests on the left, we needed three on the right. When a producer proposed booking Michael Moore, she was told she’d need three right wingers for ideological balance.

Olbermann’s increasingly bold dissent has been occurring at a time when Bush’s approval ratings are low and Bush’s war is in shambles. That gives him some added security.

During “Donahue’s” tenure at MSNBC on the eve of war, Bush’s popularity was high. And media conglomerates were particularly concerned about not ruffling the White House at that moment—as they were lobbying hard to get FCC rules changed to allow them to grow still fatter.

The day after “Donahue” was terminated, an internal NBC memo leaked out; it said that Phil Donahue represents “a difficult public face for NBC in a time of war.” Why? Because he insisted on presenting administration critics. The memo worried that “Donahue” would become a “home for the liberal antiwar agenda at the same time that our competitors are waving the flag at every opportunity.”

NBC’s solution then? Dump Phil, stifle dissent and brandish the flag.

NBC’s solution now? So far, Olbermann appears to be on more solid footing—mostly because the political zeitgeist is much changed from four years ago.

But MSNBC is still owned by GE’s conservative bosses, and managed by NBC’s ever-timid executives. Olbermann knows this reality as well as anyone; six months ago on C-SPAN, while expressing confidence that good ratings would keep them at bay, he remarked: “There are people I know in the hierarchy of NBC, the company, and GE, the company, who do not like to see the current presidential administration criticized at all.”

I’m pulling for Olbermann; I’m one of the multitudes who find his commentaries online (perhaps more on the web than on TV)—and forward them far and wide.

But with each new broadside against the Bush administration, I fear for his future. His best security is us, an active citizenry. It’s media activism, organized heavily on the Net. It’s media watch groups like FAIR and Media Matters for America. It’s the movement that resisted the FCC changes in 2003, challenged Sinclair Broadcast propaganda before the 2004 election, and recently exposed the 9/11 “hijacking” of ABC by rightwing Clinton-bashers.

In the epilogue of Cable News Confidential, I lauded this movement: “My only regret was that such a potent movement had not coalesced by 2002—to flex its muscles against MSNBC brass in defense of an unfettered ‘Donahue.’”

If Olbermann gets muzzled or terminated for political reasons, it will be up to us to fight —not only for him, but for the concept that without serious dissent, democracy is a sham."

Centre Media Values

2006-09-28T08:58:00.000-04:00

From blog post by Jim Henley (on 'Unqualified Offerings'):

September 22, 2006
We Killed ‘Em at the Palace, Babe, And We Murdered ‘Em in Rome

The Senate has made it official: torture is official government policy so long as it meets the strict test of being called something else, said test to be proctored, taken and graded by the President in consultation with . . . the President.

Two days ago Megan McArdle wrote

I do not think it is even remotely likely, as my reader demanded, that Bush is trying to move this country towards dictatorship. As I wrote him, a dictatorship is a real thing, not a super-synonym for “governments that do things I don’t like”. I am so confident that Bush is not trying to move the country towards dictatorship that I offered to bet him $5,000 that the elections go off as scheduled.

I wouldn’t take that bet. I’d say, instead, the following syllogism:

1. The theory is that an election is the people saying what they want.

2. The one thing we know torture is really good for is getting someone to say what they think the torturer wants to hear.

3. Who needs a dictatorship?

We should be able to combine official torture, free elections and multiple political parties into functional one-party rule.

Posted by Jim Henley @ 11:42 pm, Filed under: Main

music is life festival

2006-08-26T15:28:00.000-04:00

music is life festival

Hey, if anyone is in the area and wants to see some great music, the 2006 milfestival is the way to go! http://musicislifefestival.blogspot.com/ . It benefits some local cancer survivors, and is bound to be a great time! I hope to see you there!

Centre Media Values

2006-08-09T13:12:00.000-04:00

As Bob Barosage writes on www.TomPaine.com, Ned Lamont's victory in Connecticut may herald the triumph of "The New Moral Center." Yet we are reminded that right-wing forces for torture and indecency are still pushing their cause at home and abroad. As often, Billmon (www.Billmon.org) says it best:

' August 09, 2006
The Boys From Brazil

I guess this is Shrub's idea of "faithfully executing" the laws -- he wants to take the War Crimes Act out and shoot it with Dick Cheney's shotgun.

The Bush administration has drafted amendments to a war crimes law that would eliminate the risk of prosecution for political appointees, CIA officers and former military personnel for humiliating or degrading war prisoners, according to U.S. officials and a copy of the amendments . . .

"People have gotten worried, thinking that it's quite likely they might be under a microscope," said a U.S. official. Foreigners are using accusations of unlawful U.S. behavior as a way to rein in American power, the official said, and the amendments are partly meant to fend this off.

This is like letting John Gotti rewrite the RICO statute.

I guess somebody finally was able to make Shrub understand what was in that Hamdan ruling:

Once Common Article 3 applies to the conflict with al Qaeda, the legal framework within which we analyze the various interrogation and torture allegations changes dramatically, as does the . . . potential liability of various U.S. officials under the War Crimes Act.

So now we have the shameful spectacle of an American president asking his rubber stamp Congress to redefine the meaning of "war crimes," lest at some future date and in some future place he and his flunkies be forced to account for theirs. Just call it the Milosevic Amendment.

Is there a pit of slime so filthy these moral cretins won't drag us through it? A cup of national humiliation so bitter they won't make us drain it to the dregs?

Apparently not.

But I really wouldn't worry about it that much if I were one of the boys. With a bit of luck they should be able to push their CYA legislation through while the heelclickers are still in the majority.

Besides, even if they fail, and the legal situation does goes south on them, there's always Brazil. Who knows? Dick and Rummy might even make a few friends down there.'

Centre Media Values

2006-08-02T09:02:00.000-04:00

Today's (Aug 2, 2006) Centre Daily Times has an excellent, balanced Op Ed by Cynthia Arnold discussing the plight of the Palestinians, including trenchant comments on the US role in contributing to tragedy we see now see unfolding in Lebanon.

..."Each year, more than $3 billion U.S. tax dollars enable illegal and inhumane policies that are squeezing the life out of an entire people who are innocent of having inflicted the Holocaust terror that has resulted in decades of fear-based militaristic policies. This must end."

Billmon(on Billmon.org)is also worth reading.

'August 02, 2006

The Stranger

Blair said the war in the Middle East was in part a fight between "reactionary Islam and moderate mainstream Islam" and that Western intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan had turned into "existential battles for reactionary Islam."

"We posed a threat not to their activities simply: but to their values, to the roots of their existence."

Great. Lebanon is in flames, the Iraqis are playing Name That Death Squad, the neocons want to renact Hiroshima in Iran, the Turks are talking about settling scores with the Kurds, the Taliban are cultivating their Pashtun gardens, and Bush's butler is giving us existentialist psychobabble.

I think he may be even more deranged than his master. The other day Blair said something to the effect that he was absolutely confident -- way down in that "irreducible core" of his -- that his Middle East policies are correct. It was the sort of thing Shrub might say if he knew what the word "irreducible" means.

I remember thinking: Anyone who has even a smidgeon of knowledge about, or experience in, the Middle East, and who says he is absolutely, 100% certain he has the right answers, is either a liar, a fanatic, or Tom Friedman -- which is to say, a world-class educated fool.

Blair, unfortunately, is all three.

Well, given Tony's absolute belief in his own moral and intellectual superiority, and the slaughter of the innocents currently underway in both Iraq and Lebanon, I think there's another existentialist classic Tony needs to read.

It's also about killing Arabs.
Posted by billmon at 01:49 AM'

Exarchos and Dersham sell out our democracy....

2006-06-21T13:00:00.000-04:00

Are they getting kickbacks? Are they intentionally trying to get the "fix" in for the next election? Why else would they vote for a more expensive, less secure, and basically non-auditable system?

Who has anything to gain by not having a voter verifiable paper trail? Only those that want to steal the election. I hope my fellow citizens wake up and keep a very close eye on these two....

Will the mainstream media ever report on the voting fraud of the last presidential election?

If Rolling Stone is the last bastion of journalistic integrity left, I think we are already sunk.

People did notice the fraud back in 2004, but no-one seems to care...

Centre Media Values

2006-06-03T21:13:00.000-04:00

Oh, those good old days...one nation, with liberty and justice for all. All for one and one for all. Super-size this! After an increase of 200% in the the Estate Tax Exemption amount in the last several years, a little more "relief"--for those who need it least. From an OP Ed in the The Washington Post.

Estate Tax Lunacy

By Harold Meyerson
Wednesday, May 31, 2006; A19

Spring has given way to summer's full-furnace heat in Washington, apparently taking with it any scintilla of sense that Congress may yet possess.

In the House, Republicans who could not even raise an eyebrow at reports that the National Security Agency has been conducting warrantless wiretaps of Americans became instant civil libertarians when the FBI conducted a search of a congressman's office.

The Senate, meanwhile, is scheduled next week to take up legislation by Arizona Republican Jon Kyl that would permanently repeal the estate tax on the wealthiest Americans. If enacted, Kyl's bill would plunge the government another trillion dollars into the red during the first decade (2011-2021) that it would be in effect.

Behind the scenes, the action has been on the Democratic side in the Senate, as the party's leadership has sought to dissuade Montana's Max Baucus, ranking Democrat on the Finance Committee, from forging a halfway-house compromise with Kyl that would deplete revenue by only $500 billion to $600 billion during that decade. The Republicans would need Baucus to bring roughly a half-dozen Democrats along with him to reach the magic number of 60 votes required to overcome any filibuster that the vast majority of Democrats would mount to block any such measure.

Even a paltry $500 billion, of course, is a lot of money to drain from public coffers just when boomers are going onto Social Security and Medicare and the number of employers providing health insurance, if present trends continue, might have dropped to a virtuous handful. To cover those and other needs, Congress will either plunge us deeper into debt or increase some other levies -- payroll taxes, say -- that will come out of the pockets of the 99 percent of Americans whom the estate tax doesn't touch.

A decades-long campaign by right-wing activists (brilliantly documented by Yale professors Michael Graetz and Ian Shapiro in their book "Death by a Thousand Cuts") has convinced many Americans that the estate tax poses a threat to countless hardworking families. That was always nonsense, and under the estate tax revisions that almost all Democrats support -- raising the threshold for eligibility to $3.5 million for an individual and $7 million for a couple -- it becomes more nonsensical still. Under the $3.5 million exemption, the number of family-owned small businesses required to pay any taxes in the year 2000 would have been just 94, according to a study by the Congressional Budget Office. The number of family farms that would have had to sell any assets to pay that tax would have been 13.

On the other hand, an estate tax repeal would save the estate of Vice President Cheney between $13 million and $61 million, according to the publicly available data on his net worth. It would save the estate of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld between $32 million and $101 million. The estate of retired Exxon Mobil chairman Lee Raymond would pocket a cozy $164 million. As for the late Sam Walton's kids, whose company already makes taxpayers foot the bill for the medical expenses of thousands of its employees, the cost to the government for not taxing their estates would run into the multiple billions.

The Baucus split-the-difference measure wouldn't repeal the estate tax, but it would still cut the tax rates on the estates of the super-rich by 15 percent. The Montana senator spent much of last week trying to line up a handful of his Senate Democratic colleagues to support his proposal, in the hope of being able to announce an unshakable 60 votes favoring this folly when the debate begins next week.

Why any Democrat would back such a measure, however, is a deep mystery. From the policy standpoint, it would make it vastly more difficult both to shore up programs that Democrats believe need shoring up -- better educating the nation's children, for one -- and to get the nation's fiscal house in order. Politically, backing the measure is even wackier. The Democrats are running this year as the party of comparative fiscal sanity and greater economic equity and security. Baucus's compromise would undermine all those premises. Republicans might very well attack Democratic senators up for reelection this year for failing to repeal this hideous death tax, as they call it, but any Democratic senator who can't rebut that charge in what is shaping up as a very Democratic year should probably be in another line of work.

Last Friday Baucus's staffers assured the Democratic Senate leadership's staff that their boss would back off his compromise campaign. Still, given Baucus's penchant for mischief (it was largely he who rounded up enough Democratic votes to enact Medicare Part D and its Big Pharma giveaway), those assurances have met with some skepticism on Capitol Hill. The Democrats' capacity to undermine themselves has not vanished with the final days of spring.

meyersonh@washpost.com
© 2006 The Washington Post Company

Yet another Bush administration falsification.......

2006-05-30T22:06:00.000-04:00

EFF versus At&T

2006-05-25T09:25:00.000-04:00

I find it very telling how many House members are up in arms about the office of a corrupt official being searched. It is funny how suddenly they care about "civil liberties" when they risk getting exposed for their corruption, yet they could give less of a damn when the average citizens rights are being stepped on. At least the EFF is still looking out for us.

Centre Media Values

2006-05-23T22:49:00.000-04:00

Ex-'Inky' Editor: New Ownership Of Philly Papers Could Be 'Dangerous'

By Joe Strupp

Published: May 23, 2006 6:10 PM ET

NEW YORK Former Philadelphia Inquirer Editor Robert Rosenthal, who spent 22 years at the paper, said the sale to a local investors group could prove problematic.

"It is a unique situation and I don't think it is necessarily a great one for journalism," said Rosenthal, who is currently managing editor at the San Francisco Chronicle. "Many of them are some of the most influential business people in Philadelphia and people who actively support politicians locally and nationally."

The veteran editor called the situation "very interesting and dangerous ... at times." He said it would be interesting "to see where the paths and relationships cross when it comes to the owners' relationships in the city and where the journalism leads." He added, "I don't think there is a situation like this in the country where the ownership group is so much a part of the political and economic power structure of a city."

In addition, Rosenthal called the leader of the investment group, Brian Tierney, a "fierce advocate who is used to getting his own way....I can't imagine a guy like Brian Tierney taking a back seat and letting things get in the paper that he is unhappy with," Rosenthal told E&P just hours after the deal was announced. "He was a very fierce advocate for his clients, there was nothing subtle about him -- elbows and knees."

Tierney served as national head of Catholics for Bush in 2000 and has been active in other Republican campaigns. He served as chairman of Sam Katz's unsuccessful run for mayor of the city in 2003.

Rosenthal tangled with Tierney years ago when the Inquirer was sued by a former reporter, Ralph Cipriano, over a story Cipriano wrote about the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. The suit ended in a settlement in which the Inquirer paid Cipriano $7 million. Tierney, who runs a major public relations firm, had handled P.R. for the church and dealt with Rosenthal on that and other stories.

Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua, in an interview with E&P then, praised Tierney for keeping certain stories out of the Inquirer. Tierney told E&P at that time that religious organizations and non-profits should be covered differently than other institutions.

Cipriano had sued the paper after Rosenthal made comments to The Washington Post that were critical of Cipriano's work on the Archdiocese story. The reporter, who was fired, had complained about the paper refusing to publish some elements of his reporting, which included accusations that money had been wrongly spent by the church.

"I have no idea how he views journalism," Rosenthal said of Tierney. "Or whether he will be hands-on in terms of his interests or friends."

Tierney led the formation of the Philadelphia Media Holdings, which announced today its purchase of the Inquirer and Philadelphia Daily News from McClatchy for $562 million. The investment group also includes a number of major Philadelphia business and political leaders, including Bruce E. Toll, who owns several of auto dealerships; Hamilton Lane Advisors founder Leslie E. Brun; and Aramark Corp. chairman Joseph Neubauer, according to the Inquirer.

Rosenthal said the owners have their hands in such volatile issues as labor, politics, development and other business circles, which may cause problems with balanced coverage. "A lot of those people involved in owning the paper do have and will have involvement in those issues," he said. "The danger is whose toes are going to get stepped on. Perception is something very powerful, whether it is real or not. People who own the paper now are deeply embedded in many of the issues that confront Philadelphia and have a personal stake."

According to one of his online bios, "Early in his career, Brian worked in Washington, D.C. for the Republican National Committee and was a Presidential appointee to the U.S. Small Business Administration." His P.R. firm designed the Web site for the Republican National Convention that nominated George W. Bush in Philadelphia in August 2000.
Joe Strupp (jstrupp@editorandpublisher.com) is a senior editor at Editors&Publishers.

More Diebold flaws exposed

2006-05-12T13:21:00.000-04:00

UPI Story

TMCnet Story

Security Focus Article

"Michael I. Shamos, an examiner of electronic voting systems for Pennsylvania, where primary voting is scheduled Tuesday, calls it "the most severe security flaw ever discovered in a voting system."

Centre Media Values

2006-04-12T08:55:00.000-04:00

On Tuesday, we spent several hours on Penn State's HUB lawn (at the Eyes Wide Open exhibit) examining the 115 pairs of combat boots and 50 pairs of civilians shoes commemorating Pennsylvania's military dead as well as the tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians who have so far been killed in the the War in Iraq. So we were especially struck by this post by Billmon (www. billmon.org) about seemingly widespread indifference and equanimity about the prospect of nuclear war against Iran:

Mutually Assured Dementia

Maybe it's just me, but I've been at least a little bit surprised by the relatively muted reaction to the news that the Cheney Administration and its Pentagon underlings are racing to put the finishing touches on plans for attacking Iran – plans which may include the first wartime use of nuclear weapons since Nagasaki.

I mean, what exactly does it take to get a rise out of the media industrial complex these days? A nuclear first strike against a major Middle Eastern oil producer doesn't ring the bell? Must every story have a missing white woman in it before the cable news guys will start taking it seriously?

I suppose I could understand it if all we had was Sy Hersh's word that the administration is planning another "pre-emptive" war in the Middle East. After all, we're talking about the same reporter who peddled all those crazy, unsubstantiated allegations about torture at Abu Ghraib prison. You can't be too careful with a journalistic loose cannon like that.

But now that Sy's Iranian nightmare – including the nuclear aspect of it – has been confirmed by the semi-official media, you'd think we could expect a little more ruckus about it from someone other than Helen Thomas. (No disrepect intended to Thomas, but she's probably the media personality the White House would most like to see taking point on this story.)

Even by the corrupt and debased standards of our times, this is a remarkable thing. The U.S. government is planning aggressive nuclear war (the neocons can give it whatever doublespeak name they like, but it is what it is); those plans have been described in some detail in a major magazine and on the front page of the Washington Post; the most the President of the United States is willing to say about it is that the reports are "speculative" (which is not a synonym for "untrue") and yet as I write these words the lead story on the CNN web site is:

ABC pushes online TV envelope

ABC is going to offer online streams of some of its most popular television shows, including "Desperate Housewives" and "Lost," for free the day after they first air on broadcast TV.

It appears our long national journey towards complete idiocy is over. We've arrived.

Idiots, of course, don't need a reason to be idiots. But to the extent there is a rational excuse for treating a nuclear strike on Iran as the journalistic equivalent of a seasonal story about people washing their cars, it must be the cynical conviction that the Cheneyites aren’t serious – they're just doing their little Gen. Jack Ripper impression to let the Iranians know they really mean business.

[There's much more in the orginal post by Billmon on April 11, 2006.]

We have always been at war with EastAsia

2006-03-22T08:24:00.000-05:00

Think Progress noted that Neil Cavuto says we are already at war with Iran.

CAVUTO: But what if I told you it is too late, that we’re already probably at war with Iran and most of us don’t even know it.

I honestly would not be a bit surprised if we are. Bush lied in his speech yesterday when "answering" Helen Thomas' question. We all know that he had every intention of invading, regardless of public opinion, reasoning, morality or ethics....

Centre Media Values

2006-03-20T13:00:00.000-05:00

From www.dailykos.com, in reference to a 20 March 2006 New York Times Op Ed by Bob Herbert:

That Good Ol' Compassionate Conservatism in Action
by mcjoan Sun Mar 19, 2006 at 10:48:54 PM PDT

"Bob Herbert is too infrequently linked these days...Herbert has an amazing talent for finding that small, absolutely critical story, presented clearly, simply and with devastating acuity...

The federal government has a national breast and cervical cancer early detection program, run by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It provides screening and other important services to low-income women who do not have health insurance, or are underinsured.

There is agreement across the board that the program is a success. It saves lives and it saves money. Its biggest problem is that it doesn't reach enough women. At the moment there is only enough funding to screen one in five eligible women.

A sensible policy position for the Bush administration would be to expand funding for the program so that it reached everyone who was eligible. It terms of overall federal spending, the result would be a net decrease. Preventing cancer, or treating it early, is a lot less expensive than treating advanced cancer.

So what did this president do? He proposed a cut in the program of $1.4 million (a minuscule amount when you're talking about the national budget), which would mean that 4,000 fewer women would have access to early detection.

Four thousand women, 4,000 families, written off. For a measly $1.4 million. Women who generally are working, make too much to qualify for Medicaid and whose employers don't provide health insurance. This program offers free early detection services--mammograms, Pap smears--and for those with a cancer diagnosis, hooks them up with a companion program that provides medical insurance.

The truly insane thing about this particular target is that the screening catches these cancers early on, when they are still relatively easy and inexpensive to treat. As one doctor participating in the program explains

'It won't save money,'he said. 'You don't save money by not diagnosing cancer early. You end up spending more money because anyone who develops cancer will get into the health care system and they will be treated. And the cost at that point will be a lot more. The logic here is very simple: the later you diagnose cancer of the breast or cervix, the more expensive it is to the country.'

Katrina went a long way toward proving the lie of Bush's compassionate conservatism. The conclusion of Herbert's column pretty much seals the deal.

This is just one program in a range of cancer services that rely on support from the federal government. As if immune to the extent of human suffering involved, President Bush has proposed a barrage of cuts for these programs.

'What's really amazing,' said Mr. Smith, 'is that the president cut every cancer program. He cut the colorectal cancer program. He cut research at the National Cancer Institute. He cut literally every one of our cancer-specific programs. It's incomprehensible.'

Centre Media Values

2006-03-20T08:35:00.000-05:00

On Senator Feingold's Resolution for Censure of Bush, Dibgby (digbysblog.blogspot.com) puts it succinctly:

It is vitally important that the Democrats use this opportunity to draw the country back from the hysteria that overtook it after 9/11, an emotional conflagration stoked by an opportunistic administration and a slavering media. That hysteria permitted them to normalize preventive war, torture and kidnapping --- and assert a radical, unconstitutional view of the role of the president in our government, none of which the country signed on to because it was all done in secret. This simply has to stop, and people need to start seeing Democrats stand up and declare "enough is enough."

There has never been a greater time or a greater hunger for our political leadershihp to offer a straightforward, principled way back from the feeling that the country is hurtling out of control. The censure motion puts out a marker that the end of this wild ride is almost over.

Salon.com article on Abu Ghraib

2006-03-14T16:29:00.000-05:00

279 photographs and 19 videos from the Army's internal investigation record a harrowing three months of detainee abuse inside the notorious prison -- and make clear that many of those responsible have yet to be held accountable.

It's nice to see some REAL journalism out there once and a while. This very disturbing report is one of the most complete I have seen amidst the rhetoric and denial and hype most news companies seem to focus on.

Centre Media Values

2006-03-07T17:58:00.000-05:00

Centre Media Values

We were intriqued by these recent observations from Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for the Reagan Administration. Following are excerpts from a much longer OP ED piece that was offered for publication March 1, 2006 (and thereafter) on www.creators.com

LEST WE FORGET. Fifty years ago this month, Nikita Krushchev gave his Secret Speech to the Closed Session of the Twentieth Party Congress, in which he denounced Joseph Stalin... Kruschev denounced Stalin before the Party Congress "in order that we may preclude any possibility of a repetition in any form whatever of what took place" under Stalin.... Party members have explained the shattering effect of Krushchev's speech on their belief system. ... life behind the Iron Curtain nevertheless changed for the better. Camps were closed. Prisoners were released. Innocent victims were rehabilitated. Dissent became less dangerous. An underground press grew up. ... By making communism safe for communists, Krushchev created a toehold for truth. Truth grew in importance and influence. After three decades more, the reformer Mikhail Gorbachev rose to general secretary, reached an understanding with Ronald Reagan and brought an end to the Cold War and to the Soviet Union itself.... We need to remember this in our own days, faced as we are with a regime that brooks no dissent, seeks no expert advice, and deceitfully pursues agendas inimical to the U.S. Constitution and to the rights and safety of citizens.

We have already fallen dangerously far when the U.S. Department of Justice produces justifications for torture of detainees held without charges or access to attorneys, when Congress and the judiciary acquiesce to the executive disregarding statutory law, and when wars of aggression are started on the basis of lies and false accusations. We now read of Halliburton being awarded a $350 million contract to build detention camps in the United States. George Bush says, "You are with me or against me." Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney already speak of "fifth columnists" and enemies of the regime. It is a great lie that America needs to give up its civil liberties, the separation of powers, the Geneva Conventions and humane treatment of prisoners in order to defend itself against terrorism. To find out more about Paul Craig Roberts, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com. COPYRIGHT 2006 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
Originally Published on Wednesday March 1, 2006

Centre Media Values

2006-03-05T12:59:00.000-05:00

Centre Media Values
It's worth remembering that the '60's were not all about Vietnam, drugs or rock and roll. (Following snipped from one of today's post by Digby on Hullabalu.)

The truth behind the conservative myths
By Joseph A. Califano Jr. online Washington Monthly column of October of 1999.
________________________________________
"If there is a prize for the political scam of the 20th century, it should go to the conservatives for propagating as conventional wisdom that the Great Society programs of the 1960s were a misguided and failed social experiment that wasted taxpayers' money. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In fact, from 1963 when Lyndon Johnson took office until 1970 as the impact of his Great Society programs were felt, the portion of Americans living below the poverty line dropped from 22.2 percent to 12.6 percent, the most dramatic decline over such a brief period in this century.

Since then, the poverty rate has hovered at about the 13 percent level and sits at 13.3 percent today, still a disgraceful level in the context of the greatest economic boom in our history. But if the Great Society had not achieved that dramatic reduction in poverty, and the nation had not maintained it, 24 million more Americans would today be living below the poverty level. "

NeoConMen

2006-02-25T15:42:00.000-05:00

NeoConMen

In the National Review, I just read a stinging rebuke to the Bush administration by William F. Buckley, Jr. who is now effectively calling for a "Cut and Run" policy in Iraq. (Although I borrow the words from Richard Reeves' column in Nov of '04).

Founder of the National Review, Buckley is a leading elder statesman of American conservatism. Along with recent utterances of the not so distinguished Bill O'Reilly, this is strong evidence of conventional wisdom sharply moving to the conclusion that Iran, terrorist recruiters, and radical Islamists are the prime beneficiaries of this--so far--most unwarranted, disastrous and deadly project advanced by the Neocons.

With this nightmare, the Bush Administration and its Republican acolytes in the Congress have already brought us: the needless human tragedy of almost 2,300 dead (as of 2/25/05) and over 16,000 wounded (approximately 7,600 unable to return to duty) among US military, well over 30,000 dead Iraqis, and at least $400 billion in debt (through US Fiscal '06) for US tax payers and our children.

In rough terms, that cost breaks down to about $4,000 per US household, or $1540 per man, woman and child. For those of us with young children (under age 18) and college students (in total, there are about 92 million US citizens under age 21) that's about $4,345 more debt riding on each of their backs.

Since the Bush Administration and its Congressional Republican allies have chosen to finance the war with record tax cuts for the wealthiest among us, that $400 billion is now the fastest growing part of the country's total debt: it has now now rocketed to almost $8.25 trillion.

For perspective: on Sept 30, 2001, the total national debt stood at just under $5.81 trillion. This more than $2.44 trillion increase (+41%, with no end in sight) has been in less than 4.5 years under Bush!

For perspective: in the last 5 complete Fiscal Years years under the Administration of Bill Clinton (from 9/30/1995 through 9/30/2000) there was a slightly more than $700 billion (or +14%) increase in the National Debt.

Back in 2003 and 2004, the good Doctor Dean was certainly right (as were others, of course) in clearly and forth-rightly warning us about the fact 'you can't trust the Republicans with your money'; about the deceit that accompanied the Administration's taking us to war on Iraq; about the disastrous consequences that would accompany our becoming bogged-down in this sectarian civil war; and about it's dangerous implications for our national security interests and reputation seen in the broader context at home and abroad.

Protect your vote in Centre County!

2006-01-26T13:36:00.000-05:00

Why is the type of voting machine important to me?

As American citizens, we are very proud of our representative democracy and our right to vote. We like to think that our votes do count. Many of us take it for granted that our votes will be properly processed and counted. Newer technologies for voting sound great and they can be very useful and effective, if they are properly implemented and if they provide a good paper audit trail. Most every retail business in the USA uses some type of electronic system to record purchases. These systems vary widely, yet most all of them have a very strong audit trail, including paper receipts. Many of the electronic voting systems out there would like us to do away with a paper audit trail all-together. There is no good argument for doing this, especially with the myriad issues and questions surrounding recent elections. A federal law called HAVA or the “Help America Vote Act” is purportedly designed to help with these issues and is providing some funding to states, which is why this issue has come before us at this point. No electronic media is failsafe. Paper is not failsafe either of course, but it is a good lowest common denominator that anyone can use to determine how someone voted. This type of audit trail makes voting fraud or “fixing” the vote more difficult. In a purely electronic medium where you vote is stored in some type of database (with Diebold systems it is Microsoft Access!) it becomes much easier to fix, as there is no “physical” auditable trail to look at if fraud is suspected. No system is completely secure, but with more transparency, and an easy to follow paper audit trail, we can move in the right direction with our new voting machines. The direction we should go is clear in the acronym SARA. We need a system that is Secure, Accurate, Recountable, and Accessible. We also need what is being called (in the mad rush to have an acronym for everything) VVPT or VVPAT a “Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail”.

You can read more online at the following web sites:

http://www.votepa.us/

http://www.wheresthepaper.org/

http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

http://www.eff.org/Activism/E-voting/

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

http://www.votetrustusa.org/

http://blackboxvoting.com/

http://www.progressivevote.org/

http://www.electronic-vote.org/

http://www.fec.gov/hava/hava.htm

http://www.hava.state.pa.us/hava/site/default.asp

Please SIGN THE PETITION if you live in Centre County.

Federal Police Force

2006-01-25T13:00:00.000-05:00

Some discussion.

When directed by the President, the United States Secret Service is authorized to participate, under the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury, in the planning, coordination, and implementation of security operations at special events of national significance, as determined by the President.

Here is the actual document.

Here is some more discussion.

The Swiftboating of John Murtha

2006-01-14T21:59:00.000-05:00

Investigative reporter Murray Waas catches stenographer Howie Kurtz of the Washington Post playing the "Swiftboat" game with an RNC-sponsored fake news service, Fox News, and a dead man.

Craig Murray’s British Torture Memos

2005-12-30T07:41:00.000-05:00

Well, it looks like the UK may have one-upped us on torture. Sure, Condi went around trying to talk out the side of her mouth , and pretend we didn't kidnap (extraordinary rendition) and take people to other countries to be tortured. Sure, McCain finally got Bush to agree to his ban on torture (clearly only because of public opinion, and not because Bush has any problem with torturing, "So long as he is the dictator"). Craig Murray, former ambassador to Uzbekistan has released documents, some say to help sell his new book. Regardless of his motives, if the documents he released against the governments will are true, they demonstrate outright lies, and our government has blood on it's hands too. As KOS points out, this isn't just your "run of the mill" stand on a box and be electrocuted, or threatened by dogs.

"The US marriage of convenience with Uzebekistan, perhaps the most repressive regime in the world, gives lies to all the bullshit post-WMD justifications for invading Iraq ("evil regime" and all that jazz). Among other atrocities, Uzbekistan boils its dissidents alive. And no, that's not from Amnesty International or other "do-gooder" organization, but from the State Department's 2004 human rights report."

Is this what we have come to? Unfortunatley that seems to be the case. Who are the "terrorists" now?

Demand some answers!

2005-12-20T14:56:00.000-05:00

George W. Bush, April 20, 2004:"Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so."

Yet another lie from our president. Just lovely.........

Join me to demand censure for Bush and Cheney in addition to the creation of a Special Committee to investigate impeaching the Bush Administration for its widespread abuses of power.

--Centre Media Values--

2005-12-20T14:11:00.000-05:00

November 18, 2004. Richard Reeves. The Boston Globe. "The Argument for Cutting and Running."

Just after the '04 election, Richard Reeves made a striking reference to the lesson from Reagan's withdrawal from Lebanon.

Reeves made this argument just after 2004 Election--not quite 20 months after the original attack on Iraq. There were then (18 Nov 2004) just 1,212 US military deaths in Iraq. Now, 13 months since Reeves' column appeared, there have been an additional 945 US military killed in Iraq. That is almost 73 per month in the recent period, compared to 61 per month in the first 20 months of the war. As we know from statistics now confirmed by President Bush, since the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, there have been at least 30,000 Iraqi civilians killed in addition to the current total of 2,157 US military deaths.

Following are just a few paragraphs we "snipped" from a much longer columny Reeves:

---------

"Cut and run? Yeah, cut and run, just as President Reagan cut and ran in Lebanon a few weeks after more than 240 U.S. Marines were killed by a suicide bomber in Beirut. Those young men paid the ultimate price for being in the wrong place at the wrong time in someone else's civil war. My God, the lessons of Beirut terrify anyone who remembers or cares to think about them. We took that terrific hit one October morning in 1983 -- the explosion at the undefended Marine barracks was the largest non-nuclear explosion recorded -- and we did not know who did it or why.

Reagan had made a mistake, several of them, leading up to that disaster. We are repeating those mistakes in Iraq, basically taking sides in a civil war. That time, more than 20 years ago, American troops were indeed pelted with flowers and candy when they came as peacemakers -- and then came to be seen as occupiers.

The Israelis, led by Defense Minister Ariel Sharon, did worse than we did in that war. They gained none of the central goals of their decision to invade in June of 1982. They lost more than 1,000 soldiers killed in action -- the United States' loss equivalent would have been 50,000 killed; they divided their own country and drained their treasury paying for an 18-year occupation.

It was all a mistake...

This (following) was said by our secretary of defense defending the decision not to go into Baghdad during the first Gulf War (news - web sites) in 1991:

'Once you get to Baghdad, it's not clear what you do with it. It's not clear what kind of government you put in place of the one that's currently there now. Is it going to be a Shia regime, a Sunni regime, a Kurdish regime? Or one that tilts toward the Baathists, or one that tilts toward Islamic fundamentalists? How much credibility is that going to have if it's set up by the American military there? How long does the United States military have to stay there to protect the people that sign on for that government, and what happens once we leave?'

That secretary of defense was a former congressman from Wyoming named Dick Cheney (news - web sites). What will happen once we leave this time? The answer is probably that the same things will happen whether we leave now or in 18 years."
-------------

--Centre Media Values--

2005-12-17T17:29:00.000-05:00

Larry Johnson--over at TPMCafe.com--has interesting observation on why in John Bolton's confirmation hearings the Administration may have fought so hard to keep secrets about names of folks ensared in earlier surveillance activities.

By Larry Johnson | bio on Dec 12: www.tpmcare.com
From: Politics
The revelation that the National Security Agency was allowed to conduct non-FISA intercepts of American citizens should bring last summer's hearing on John Bolton's nomination to the United Nations back into focus. As Legal times noted in September of this year, "During the confirmation hearings of John Bolton as the U.S. representative to the United Nations, it came to light that the NSA had freely revealed intercepted conversations of U.S. citizens to Bolton while he served at the State Department. . . . More generally, Newsweek reports that from January 2004 to May 2005, the NSA supplied intercepts and names of 10,000 U.S. citizens to policy-makers at many departments, other U.S. intelligence services, and law enforcement agencies."
We still don't know who he was looking at and what information was contained in those intercepts. More importantly, were they legally obtained? In light of the latest revelation, we have another possible explanation why the Bush Administration fought so strenuously to keep those intercepts secret and out of the hearing. Snooping without judicial review is wrong and must be punished.

Dec 16, 2005 -- 02:26:20 PM EST

--Centre Media Values--

2005-12-17T11:21:00.000-05:00

--Centre Media Values--

2005-12-17T11:08:00.000-05:00

When silence IS complicity! Or, whose Free Press? At least in Baghdad, the Bush Administration had to pay good money for this sort of co-operation. Guess what happens when the New York Times--allegedly one of the most powerful, independent and highly respected exemplars of our so-called liberal media--spends too many nights in the Lincoln Bedroom? Isn't this precisely the sort of information the American public would like to know about when deciding whether or not to renew a President's 4-year lease on the apparently unfettered reins of power? We look forward to sharp editorial comment by Centre Daily Times on the outrage of its esteemed competitor sitting on such information for more than a year. And how could NYT have more than 12 official sources confirming this story without a single one of the other major news gathering organizations getting at least some wind or a wisp of suspicion about it? [Sorry, Rupelmonde can't do photos.]

From Comments by "geogia10" seen on Dec 17 on :

Washington NY Times Self-Censorship, AKA "the President's Press"
by georgia10
Fri Dec 16, 2005 at 05:47:44 PM PDT

Whether Bush's secret order to eavesdrop on Americans constitutes an impeachable offense is debatable. Whether the New York Times has betrayed the American people is not.

The White House asked The New York Times not to publish this article, arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. After meeting with senior administration officials to hear their concerns, the newspaper delayed publication for a year to conduct additional reporting. Some information that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists has been omitted. link

Let's get this straight. The NY Times has this story which, as it reports, has been confirmed by a dozen officials. It possibly had this information prior to the election. And when the White House asks pretty please can you not let the American people know we're destroying their civil rights, the NY Times says "sure"? Because, you know, Americans don't need to be informed as they go to the polls. Better to keep them ignorant and scared--and Republican.

The NY Times and the White House yank out the tired "national security" excuse for delaying the article's publication. But does disclosing the fact the government is spying on its citizens really tip off terrorists? Does the NY Times or the White House for that matter expect us to believe that terrorists actually have an perpetual expectation of privacy in this nation? Fuck no. The government can search our houses, our effects, our communications--but only after following those procedures established to protect one of our most fundamental rights: the right to privacy.

In a failed attempt to excuse its actions, the NY Times has released a statement:

Officials also assured senior editors of The Times that a variety of legal checks had been imposed that satisfied everyone involved that the program raised no legal questions.

Well, if the Bush Administration says it's legal, it must be! When did the Fourth Estate adopt the policy of accepting government statements as gospel? Since when did the press decide that it would forfeit its duty to hold the government independently accountable? Oh yeah, back in 2001.

Justice Black wrote that "The Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have [to] bare the secrets of government and inform the people." Our soldiers have spilled their blood time and time again to preserve that freedom. And now, the NY Times goes and pisses all over the First Amendment. Apparently, the press doesn't want to be free; it wants to be leashed and led by the administration. It wants to be the President's lap dog, trotting behind the President as he stomps through his presidency, gleefully licking up whatever shitty pieces of "news" the administration decides to drop.

If we are a nation destined to have a government-controlled media, then for fuck's sake, have Frist lead the charge to repeal the First Amendment and let's get it over with. But if we are to have that independent press protected by our Constitution and owed to the American people, then the New York Times must apologize. Not only to its readers, but to all of America for being complicit in this moral crime.
Cut----------------------------------------------------------------

--Centre Media Values--

2005-12-17T09:52:00.000-05:00

Digby (try 'Hullabalu' or 'Digby' on GOOGLE, or ) has an excellent post on the Bush White House and its apparent theory of the Divine Right of Kings.

Friday, December 16, 2005

If The President Does It It's Not Illegal

by digby

Oh for Gawd's sakes. Tom Brokaw is on Matthews boo-hooing that this NSA story stepped on Junior's wonderful Iraq triumph. He explains that when you are at war you need to do things that are difficult and believes that most people in the country will agree that the administration needed to spy on Americans after 9/11. He agrees with analyst Roger Cressy (who I used to think was sane) that once the "window" of a possible impending attack closed they should have gone up to the hill and sought permission to keep spying on Americans with no judicial oversight. (I haven't heard about this "window" before. Tom and Roger both seem to have a fantasy that the administration would not simply say that the "window" remains open as long as evil exists in the world.)

Look, the problem here, again, is not one of just spying on Americans, as repulsively totalitarian as that is. It's that the administration adopted John Yoo's theory of presidential infallibility. But, of course, it wasn't really John Yoo's theory at all; it was Dick Cheney's muse, Richard Nixon who said, "when the President does it, that means it's not illegal."

This was not some off the cuff statement. It was based upon a serious constitutional theory --- that the congress or the judiciary (and by inference the laws they promulgate and interpret) have no authority over an equal branch of government. The president, in the pursuit of his duties as president, is not subject to the laws. Citizens can offer their judgment of his performance every four years at the ballot box.

After the election, George W. Bush said this:

The Post: ...Why hasn't anyone been held accountable, either through firings or demotions, for what some people see as mistakes or misjudgments?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, we had an accountability moment, and that's called the 2004 election.

He, like Nixon, believes that the president has only one "accountability moment" while he is president. His re-election. Beyond that, he has been given a blank check. And that includes breaking the law since if the president does it, it's not illegal, the president being the executive branch which is not subject to any other branch of govenrment.

John Yoo, the former deputy attorney general who wrote many of the opinion undergirding these findings (on torture as well as spying) explains that the congress has no right to abridge the president's warmaking powers. Its only constitutional remedy to a war with which they disagree is to deny funding; they can leave the troops on the field with no food or bullets.

I suspect that there are many more of these instances out there in which the administration has simply ignored the law. They believe that the constitution explicitly authorizes them to do so.

Diebold CEO resigns!!

2005-12-13T12:16:00.000-05:00

The chief executive officer of electronic voting company Diebold who once famously declared that he would "deliver" Ohio for President Bush has resigned effective immediately, RAW STORY has learned.

Diebold CEO resigns

Forbes article

And Now, Securities Fraud!

Diebold insider alleges company plagued by technical woes, Diebold defends 'sterling' record

2005-12-07T16:00:00.000-05:00

"Dieb Throat," a whistleblower from electronic voting machine company Diebold Election Systems Inc., says, “I’ve absolutely had it with the dishonesty.” An insider who once strongly supported e-voting, Throat "became disillusioned after witnessing repeated efforts by Diebold to evade meeting legal requirements or implementing appropriate security measures, putting corporate interests ahead of the interests of voters."

Of special interest as PA moves to adopt e-voting are the sections on the difficulties of installing paper trails (retrofitting doesn't work) and how Diebold woos state officials (anything goes).

Click on the title to read the article.

Maimed soldiers retraining to serve in another foreign field

2005-12-04T14:52:00.000-05:00

Great news from Iraq!!! Wonder if the Pentagon paid to have this story published? Here's a quote; click on the title above to read the rest.

The unprecedented number of troops who are returning from Iraq with missing limbs has given the US Paralympic Team an unexpected recruitment boost and the chance to become “unbeatable” at the next Games in Beijing in 2008.

Televangelists on Unusual Side in Indecency Debate

2005-11-30T13:45:00.000-05:00

Strange bedfellows, indeed....

By Jube Shiver Jr., LA Times Staff Writer, 11/29/05

WASHINGTON — Trying to preserve their electronic pulpits, the nation's religious broadcasters find themselves in the unusual position of fighting an effort by anti-indecency groups to thwart channels offering racy programming. The issue involves a debate over whether cable companies should continue offering subscribers mainstream and niche channels in bundles, or let them buy what they want on an a la carte basis.

Consumer groups are pushing to let people choose their channels rather than pay for ones they don't watch. One Federal Communications Commission study showed people on average regularly watch only 17 of the more than 100 cable channels they typically receive. But what started largely as a consumer issue has now morphed into a larger controversy involving whether cable operators should be required to continue exposing subscribers to niche channels, including religious ones, that people might not order on their own. "We don't just want to preach to the choir; we want to reach the unchurched," said Paul Crouch Jr. of Trinity Broadcast Network in Santa Ana. "The bottom line is that we want to be everywhere on cable."

The controversy is expected to come to a head today when media executives, televangelists, government regulators and consumer activists gather for Open Forum on Decency, held by Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska). Lawmakers and advocacy groups have seized on the a la carte system as a way to give cable TV subscribers more flexibility to drop channels with adult fare, citing such programs as the plastic surgery drama "Nip/Tuck" on FX that regularly features sex and gore.

"A la carte is a solution that will immediately address the issue of indecency on cable," said Tim Winters, executive director of the Los Angeles-based Parents Television Council. The debate has created unusual bedfellows: religious broadcasters that want to keep getting their messages out, and free-speech advocates who are fearful that the unbundling of cable channels is being used by anti-indecency advocates as a tool against provocative shows. It also pits televangelists against their usual allies in trying to clean up language and sex on TV and radio. Christian broadcasters, including such big names as Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, worry that changing the current system will cut into viewership. If that puts them on the opposite side of where they usually stand in the indecency debate, Crouch said, "so be it." But Winters contends that religious broadcasters oppose more cable choice because they "are very fearful of losing any market share."

To preserve viewership, big religious broadcasters such as Trinity, which owns 33 TV stations, and Daystar, operator of stations in San Francisco and 44 other U.S. cities, are pushing the government to expand regulations requiring that cable operators carry local, over-the-air channels such as theirs. That has put them at odds with other religious programmers that don't own TV stations, such as INSP and Gospel Music Channel. They fear their shows will be crowded out by channels that cable operators have to carry. "I don't think the answer to indecency is necessarily more religious programming," said Gospel Music President Charles Humbard, son of televangelist pioneer Rex Humbard. "The answer is for people who know better to correct what's going on … by extending broadcasting indecency rules to cable."

Cable TV has emerged as a major indecency battleground. Because programs aren't transmitted into homes over public airwaves, operators are exempt from regulations involving sex and language. They also are shielded from the pressures of the FCC, which exercises clout over broadcasters by regulating station licenses. Nonetheless, FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin has urged cable operators to voluntarily rein in racy shows, or risk having Congress do it. Indeed, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) is seeking support for a bill that would force the cable industry to offer a "family friendly" tier of programming.

But cable companies and major media companies have been fighting government efforts to regulate programming."It's not fair to handicap us with these requirements because we want to be free to give consumers what the marketplace wants," said David Grabert, a spokesman for cable operator Cox Communications Inc. Time Warner Inc. and Comcast Corp., seeking FCC approval of their $17.6-billion acquisition of ailing cable company Adelphia Communications Corp., are balking at the government's indecency concerns. The two companies reportedly have convinced the agency that it doesn't have the authority to require them to offer a family-friendly tier of programming as a condition of approving the deal.

The FCC nonetheless will seek public comment next month on a proposal that would require the cable industry to offer a la carte programming. Preston Padden, executive vice president of government relations for Walt Disney Co., predicts that if such a proposal is enacted, viewers stand to lose." Consumers likely would pay more, and get less," Padden said.

The Press: The Enemy Within

2005-11-29T12:49:00.000-05:00

This is a very interesting article by Michael Massing . Well worth a read, here is an excerpt:

As Silverstein suggests, this fear of bias, and of appearing unbalanced,
acts as a powerful sedative on American journalists—one whose effect has been
magnified by the incessant attacks of conservative bloggers and radio talk-show
hosts. One reason journalists performed so poorly in the months before the Iraq
war was that there were few Democrats willing to criticize the Bush
administration on the record; without such cover, journalists feared they would
be branded as hostile to the President and labeled as "liberal" by conservative
commentators.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18555

Moyers on Tomlinson

2005-11-27T13:27:00.000-05:00

Broadcastingcable.com has an interview with bill in which he states "Right-wing partisans like Tomlinson have always attacked aggressive reporting as liberal." Definately worth a read.

We were biased, all right—in favor of uncovering the news that powerful people wanted to keep hidden: conflicts of interest at the Department of Interior, secret meetings between Vice President Cheney and the oil industry, backdoor shenanigans by lobbyists at the FCC, corruption in Congress, neglect of wounded veterans returning from Iraq, Pentagon cost overruns, the manipulation of intelligence leading to the invasion of Iraq.

The Man Who Sold the War

2005-11-21T22:22:00.000-05:00

"Your mission, Mr. Rendon, should you decide to accept it, is to sell a war with Iraq at home and abroad through media manipulation. Murder, mayhem, and Miller are among the tools available to you in pursuit of this goal. "

That's what flashed through my mind as I read "The Man Who Sold the War." Unfortunately, this Rolling Stone investigative piece about John Rendon, dubbed "Bush's general in the propadanda war," is not a summary of Mission Impossible episodes. It's a long article, but well worth the time. It begins and ends with the Iraq war....and concludes with Rendon's cold-blooded calculation about what to fix for the next one.

Has American Democracy died an electronic death in Ohio 2005's referenda defeats?

2005-11-14T15:12:00.000-05:00

The 'impossible outcomes' of Ohio's Election Day 2005 referendum issues portend frightening results for our nation in 2006 and 2008. This story is from The Free Press. (See previous blogpost.) Here are the opening paragraphs:

While debate still rages over Ohio's stolen presidential election of 2004, the impossible outcomes of key 2005 referendum issues may have put an electronic nail through American democracy.

Once again, the Buckeye state has hosted an astonishing display of electronic manipulation that calls into question the sanctity of America's right to vote, and to have those votes counted in this crucial swing state.

The controversy has been vastly enhanced due to the simultaneous installation of new electronic voting machines in nearly half the state's 88 counties, machines the General Accountability Office has now confirmed could be easily hacked by a very small number of people.

Last year, the US presidency was decided here. This year, a bond issue and four hard-fought election reform propositions are in question.

The Free Press

2005-11-14T14:55:00.000-05:00

Via this gateway link, you can go to:

freepress.org, the online edition of The Free Press, featuring progressive news and commentary
freepress.net, a nonpartisan organization working to involve the public in media policymaking and to craft policies for more democratic media

Did you make the list?

2005-11-08T19:54:00.000-05:00

"Spurred by paranoia and aided by the USA Patriot Act, the Bush Administration has compiled dossiers on more than 10,000 Americans it considers political enemies and uses those files to wage war on those who disagree with its policies."

http://www.yuricareport.com/Civil%20Rights/FBISecretScrutinyOfCitizens.html

http://www.yuricareport.com/Civil%20Rights/LawmakersCallForLimitsOnFBIPower.html

Oh, and according to the GAO report it looks like the 2004 elections were stolen.

Do you feel any safer? The terrorists hate us for our freedoms, you know.....

Kenny Resigns!

2005-11-04T09:19:00.000-05:00

The board said in a statement: "[F]ormer chairman Kenneth Y. Tomlinson has
resigned from the CPB board. The board does not believe that Mr. Tomlinson acted maliciously or with any intent to harm CPB or public broadcasting, and the board recognizes that Mr. Tomlinson strongly disputes the findings in the soon-to-be-released Inspector General’s report."

It should be an interesting report....

Charles Melancon's analysis of Brownie's e-mails..

2005-11-03T13:21:00.000-05:00

Bahamonde to FEMA Director Michael Brown, Aug. 31, 11:20 a.m.
Hotels are kicking people out, thousands gathering in the streets with no food or water. Hundreds still being rescued from homes.

Sharon Worthy, Brown‘s press secretary, to Cindy Taylor, FEMA deputy director of public affairs, and others, Aug. 31, 2 p.m.
"Also, it is very important that time is allowed for Mr. Brown to eat dinner. Gievn (sic) that Baton Rouge is back to normal, restaurants are getting busy. He needs much more that (sic) 20 or 30 minutes. We now have traffic to encounter to get to and from a location of his choise (sic), followed by wait service from the restaurant staff, eating, etc.

Bahamonde to Taylor and Michael Widomski, public affairs, Aug. 31, 2:44 p.m.
"OH MY GOD!!!!!!!! No won‘t go any further, too easy of a target. Just tell her that I just ate an MRE and crapped in the hallway of the Superdome along with 30,000 other close friends so I understand her concern about busy restaurants. Maybe tonight I will have time to move my pebbles on the parking garage floor so they don‘t stab me in the back while I try to sleep.

Jimmy Carter

2005-11-02T23:43:00.000-05:00

Carter: White House Manipulated Iraq Intel

NEW YORK (AP) - The Bush Administration's prewar claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction were "manipulated, at least" to mislead the American people, former President Jimmy Carter said Wednesday.

Demand FCC public hearings!

2005-10-21T09:34:00.000-04:00

Check out http://www.hearusnow.org/ from Comsumers Reports. They have some very informative content, and actions you can take to try and make a difference!

"Today, six corporations control most of what you see on television. One company has gobbled up more than 1,000 radio stations across the country. And since 1975, two-thirds of all independently-owned newspapers have disappeared.

This is a dangerous trend. Access to diverse sources of information is the bedrock of a functioning democratic society. Americans depend on television and newspapers to learn about the news, understand national and local issues and make informed choices. Media consolidation means that fewer pipelines are available to distribute entertainment, information and news to consumers and fewer voices are getting a chance to be heard."

FCC: Religion 'better use' than school

2005-10-19T21:44:00.000-04:00

Divine Intervention Axes School Station

Today's lesson: Don't cross Christian broadcasting.

Maynard High School's radio frequency, 91.7 FM, is being seized by a network of Christian broadcasting stations that the Federal Communications Commission has ruled is a better use of the public airwaves....

Scotty is proud to lie

2005-10-19T13:27:00.000-04:00

SCOTT McCLELLAN: Are you referring to, what, a New York Daily News report? Two things: One, we're not commenting on an ongoing investigation; two, and I would challenge the overall accuracy of that news account.

QUESTION: That's a comment.

QUESTION: Which part of it?

QUESTION: Yes, that is.

QUESTION: Which facts --

SCOTT McCLELLAN: No, I'm just saying -- no, I'm just trying to help you all.

QUESTION: So what facts are you challenging?

SCOTT McCLELLAN: Again, I'm not going to comment on an ongoing investigation.

US blocks U.N. briefing on atrocities in Sudan

2005-10-11T07:23:00.000-04:00

"They noted Bolton had lined up with the three council members -- Algeria, China and Russia -- which have watered down action against Khartoum.

"He's playing into the hands of people who don't want to do anything," said one council diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity so as not to irritate Washington."

So Bolton is already doing wonders to support genocide.....

Who is Miers

2005-10-03T06:12:00.000-04:00

"But she does know better than just about anyone else where the bodies are buried (relax, it's a just a metaphor...we hope) in President Bush's National Guard scandal. In fact, Bush's Texas gubenatorial campaign in 1998 (when he was starting to eye the White House) actually paid Miers $19,000 to run an internal pre-emptive probe of the potential scandal. Not long after, a since-settled lawsuit alleged that the Texas Lottery Commission -- while chaired by Bush appointee Miers -- played a role in a multi-million dollar cover-up of the scandal."

Washinton Post

Wikipedia

AP

Can Roberts be stopped?

2005-09-27T09:14:00.000-04:00

We the people of the United States hereby call for a NATIONAL REFERENDUM, by phone call, by fax, by email, and by letter, on the choice of a new chief justice for our Supreme Court. We are presented with a pleasant, smiley face who so far has refused to answer questions about whether he agrees with the holdings in cases upon which we have long relied, which we have a right to know, and who has refused to deliver for examination any of his memos for the last 20 years, which we have a right to see.

The now most unpopular second term president in history does NOT have the carte blanche to appoint any crony ideologue of his own choosing, and we are deeply suspicious of the motives of this particular nominee, who cannot even tell the truth about his leadership role in the reactionary Federalist Society. We therefore call on our senators to reject this nominee, by filibuster if necessary, and to DEMAND a different and more forthcoming nominee who better represents the mainstream of the American people. Read the inspirational piece on OpEdNews.com.

The immediate priority is to call the three Democrats who have already voted for Roberts in committee and persuade them that their vote was wrong, and CONTRARY to the will of we the people, especially if you are from Vermont or Wisconsin. They said it was a "close call". If we all tell them it has to go the other way they must listen. There are three toll-free numbers, 888-818-6641, 888-355-3588, 877-762-8762 (already fast busy signal). Just ask for the senator by name, or here are their direct phone and fax numbers:

Patrick J Leahy [VT], 202-224-4242(phone), 202-224-3479(fax)
Russell D Feingold [WI], 202-224-5323(phone), 202-224-2725(fax)
Herb Kohl [WI], 202-224-5653(phone), 202-224-9787(fax)

Did your vote count?

2005-09-19T18:34:00.000-04:00

Just to remind you

"The CEO of North Canton, Ohio-based Diebold, Inc., Walden O'Dell has been
oft-quoted for his 2003 Republican fund-raiser promise to help "Ohio deliver its
electoral votes to the president next year." O'Dell himself was a high-level
contributor to the Bush/Cheney '04 campaign as well as many other Republican
causes. "

Now, a Diebold insider finally speaks

Jimmy Carter is recommending a paper trail

Why isn't there more concern?

Project Censored's top 25

2005-09-11T22:28:00.000-04:00

Project Censored is a media research group out of Sonoma State University which tracks the news published in independent journals and newsletters. From these, Project Censored compiles an annual list of 25 news stories of social significance that have been overlooked, under-reported or self-censored by the country's major national news media.

Highlights include
Bush Administration Moves to Eliminate Open Government
and
Surveillance Society Quietly Moves In

"Freedom Walk" surely isn't "free"

2005-09-09T05:35:00.000-04:00

Anyone who joins Sunday's Nine-Eleven memorial Freedom Walk without registering could be arrested. Pentagon officials tell The Washington Post that the route from the Pentagon to the Mall will be lined with four-foot-high snow fencing. US Park Police will keep out interlopers. Hundreds of officers will patrol the route on foot, horseback, motorcycles and in a helicopter. Park Police Chief Dwight Pettiford says anyone who joins the march or the subsequent concert on the Mall without a permit and refuses to leave will be arrested. The media will also won't be allowed to join walkers on the route. Police have approved a permit from a small group of protesters that plans to stand along Independence Avenue. Walkers have until 4:30 p.m. Friday to register online at http://www.asyfreedomwalk.com/. There is no walk up registration.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/08/AR2005090802140.html

Seems a tad bit ironic..... There is a protest though
http://www.internationalanswer.org/

Bush in Action / Bush Inaction

2005-09-01T10:48:00.000-04:00

How about some captions or voice balloons for this photo of the 'leader of the free world,' taken on the day Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast?

Here's a start:

A caption...

George Bush shows Sen. John McCain the administration's response to the devastation of Hurricane Katrina: 'Let them eat cake.'

A voice balloon:

Bush to McCain: 'Hey, Big Mac, this cake is great! I'm gonna take a piece to enjoy tonight while I'm rereading My Pet Goat. '

5 Major trends in the state of News Media

2005-08-26T04:22:00.000-04:00

Journalism.org is in its second year of reporting on the State of the News Media. In what appears to me to be a pretty objective report, they identify 5 major trends, one of which will be of little surprise to CMVers. They state "The traditional press model - the journalism of verification - is one in which journalists are concerned first with trying to substantiate facts. It has ceded ground for years on talk shows and cable to a new journalism of assertion, where information is offered with little time and little attempt to independently verify its veracity. " Ain't that the truth! There is quite a bit of good content on their site, and they discuss the many different incarnations of news media. I recoomend a good perusal of their site.

Journalism is the one solitary respectable profession which honors theft (when committed in the pecuniary interest of a journal,) & admires the thief....However, these same journals combat despicable crimes quite valiantly--when committed in other quarters.- Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens) in a Letter to W. D. Howells, 10/30/1880

Beltway dems and the Grassroots

2005-08-23T09:59:00.000-04:00

David Sirota writes:

'The Philadelphia Inquirer has a great piece today on how many of the highest-profile 2008 Democratic presidential contenders - other than the courageous Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) - are still unwilling to take a serious position on the Iraq War. I must say, there are very troubling signs in the article in terms of Democrats continuing to regurgitate dishonest right wing lies (a phenomenon I have written a lot about before), and continuing to listen to the professional election losers (aka. "The Consulting Class") and the club of foreign policy elitists (aka. the "The Strategic Class") in Washington, D.C. But there are also some very encouraging signals this insulated Beltway Establishment is being shaken to its core.'

and

'Finally, there is some good news: the Inquirer story reminds us that there is a growing outrage outside the class of professional election losers in Washington who are starting to flex their political muscle. That is, the millions of ordinary, hard-working citizens who actually make up the ranks of the Democratic Party are getting sick and tired of the split-the-difference politics that has led Democrats to loss after loss after loss. People like Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Paul Hackett are showing that there are talented and effective champions who are listening to us, and are ready to take up the fight. And others like top-tier Senate candidate Bob Casey (D-PA) are rejecting the Iraq advice from the all-too-comfortable consultants in Washington.'

Guzzle Gas and Pretend

2005-08-18T09:57:00.000-04:00

Derrick Z. Jackson in the Boston Globe:

"We have allowed a president to send off the sons and daughters of the working class and the poor to invade Iraq, killing thousands of innocent Iraqi working class and poor along the way. As each day passes, the fact that no Osama has been flushed out, the fact that no weapons of mass destruction have been found, and the fact that there was never a tie between Saddam Hussein and 9/11 becomes not just Bush's responsibility but ours as well."

and

"Unfortunately, it is difficult for a populace to be enlightened if its leader keeps leaving it in the dark. President Bush, according to the Times, is planning to leave out mega-SUVs such as Hummers from new fuel economy standards, apparently to ease the competitive strain on Detroit, which has invested far more in selling gas guzzlers than foreign automakers. With the explosion of SUVs (trucks now account for 50 percent of light-duty vehicle sales), the nation's average fuel economy has been flat for a quarter century and has actually fallen slightly, from 22.1 miles per gallon in 1987 to 21 miles per gallon today."

Washington Post's questionable support of "Freedom March"

2005-08-15T04:05:00.000-04:00

I normally think of the Washington Post as one of the better newspapers out there, I even get their weekly "Staff-writers only" version of the paper. This is enough to make me re-think that subscription, and I am going to take the time to tell them so.

"But Rick Weiss, a Post science reporter and co-chair of the Washington Post unit of the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild, noted the hypocrisy of the paper's involvement, since it bars reporters from participating in partisan events. "It is dismaying, to say the least, that I can be fired for participating in a peace march while my employer feels free to co-sponsor an event that so blatantly beats the drum of war," Weiss stated."

In other news, look what war can do to even a "Marine of the year"...

`Marine of the Year' charged in shooting

Cotnoir profile

It seems like nuclear is everywhere.

2005-08-11T17:38:00.000-04:00

From nuclear power like Iran is claiming to be wanting, to nuclear weaponry like Pakistan is showing off, to the lifting of sanctions by Britain, to the tactical nuclear weapons promoted by the Bush administration, nuclear is always in the news and our lives, and is clearly not going away. It can reap destruction, it can create dangerous waste, and it is one of the most powerful things science has wrought.

I am in favor of freedom of religion.

2005-08-09T04:30:00.000-04:00

But the sick "Christian Values" that seem to demonize the naked body, yet are totally accepting of killing and maiming are starting to take over our governmental institutions, and quite frankly, it is not only immoral and unethical, it is just plain disgusting. If you're so damned offended by bad words and nudity on television, don't fucking watch it, you ignorant assholes. And keep your fucking religion the hell OUT of my government. How twisted are you to promote nuclear weapons, yet be worried about nudity?

Penny Nance, until recently a board member for Concerned Women for America - a group which describes its mission as helping to "bring Biblical principles into all levels of public policy" - is now a special advisor in the FCC's Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis, according to aides to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin.

The group this bitch represents is nothing but a thinley veiled hate group. And now they hired her on at the FCC... Just do a search off the Morons.org site for "Concerned women of America", and you will find numerous uncoverings of this groups hate mongering and anti-gay bigotry. Here is but one example

Eric Idle's Fuck The FCC song

And here is a little more on the ignorant bitch from media matters

And here is the ignorant bitch fighting against the global nuclear test ban treaty back in 1999(you can also see how fucking ugly she is, though I guess that isn't really relevant)....

So I guess she wants more cruelty and violence "for the children"

And what the hell is she doing anyway, she is supposed to be subservient, if she is going to practice what she preaches at all

CJR's take

Killed for his story?

2005-08-05T07:13:00.000-04:00

Was Steven Vincent killed for his story? In his story he claims that the Iraqi police are really mostly composed of religious extremeists.

As has been widely reported of late, Basran politics (and everyday life) is
increasingly coming under the control of Shiite religious groups, from the
relatively mainstream Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq to the bellicose followers of the rebel cleric Moktada al-Sadr. Recruited from the same population of undereducated, underemployed men who swell these organizations' ranks, many of Basra's rank-and-file police officers maintain dual loyalties to mosque and state.

Was he killed because he was telling the truth?

Column One: From Vincent to van Gogh

Steven Vincent, U.S. art critic who went to war

Podcasting

2005-08-04T08:13:00.000-04:00

Check out http://www.odeo.com/ for a nice free tool to find audio on the internet. According to their FAQ "Podcasting is a new way to create and listen to radio. Sorta." A number of other search tools for finding free "podcasts" are also out there, including http://www.podscope.com/ and http://www.podcast.net/. There is even a news site dedicated to podcasting, called non-other than http://www.podcastingnews.com/.

If you haven't tried it, check it out! There is a ton of great free content out there!

Our Terrible Things

2005-08-03T09:44:00.000-04:00

James Carroll of the Boston Globe writes about the 60th anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki:

"In the United States of America, a terrible thing shapes our relationship to the world, but we do not admit it, not even on its unhappy anniversary. Sixty years ago this week, American B-29s named Enola Gay and Bock's Car dropped atomic bombs on two Japanese cities. The men responsible insisted, in the face of shocking devastation, that the bombs were not so terrible."

He goes on witha modern analogy:

"And so with Iraq. Under George W. Bush, America has done and is doing a terrible thing in that nation. Yet to hear the war described in Washington, one would still think it is an exercise in nation building, democracy, humanitarian intervention -- women's liberation. Indeed, the administration's language mavens last week began eschewing the word ''war," which is a sure sign they know it is lost. The hard truth is that we have destroyed the place we claimed to want to rescue, and no matter what tactics the improvising Pentagon adopts (US troops withdraw? US forces escalate?), the situation will only worsen. Political pressures require Bush to pretend that a positive outcome hovers at the horizon in Iraq, but that is a mirage. Together with Tony Blair, he also denies that terror attacks a world away from Baghdad constitute a second front in the Iraq war, but that too is self-serving illusion. The coalition of denial."

So now we are fixing their trials too.....

2005-08-02T12:31:00.000-04:00

The military commissions set up by the United States to try terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay are rigged, fraudulent and based on "half-assed" evidence, according to leaked e-mails.

Of course they deny..

and deny....

But seriously, ask yourself, WHY WOULD THESE MEN MAKE THIS UP?

I think these 2 prosecutors are telling the truth, and the Bush administration is lying.

Bringing dignity to the white house

2005-08-02T06:03:00.000-04:00

Yay, GW is bringing dignity back to the white house, just like he promised! One -"Go FUCK YOURSELF" at a time.....
Of course Scotty "Won't dignify the question" and they later claimed it was his thumb. How fucking stupid do they think we are?
Why do people accept this?

I guess maybe because he has been ignorant like this since he was a governor...
One finger victory salute

DOES OUR MEDIA ADEQUATELY COVER NATIONAL/WORLD EVENTS?

2005-07-29T11:08:00.000-04:00

"A former Marine, I had arrived in Sudan's Darfur region in September 2004 as one of three U.S. military observers for the African Union, armed only with a pen, pad and camera. The mandate for the A.U. force allowed merely for the reporting of violations of a cease-fire that had been declared last April and the protection of observers. The observers sometimes joked morbidly that our mission was to search endlessly for the cease-fire we constantly failed to find. I soon realized that this was no joke."

BILLION DOLLAR QUESTION:
With a human tragedy of such gigantic proportion occurring in the world, why did the U.S. administration choose to spend the national wealth and the lives of its citizens to "democratize" Iraq?
____ Empire building and permanent presence in Middle East
____ Oil
____ Get even for Papa Bush
____ Windfall profits for Halliburton and other military contractors
____ All of the above

Bolton LIED about being involved in investigations.

2005-07-29T09:03:00.000-04:00

His statement came hours after another State Department official said Bolton had correctly answered a Senate questionnaire when he wrote that he had not testified to a grand jury or been interviewed by investigators in any inquiry over the past five years.
Clay said Bolton "didn't recall being interviewed by the State Department's inspector general" when he filled out the form. "Therefore, his form, as submitted, was inaccurate," Clay said. "He will correct it."

Washington Post

Chicago Sun-Times

Star Tribune

"It seems unusual that Mr. Bolton would not remember his involvement in such a serious matter," said Biden, the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "In my mind, this raises more questions that need to be answered. I hope President Bush will not make the mistake of recess appointing Mr. Bolton."

You know he will, Joe, Bush likes to promote those with loose ethics. And he particularly seems to have a strong affection for LIARS.

Judith Miller's Role in Rove Affair

2005-07-28T10:32:00.000-04:00

An article in Arianna Huffington's site suggests the following theory: Judith Miller is not in jail for protecting a source; she was a source. When Joe Wilson published his famous op-ed in the NYT demolishing the 'uranium from Niger' assertion in Bush's State of the Union, Miller got very angry because her credibility was heavily involved in the Niger story. She knew about Wilson's wife being covert CIA (not sure how) and told one or two friends in the White House (maybe Rove, maybe Libby).
If this is true, it would explain why Miller never wrote about Plame being CIA. She didn't have to take the chance of doing so because she maneuvered others into doing it.

Bush administration wanted torture.

2005-07-28T07:15:00.000-04:00

The mainstream media is still spreading the lie that the torture which has been occuring was the work of "a few bad apples". Well, it seems that those bad apples are really all high level members of the Bush administration. I am glad that the NY Times and the Washington post reported on this, however it is very disturbing that the grossly immoral actions promoted by the Bush administration are not front page news. By not reporting this, the mainstream media is being complicit in promoting torture.

Rear Adm. Michael F. Lohr, the Navy's chief lawyer, wrote on Feb. 6, 2003, that while detainees at Guantanamo Bay might not qualify for international protections, "Will the American people find we have missed the forest for the trees by condoning practices that, while technically legal, are inconsistent with our most fundamental values?"

SIMPSON UPSET ABOUT MISSING IRAQ FOOTAGE

2005-07-27T14:29:00.000-04:00

Out of the mouths of babes...?

JESSICA SIMPSON wants to know where missing footage of her and husband NICK LACHEY's harrowing trip to Iraq got to -- because she thinks Americans would like to see just how bad conditions are there.... Simpson says, "It was unbelievable. They didn't show a lot of what really went on with the enemy attacks and the shelling. There was so much stuff that went on and somehow the tapes got mysteriously misplaced."

Here's what made it back from Iraq:

http://community.webshots.com/album/344110718wpcFPH

William Fisher schools Michelle Malkin

2005-07-27T07:42:00.000-04:00

"Well, let me suggest that this cute-looking new darling of the salivating right is asking the wrong question. What she should want to know is why the FBI is snooping on the ACLU. After all, the rights the ACLU defends include those that allow Ms. Malkin to write exactly what she wants to write, no matter how misinformed."

BILL O'REILLY IN DRAG

Solidarity Later

2005-07-26T20:25:00.000-04:00

Molly Ivins in support of the Change to Win Coalition:

"The larger result can be seen in the whole picture of stagnant wages, frozen minimum wage, corporate gains against labor on every front. It won't stop -- the Bush administration is in a fight to the death against labor. They even intervened to block a California law that says employers cannot use taxpayer money to run anti-union campaigns in the workplace. How do you like them apples, middle-class taxpayer?"

Latest in the Rove Saga

2005-07-25T18:34:00.000-04:00

Here is the latest outrage regarding Rove! (ROVE RAGE)

"Rove's gang of bullies" click this for AlterNet article

A former CIA analyst speaks up in the hopes of freeing his former colleague, Valerie Plame, from the RNC's 'malicious smear campaign.'

New torture device to be implemented....

2005-07-21T06:36:00.000-04:00

Millimeter-wave device puts the ‘heat’ on adversaries

Riot control ray gun worries scientists
The Active Denial System weapon, classified as "less lethal" by the Pentagon, fires a 95GHz microwave beam at rioters to cause heating and intolerable pain in less than five seconds.

Scientists Concerned by Gun on Tap for Iraq

Details of US microwave-weapon tests revealed

Clearly, our goverment *is* sanctioning torture, and we are developing better ways to torture folks too!

Was a PSU graduate's cover blown by the Bush Administration?

2005-07-20T08:51:00.000-04:00

Valerie Plame (who has a BA in journalism from PSU) is under fire from the Bush administration because her husband, Joseph Wilson, cared enough to tell the truth. How far up does the deceit go? at least as far as Rove. The GOP talking points on the issue seek to obfuscate the issue, and intentionally deceive the public. At least some people have the integrity to call them on their lies.

Rove revelation compromised more than Plame's career

Rove-Plame Scandal Leading to Deeper White House Horrors?

The One Very Good Reason Karl Rove Might Be Indicted

Bring out yer dead!

2005-07-19T06:30:00.000-04:00

E&P has an interesting article about why the US media is not showing photos of the Iraq war. Moises Saman (a photographer) states "Americans understand we are at war -- but not many people want to see the real consequences, especially when they involve one of your own," he says. "I think some publications cater to this sentiment by trying not to anger subscribers and advertisers with harsh 'in-your-face' coverage of the true nature of war."

To see some of what our actions in Iraq have wrought, see some of the following websites:

http://www.iraqphotos.com/

101st Airborne

Kevin Sites

Iraq US wounded

Brandon Blog

Iraq Casualties

Robert Fisk

Dahr Jamail

FBI monitoring Civil Rights group.

2005-07-18T06:14:00.000-04:00

ACLU filing finds FBI files on protests - Science Daily

FBI Says It Has Files on Rights Groups -Washinton Post

"I'm still somewhat shocked by the size of the file on us," said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the ACLU. "Why would the FBI collect almost 1,200 pages on a civil rights organization engaged in lawful activity? What justification could there be, other than political surveillance of lawful First Amendment activities?"

END THE WAR ON IRAQ

2005-07-12T13:12:00.000-04:00

Hold Bush & Congress Accountable for the Deaths, the Destruction, the Lies, and the Toll on Our Communities
Three Days of Action for Peace and Justice in Washington, D.C.
Sat., Sept. 24 - Massive March, Rally & Festival
Sun., Sept. 25 - Interfaith Service, Grassroots Training
Mon., Sept. 26 - Lobby Day and Mass Nonviolent Direct Action and Civil Disobedience

Killing the journalists as a matter of policy?

2005-07-12T06:03:00.000-04:00

One would wonder why Bush is having our military intentionally target journalists, when most of them are toeing the administration line anyway.

US urged to probe Iraq media deaths

International Federation of Journalists’ calls for:
An Independent probe into unexplained killings;
New rules to make targeting of media and negligence over journalists’ safety a war crime;
A Global campaign to demand justice for media victims.

Judge Wants to Question US Troops on Media Deaths in Iraq

US 'lied' about media deaths

US 'targets' journalists in Iraq

Once again, Conyers stands for integrity

2005-07-11T07:21:00.000-04:00

Once again, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), has taken a stand for honesty and integrity in our political systems.
"We write in order to urge that you require your Deputy White House Chief of Staff, Karl Rove, to either come forward immediately to explain his role in the Valerie Plame matter or to resign from your Administration," the veteran Democrat writes. "High-ranking members of your Administration who are involved in any effort to smear a private citizen or to disseminate information regarding a CIA operative should be expected to meet a far higher standard of ethical behavior and forthrightness."
I'm guessing he will be ignored, just like with Downing Street

Banal, trite, FauxNews

2005-07-11T06:23:00.000-04:00

Mary asked me to post this from Media Matters.

Fox News contributing correspondent Simon Marks distinguished between Arabs and "regular" Londoners, in reporting on the scope of the attacks.

"I mean, my first thought when I heard -- just on a personal basis, when I heard there had been this attack and I saw the futures this morning, which were really in the tank, I thought, "Hmmm, time to buy." Brit Hume

Oliphant

2005-06-30T14:44:00.000-04:00

Brenda asked me to post this Oliphant cartoon from ucomics.com.

About Pat Oliphant
No one is safe from the acid brush of Pat Oliphant, acknowledged by many as the nation's most influential political cartoonist. A master of what he calls "confrontational art," Oliphant spares neither the liberal nor conservative, sinner nor saint. As the most widely syndicated political cartoonist in the world and a winner of the Pulitzer, he produces work that is as visually stunning as it is metaphorically powerful.

Congressional Research reports for the people!

2005-06-30T06:25:00.000-04:00

American taxpayers spend nearly $100 million a year to fund the Congressional Research Service, a "think tank" that provides reports to members of Congress on a variety of topics relevant to current political events. Yet, these reports are not made available to the public in a way that they can be easily obtained. A project of the Center for Democracy & Technology, Open CRS provides citizens access to CRS Reports that are already in the public domain and encourages Congress to provide public access to all CRS Reports.

Baseball, Republicans and Assholes.

2005-06-30T05:54:00.000-04:00

Tom Davis, Asshole at large.

In the Nation's Capital, Baseball Has Become a Political Football

Tim Robbins vs. the Baseball Hall of Fame

Baseball: Dubya was appointed managing partner of the Texas Rangers baseball team, even though he put up only $600,000 of mostly borrowed money for a 1.8 percent stake in the team. Among the big backers buying the Rangers were William DeWitt (a fellow Yale alum of Dubya's) and Mercer Reynolds. Both were major contributors to President Bush's campaign. Earlier, the two also were in on the rescue of Dubya's oil company.

Dubya later sold out of the Rangers' ownership group. His take: $15-million. That sum made Dubya rich and finally in a comfortable position to pursue a political career.

Emminent Domain

2005-06-29T05:53:00.000-04:00

"Lost Liberty Hotel" proposed on Justice Souter's land

On Monday June 27, Freestar Media, LLC informed the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire that it wants to begin the permit process to build a hotel on the land owned by Justice David H. Souter. Justice Souter's vote in the "Kelo vs. City of New London" decision allows city governments to take land from one private owner and give it to another if the government will generate greater tax revenue or other economic benefits when the land is developed by the new owner.

"I'm happy to give away your property rights!"

Downing Street Memo to be addressed on House Floor

2005-06-28T09:37:00.000-04:00

Congressman John Conyers, Congresswoman Maxine Waters, and Congresswoman Barbara Lee are asking their colleagues in the House of Representatives to join them on the evening of June 28 to discuss the Downing Street Minutes on the floor of the House.

They need our help.

Please contact your Congress Member right away and ask them to contact the Judiciary Committee staff and commit to taking part.
Phone: 1-877-762-8762

Why has the American Press been silent on downing street?

Finally, it makes the front page of the Washington Post

Brand X = TERRIBLE DECISION

2005-06-28T07:46:00.000-04:00

The 6-to-3 decision in the NCTA v. Brand X case could change the face of the Internet as we know it. The ruling ends a long legal fight between cable companies (like Comcast, Time Warner and Cox) and independent Internet service providers, or ISPs (like Earthlink and Brand X). The case was about whether cable operators should be required to sell access to other service providers that want to send information (data, voice, video and audio) through their networks.

In a 6-3 decision led by Justice Clarence Thomas, the court overturned a federal court decision that would force cable companies to share their infrastructure with Internet service providers such as Brand X and EarthLink.

--Centre Media Values--

2005-06-27T13:34:00.000-04:00

--Centre Media Values--

In a powerful, wide-ranging post entitled "Rogue State," Digby comments on the broader implications of state-sponsored illegal behavior and the Italian authorities issuance of "...arrest warrants for 13 CIA agents accused of kidnapping terrorist suspects and rendering them to Egypt for 'interrogation'." This post was on Sunday, June 16 at: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/.

Due process is dead.

2005-06-27T12:04:00.000-04:00

Report: U.S. abusing material witness statute

Scores of Muslim Men Jailed Without Charge

Justice Department Misused Material Witness Law in Counterterrorism Efforts
Following the September 11 attacks, the Justice Department held the 70 men -- all but one Muslim -- under a narrow federal law that permits the arrest and brief detention of "material witnesses" who have important information about a crime, if they might otherwise flee to avoid testifying before a grand jury or in court. Although federal officials suspected the men of involvement in terrorism, it held them as material witnesses, not criminal suspects.
Almost half of the witnesses were never brought before a grand jury or court to testify. The U.S. government has apologized to 13 for wrongfully detaining them. Only a handful were ever charged with crimes related to terrorism.

“Five to six cars surrounded my car. The agents pulled out shotguns and told me to get out of the car or they will shoot me. They told me they were about to shoot me. … I asked what’s going on? I’ve been so helpful. But three guys told me to put my hands on the car, they patted me down and shackled me. I asked what am I arrested for? Am I charged with something? … I got no answer. They shoved me against the car and handcuffed me. … They didn’t tell me why I was arrested—they said they’d explain in the main office. They didn’t read me Miranda rights. … I got in the car. They were so disrespectful and so rude. They told me to ‘shut the fuck up.’”
—Mohdar Abdullah, a Yemeni national arrested as a material witness on September 21, 2001 in San Diego, California.

Hey "Go Fuck Yourself" Cheney, can we compare this to the Nazi's yet?

Rummy.

2005-06-26T21:40:00.000-04:00

Rumsfeld Rejects Outside Panel on Gitmo
A new independent investigation of abuse allegations at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, "doesn't make sense," Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Sunday.

Rumsfeld admits US army has been meeting Iraqi rebels
That insurgency could go on for any number of years. Insurgencies tend to go on five, six, eight, 10, 12 years."

Iraq insurgency could last a decade, admits Rumsfeld
His downbeat assessment, during a television interview, was in stark contrast to a claim at the end of May by the vice presiden, Dick Cheney, that the insurgency was "in its last throes".
Mr Rumsfeld said: "We're not going to win against the insurgency. The Iraqi people are going to win against the insurgency. That insurgency could go on for any number of years. Insurgencies tend to go on five, six, eight, 10, 12 years."

Rumsfeld Provides Context for Army Recruiting Challenge
"This Army is not broken," Rumsfeld said. "This is the finest Army on the face of the earth; it's the finest Army in the history of the world." The secretary made the remarks to George Stephanopoulos on the ABC News program "This Week."

Rumsfeld: No torture at Guantanamo Bay, “the model detention facility”
"It is a very transparent situation," Rumsfeld told Kelso. "I am really struck by the apparent lack of knowledge or ignorance that people are reflecting in their comments about Guantanamo Bay."

Rumsfeld Sued Over Torture
A lawsuit alleging that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is responsible for the prison torture scandal in Afghanistan and Iraq moved to federal court Wednesday against the wishes of government lawyers representing the Pentagon chief.

Losing the America we once knew

2005-06-26T11:19:00.000-04:00

Paul Krugman wrote an Editorial on June 10, 2005 that was an interesting read.

Since 1980 in particular, U.S. government policies have consistently favored the wealthy at the expense of working families - and under the current administration, that favoritism has become extreme and relentless. From tax cuts that favor the rich to bankruptcy "reform" that punishes the unlucky, almost every domestic policy seems intended to accelerate our march back to the robber baron era.

Undermining the Independence of Public Broadcasting

2005-06-25T13:31:00.000-04:00

Moyers says, "I think we're at a moment in American history that is unique. I think we are in danger of losing our democracy because of the domination, the monopoly of power being exercised by the huge economic interests, both directly and indirectly. In public broadcasting we need to get back to the revolutionary spirit of dissent and courage that brought us into existence in the first place, and this country does, too."

--Centre Media Values--

2005-06-25T02:10:00.000-04:00

--Centre Media Values--

From Vienna, Paul Krugman put it very succinctly yesterday in his New York Times OP ED, "The War President."

"...Leading the nation wrongfully into war strikes at the heart of democracy. It would have been an unprecedented abuse of power even if the war hadn't turned into a military and moral quagmire. And we won't be able to get out of that quagmire until we face up to the reality of how we got in."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/24/opinion/24

Partisanship is taking over CPB

2005-06-24T08:42:00.000-04:00

Ex-RNC head gets top public broadcast post

Neocons Lie About PBS...on PBS

At almost the same time the House was voting on the CPB funding Thursday, the corporation's board threw more fuel on that fire by announcing the appointment of former Republican Party co-chair Patricia S. Harrison as its new president and chief executive. Harrison had been opposed by PBS and NPR stations, liberal advocacy groups such as Common Cause and Democratic members of Congress.

NPR All Things Considered

Fire Tomlinson!

Check out Bob Somerby's Daily Howler

2005-06-24T05:14:00.000-04:00

The Daily Howler is a great read for insightful media and political criticism!

THE DEATH OF OUR PUBLIC INTELLIGENCE: Are humans actually smart enough to conduct a democracy? Socrates wondered at the dawn of the west—and he’d never seen Hannity & Colmes, a program which answers in the negative.

Independent World Television

2005-06-22T13:12:00.000-04:00

Independent World Television is building the world's first global independent news network. Online and on TV, IWTnews will deliver independent news and real debate from professional and citizen journalists -- without funding from governments, corporations or commercial advertising. Using the web to organize and raise funds across borders, IWTnews is building an international movement for democracy.

Read more...
\http ://www.iwtnews.com/

16 Senators call for Tomlinson's head

2005-06-21T19:17:00.000-04:00

RAWSTORY link

16 SENATORS URGE PRESIDENT TO CALL FOR REMOVAL OF PUBLIC BROADCASTING CHAIRMAN TOMLINSON / House GOP Slashes Funding of PBS, Tomlinson Doesn't Even Speak up to Defend CPB, Hires Lobbyists to Undermine Influence of Member Stations on CPB Board / 80% of Public Believes PBS is Fair and Balanced in Poll Hidden by Tomlinson

U.S. Senators Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and fourteen other Senators urged President George W. Bush to call for the removal of the Chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Kenneth Tomlinson. In a letter today, sixteen Senators stated that Mr. Tomlinson has spent a great deal of time and the public's money undermining public television in his new post and making the CPB weaker than before he took over the chairmanship. Public broadcasting, in particular the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) is an invaluable resource for our TV-watching public. Congress created this not-for-profit entity in 1967, and it has become one of the most relied upon sources of news and educational programs for all Americans, and especially their children.

The Senators wrote, We strongly disagree with your Administration's decision to appoint an individual to head a not-for-profit corporation such as public broadcasting who is actively undermining, under-funding, and ultimately undoing its mission.

Mr. Tomlinson has made a series of decisions that call into question his commitment to public television:
- He hid polls from the public that show that public support for PBS is around 80 percent of Americans believe that public television is fair and balanced;
- He has spent unnecessary funds to investigate individual news programs for bias;
- He adjusted programming to cut news programs because of perceived bias;
- He didnt speak out publicly against cuts to massive cuts to public television by the House Appropriations Committee;
- He hired expensive lobbyists to strategize about how to encourage senators to oppose a bill that would have allowed individual public television stations to have more representations on the board of the CPB; and
- He has recommended Patricia Harrison, a former Republican Party co-chair, to be the new CPB President.

The Republican leadership in the House has cut nearly $200 million for CPB's budget -- and has slashed the Ready to Learn shows such as Reading Rainbow and Sesame Street by $23 million in the House Appropriations Committee.

We urge you to immediately replace Mr. Tomlinson with an executive who takes his or her responsibility to the public television system seriously, not one who so seriously undermines the credibility and mission of public television, their letter concluded.

Senators who signed the letter are: Schumer, Lautenberg, Feinstein, Leahy, Stabenow, Nelson (FL), Durbin, Kennedy, Harkin, Corzine, Cantwell, Biden, Boxer, Mikulski, Wyden, and Lieberman.

Ricky (bigot boy) Santorum is losing popularity!

2005-06-21T06:19:00.000-04:00

He is just 7 spots away from the lowest approval rating of all 100 US senators! Still, this shows a lack of knowledge on the part of the people being surveyed. The fact that so many can still approve of the job he is doing can only reflect upon the fact that very few people even have a clue as to what he does! Are people aware that Santorum is into cuddling and kissing dead fetuses? What kind of FREAKSHOW brings a dead pre-mature baby home for the live kids to "cuddle and kiss". Seriously. Even though Ricky's "soft porn necrophillia" has been deemed acceptable by him, he is so bigoted (and so insecure in his own marriage) that he "feels threatened by consenting adults". I guess the fetus is less threatening to you, eh Ricky? The REAL slippery slope is allowing ignorant, fear mongering homophobes like Ricky to spew their bile from a position of power. Assholes like Santorum have no trouble spending our tax dollars illegaly for their own personal profiteering. I guess the reason people are not aware is that the media is not telling them. Well seeing is he is a least in bed with AccuWeather I guess we shouldn't be surprised, seems Ricky has no troubles prostituting himself out to the highest bidder. "Combined, Joel Myers and his brother, Barry Myers, AccuWeather's executive vice president, have donated more than $11,000 to Santorum and the Republican Party since 2003, according to FEC filings compiled by PoliticalMoneyLine, a campaign finance tracking group." I guess you find accu-weather as sexy as a dead baby, eh Ricky? Maybe you, Joel and Barry Myers can have a nice menage a trois rolling around in your money? Well, at least some people are waking up!

Oh yeah, Ricky Santorum reminds me a lot of Mengele