Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world [...]]]> The outright lies and smears mislead Americans in ways that are detrimental to our nation. They are obliged to report the truth. The FCC should take action to promote fair and balanced reporting by news organizations.

1 Comments

• At July 23, 2010, Martin Hash martinhash.com wrote:

  Fox News is not owned by Americans. It's mostly owned and controlled by Rupert Murdoch (Australian) and Prince Alwaleed bin Talal al-Saud (Saudi Arabia), who is reported to have input on the spin of stories. That makes what they report propaganda - not news. The BBC doesn't pretend to be American. I think there is a legitimate fraud suit here.

Online TV Shows by Ustream

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

At April 25, 2010, Martin Hash martinhash.com wrote:

This kind of thing is certainly not unique [...]]]> And Congress should admit their mistake and restore funding to Acorn.  Or does Fox News propaganda trump Congressional power?

1 Comments

• At April 25, 2010, Martin Hash martinhash.com wrote:

  This kind of thing is certainly not unique to Republicans. You have links on this website to similarly vile and uncredible spokesmen. I would not engage in it, but as Maddow says, "it works."

The Health Care Hindenburg Has Landed Hedges

The Final Health Care Vote and What it Really Means Reich

Am I glad the health care insurance reform bill passed?  Yes.  Do I think it will solve our health care issues?  Not in its [...]]]> James Cameron hits back at man who said he was ‘running for antichrist’ Cameron

The Health Care Hindenburg Has Landed Hedges

The Final Health Care Vote and What it Really Means Reich

Am I glad the health care insurance reform bill passed?  Yes.  Do I think it will solve our health care issues?  Not in its present form.  Why does being an asshole pay so well?  Don’t know.

Yesterday, Cameron returned the compliment. “Glenn Beck is a fucking asshole,” he said. “I’ve met him. He called me the antichrist, and not about Avatar. He hadn’t even seen Avatar yet. I don’t know if he has seen it.

“He’s dangerous because his ideas are poisonous,” Cameron added. “I couldn’t believe when he was on CNN. I thought, what [...]]]> James Cameron on Glenn Beck:

Good for you James Cameron and Twentieth Century Fox.  Thanks for the Beck tongue-lashing and the trees.

… A multiyear contract deal with Fox News.  Bet John McCain is jealous.

“I am thrilled to be joining the great talent and management team at Fox News,” Palin said in a statement posted on the network’s Web site. “It’s wonderful to be part of a place that so values fair and balanced news.”

Fox said that according to [...]]]>

… A multiyear contract deal with Fox News.  Bet John McCain is jealous.

Palin captivating “both sides of the political spectrum” gives a new and very special meaning to “fair and balanced news”.  But then Fox News being fair and balanced is right up there with “Saddam was behind the 9/11 attack” and “the dog ate my homework”.

Perhaps this career move will help Sarah in her 2012 run for the Presidency.  Let’s hope so.  Never watched a Fox Newscast (except for youtube clips), so it really doesn’t matter…

www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQGrQPZMLK8

Here are my thoughts – for what they are worth:

Newspapers are dead.  I mean the kind that get ink on your hands.  How do I know newspapers are dead?  Because I started reading newspapers when I was 9 years old.  I loved the NY Herald Tribune.   Unfortunately The Herald shut down a couple of years later and I was forced to become a New York Times reader which was much more dry [...]]]>

Newspapers are dead.  I mean the kind that get ink on your hands.  How do I know newspapers are dead?  Because I started reading newspapers when I was 9 years old.  I loved the NY Herald Tribune.   Unfortunately The Herald shut down a couple of years later and I was forced to become a New York Times reader which was much more dry and boring.  But I continued to read newspaper(s) every day for 40 years.  And I haven’t read a (newsprint) newspaper for the last 5 years.  That is why I know they are dead.  They are going the way of music CDs.  Remember them?

Rob Kall over on Huffpo has a great article about how the Feds could design a bailout plan for journalists rather than newspapers and generate a whole new paradigm for the news business and perhaps our economy in general.  According to Kall, rather than the top-down approach being used to bailout banks and car-makers, the Feds should take lessons from Google and other new, inventive companies.  Use a bottom-up approach to revive the news business:

The new American business model, the one that has proven to be fabulously successful even in these tough times, is based on bottom-up approaches. Google, Amazon, Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, to name a few, are all based on inviting the crowd into the business mix. Transparency is a big part of the new corporation and so is open sourcing of information — that means giving things away free.

I’m a firm believer that a strong media, and that means strong investigative journalism, is essential for democracy and efficient operation of both government and corporations. Investigative journalism digs and exposes. That’s an incredibly valuable function. It’s so valuable, it’s worth investing in … with the expectation of solid returns on that investment.

I say, instead of taking a top down approach and giving huge chunks of money to a handful of failing newspapers, (the same approach that was not very effective, in the long run, in dealing with the bank liquidity crisis), have government fund journalism and journalists. Take a bottom up approach and give the money to tens of thousands of journalists — writers and photographers and videographers. That will take huge financial pressure off the newspapers, give them a lot more content they can use, and help expand the growing blogosphere, where content is usually free and millions of people are operating small businesses with the potential to grow. Small business is where the most job creation has always flourished and small businesses are not too big to die.

Part of the reason the newspaper business is in trouble (besides the internet effect) is the same reason the banks are in trouble.  When you have monopolization of an industry, inevitably competition and innovation decline.  Without competition and innovation, it is difficult to put out a good product or service over time.  The organization gets lazy and uncreative since there is no imperative to be better than the competitor down the street.

The modern day mega-corporations are the entities that are too large to ultimately NOT fail.  If our government does not end up breaking them up under anti-trust laws, they will eventually fall from their own bureaucratic inefficiencies anyway.  The latter result though will probably cause much more harm to “we the people” than the former.

So let’s start breaking up the “too big to fail” oligopolies before these babies get thrown out with the bathwater.  And let’s start bailing out the the bottom rather than the top and create a new business climate that rewards innovation rather than monopolization.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Creating the Desire for News (conversationagent.com)

5 Comments

• At October 8, 2009, LewWaters rightinaleftworld.blogspot.com wrote:

  Believe it or not, John, I mostly agree with your thoughts here.

  Okay, when you get up off the floor we can continue ;-)

  Seriously, the print media especially should be more localized and actually cover news, both sides if political without favor to either, except maybe editorials.

  Issues of importance to our community remain ignored while we read of sensationalized accounts of hearings we have no control over.

  For example, did the Columbian cover Brian Baird's recent no vote on a bill that included funding for two Chehalis River Basin flood control projects within the 3rd Congressional District because he didn't have time to read them? I don't subscribe any longer, but i didn't see anything in the online site.

  While he lists it as taking a stand on his 72-hour proposal, many wonder why he didn't take the stand on the Stimulus Bail-Out Bill or Cap & Trade, which he also did not read and were for Billions of more dollars.

  Democrat or Republcian and however we may feel about his action, shouldn't readers within the southern portion of the 3rd District have the opportunity to know about this too, with the election so close?

• At October 10, 2009, John democracyforvancouver.org wrote:

  Lew,

  Thanks for agreeing with me on this.

  I remember a time when government actually tried at least to help people. It seems ever since greed became good and taxes became bad, our government has become, as Reagan liked to say, "the problem".

• At October 10, 2009, Lew Waters rightinaleftworld.blogspot.com wrote:

  We can't and don't need to disagree on everything, John. We can have our differences, but in the end, we are both Americans who want only what is best for all of us.

  Your words point out what many others don't fully realize about most conservatives. We are not anti-government or anti-taxes, just where they become excessive to the point of doing harm.

  The greed seems to be shared across the spectrum also. Instead of seeking balance and what is best for the country, partisanship gets in the way and and individuals seem to do more for personal wealth than good for the country. Examples, Randy 'Duke' Cunningham and William Jefferson.

  And then there are those like Michael Moore, who readily condemns capitalism, but draws million of dollars doing it.

  We will continue to disagree on many things, mostly how to achieve a shared goal, but where we can agree, we will mutually state so.

• At October 10, 2009, John democracyforvancouver.org wrote:

  Since you brought him up, I especially agree with the last line of this quote below from a Michael Moore piece yesterday. Moore earns millions of dollars and also tries to do good in the world. There are many others I can think of that earn millions of dollars and do great harm in the world. Bet he would also favor a tax increase on the wealthy (himself). I have not seen Moore's latest documentary, but I would guess he still favors capitalism, just not the unregulated, "robber baron" type of capitalism which has been prevalent since the baby boomers came of age

  We are weary, weary of war. The trillions that will have gone to these two wars have helped to bankrupt us as a nation -- financially and morally. To think of all the good we could have done with all that money! Two months of the War in Iraq would pay for all the wells that need to be dug in the Third World for drinking water! Obama is moving too slow for most of us -- but he needs to know we are with him and we stand beside him as he attempts to turn eight years of sheer madness around. Who could do that in nine months? Superman? Thor? Mitch McConnell?

  Instead of waiting to see what the president is going to do, we all need to be pro-active and push the agenda that we want to see enacted. What keeps us from forming the same local groups we put together to get out the vote last November? C'mon! We're the majority now -- the majority by a significant margin! We call the shots -- and we need to tell this wimpy Congress to get busy and do what we say -- or else.

  All I ask of those who voted for Obama is to not pile on him too quickly. Yes, make your voice heard (his phone number is 202-456-1414). But don't abandon the best hope we've had in our lifetime for change. And for God's sake, don't head to bummerville if he says or does something we don't like. Do you ever see Republicans behave that way? I mean, the Right had 20 years of Republican presidents and they still couldn't get prayer in the public schools, or outlaw abortion, or initiate a flat tax or put our Social Security into the stock market. They did a lot of damage, no doubt about that, but on the key issues that the Christian Right fought for, they came up nearly empty handed. No wonder they've been driven crazy lately. They'll never have it as good again as they've had it since Reagan took office.

  But -- do you ever see them looking all gloomy and defeated? No! They keep on fighting! Every day. Our side? At the first sign of wavering, we just pack up our toys and go home.

  So, at least for this weekend, let us celebrate what people elsewhere are celebrating -- that America now has a sane and smart man in the White House, a man who truly wants a world at peace for his two daughters.

  Many, for the past couple days (yes, myself included), have grumbled, "What has he done to earn this prize?" How 'bout this:

  The simple fact that he was elected was reason enough for him to be the recipient of this year's Nobel Peace Prize.

  I have tried very hard to not be too critical of Obama, there are enough of us already doing that. And he also has worked tirelessly to advance his agenda against a media noise machine that is mostly out to help him fail. It is still a wonderful experience to be able to watch our President without turning him off after 60 seconds in anger, disgust and/or disappointment. Nixon's televised talks to the nation were great and important even if you didn't agree with him. So it is also with President Obama.

  Great presidents are not great the minute they step into the Oval Office. They rise up to the task that is handed to them over time.

• At October 10, 2009, Lew Waters rightinaleftworld.blogspot.com wrote:

  John, I don't know just what "good" Michael Moore has done with his faux documentaries and amassed wealth, often twisting the truth, but I'll take your word that he has done some, if you say so.

  To me, someone of wealth doing good would be like former Price Is Right Host, Bob Barker, giving $3 Million of his money to help fund a new hospital for our wounded recently did.

  Then again, money isn't always the only thing people can do that is good.

  I would like to ask you about one thing in your words I find troubling, "I have tried very hard to not be too critical of Obama."

  Why? We were often critical of President Bush as we should be when they need criticized. Obama is no different.

  The simple fact of being elected is not proper for awarding the Nobel Prize, as that is not the requirements laid out by Alfred Nobel in his will.

  Most troubling to me from attitudes as that coming from European nations, is all the fuss over his race. When do they elect a Black person to their governments?

  I am especially bothered that it has been nearly a month and a half since General McChrystal requested reinforcements for Afghanistan, the war Obama himself says "we must not lose," and no decisions has been made.

  In the mean time we have Troops fighting with morale declining rapidly and Obama sending out indicators of including the Taliban in going after Al Qaeda. Does he not know that it was the Taliban who allowed Al Qaeda to operate and train from Afghanistan in the first place?

  Since McChrystal made his request over 50 Troops have died. He claimed six months ago he had a strategy for winning in Afghanistan that was being implemented then. And now, he says he must review that before deciding?

  You also said, "media noise machine that is mostly out to help him fail."

  You're going to have to show me that as all I see is a media fawning all over him.

  You also said, "Great presidents are not great the minute they step into the Oval Office. They rise up to the task that is handed to them over time."

  Actually, it is history that makes one a great, good, mediocre or poor president.

  I know you disagree, but Bush did rise up where others did not and took the fight back to the terrorists after attacking us over 3 decades. He took bold stands and did not waver under public pressure, which was often whipped up by the very ones demanding he do something after 911.

  No, he will not be judged as a great president, but I am fully confident that after we are gone, historians will look back and see just what he was handed and how he handled it and will judge him a lot more fairly than we do today.

  Likewise with Obama. But, if doesn't do more than just make speeches and soon, he runs the risk of being down at the level of Jimmy Carter.

  The worst thing the leadership of your party is doing is trying to paint any disagreement with him as "racist." The term is getting so over used it is losing its meaning and I fear that true racism will end up being ignored in the days ahead.

  Sorry, but I don't see Obama rising to any task just yet. I hope he does soon, for the sake of our country.

Just to give you some perspective:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIb2LBo-LqY

The Wall Street Journal (a paper btw I stopped reading in the 1990′s because of its horrible [...]]]> It is nice to see mainstream media calling out a Republican politician on the faux criticism of President Obama’s speech today to school children. David Sirota is quite outraged by this and the Van Jones fiasco as we all should be.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIb2LBo-LqY

The Wall Street Journal (a paper btw I stopped reading in the 1990′s because of its horrible coverage of a White House indiscretion) says this about David Sirota today:

Mr. Sirota is speaking for many on the movement left who believe they helped to elect Mr. Obama and therefore deserve seats at the inner table of power. They are increasingly frustrated because they are discovering that Mr. Obama will happily employ “movement progressives,” but only so long as their real views and motivations aren’t widely known or understood. How bitter it must be to discover that the Fox News Channel’s Glenn Beck, who drove the debate about Mr. Jones, counts for more at this White House than Mr. Sirota.

And David Sirota goes on to say this about the Wall Street Journal editorial:

The Journal is absolutely, and unfortunately, correct -- right now, today’s White House officials answer more to Glenn Beck, Blue Dogs and Republicans than it does to progressive members of Congress and the progressive base of the Democratic Party that got them into the White House in the first place. You can see that in the negotiations over health care and climate change. You can see that in the plans to escalate the war in Afghanistan at the urging of people like Karl Rove, and the refusal to stop Wall Street bailouts and push real Wall Street reform. You can see that even in who the president opts to give exclusive interviews to. You can, in short, see it everywhere.

While I disagree with Mr. Sirota’s assertion that the progressive base played such a pivotal role in the President’s election, I do agree with David’s criticism of the current administration.  The President should have stood up for Van Jones rather than cut him loose.  He should have not revised his lesson plan for the school children and explained better to the public his intentions.

President Obama, you must stop trying to appease the political terrorists on the Right and start governing from the gut.  You need to take a lesson from dubya.  Don’t listen to anyone but what that voice in your head is telling you (not to be confused with dubya’s little voice).  Don’t do damage control, rather stand up for your values.  Let others criticize you and learn from that but do not cave into them as a result.  Mr. President, you know VERY well how to say the right words.  Now is the time you must practice what you preach.  Be bold.

“Hell is full of good intentions…” Bernard of Clairvaux

Image via Wikipedia

3 Comments

• At September 8, 2009, John democracyforvancouver.org wrote:

  There are still some Republicans worthy of respect and forgiveness. But mostly I agree with this letter and wish our President would heed the advice.

  Pass Along this Open Letter to the Republican Party

  An Open Letter to the Republican Party

  Sam Mossler

  Dear Republican Party,

  Sometimes when I am trying very hard to make a point and I feel that is is being missed I will, being human, go to great lengths to insure that my point is made. Often, in going to these great lengths I ultimately lose sight of the point I was trying to make and am focused instead on being sure that it is noted that I am making a point. Acknowledging that this is a common propensity ‘mongst mouth-breathers I am almost moved to forgive you for the last nine months. I, unlike many, relish the opportunity to forgive. I savor the forgiveness process. It would be far more comfortable for me, being who I am, to say:

  “Well, they have a right to disagree. The dissonant cacophony of differing views is, as it always has been, the stirring composition played by our proud American orchestra for the last two hundred and thirty three years. These Republicans, who have always entranced me with their endlessly complex moral paradoxes, like pushing to have their Judeo-Christian symbology included in public works but failing to absorb the message of the sermon on the mount, may hold views that I find both confusing and objectionable. But, dagnammit, it is their right. And I enjoy a healthy debate, so God love ‘em. And, hey, we all have the same desired outcome in mind, despite our different theories regarding how to reach it, right? Right? I mean, ultimately we, republican, democrat, and otherwise, only seek to continue building a civilization that is more enlightened and closer to our conception of God than the civilizations that have come before us. So God love the Republican and his Free Market Poop on Your Neighbor But Praise Jesus approach to social evolution. It may not be a logical plan, or one that I agree with but thank you for your input. I love you.”

  This, in so many words, was the mantra that has gotten me through to this point. It has allowed a love, sometimes conflicted but always sincere, for my conservative countrymen. And it has felt very good, this love, and has allowed to me to feel like a citizen of my own country for good or for better. But, Republicans, I feel that I have not been afforded the same respect. That, in fact, is putting it very lightly. Where you used to calmly illustrate your objections to social programs and produce charts that show how gdp's thrive when the market is bullish or bearish or what-have-you, suggest that our quaint leftist notions were naive and unrealistic, and chuckle over lunch at our idealistic foibles, you now have taken far more malevolent tacts. You have offered the American people a series of enormously flawed public figures and when we failed to glom onto your ham handed, under read, under educated, under curious, under everything deer hunters, dense pundits, flim flam men, and former CEOs ...when we rejected them you proceeded to damage, maliciously, a beautiful momentum. Something that, for a change, seemed pure and reasonable. Something that might have allowed us to rise above China and India, close on our heels, and show them that American right-wiseness wins out over the exploitation of a country's most vital national resource: people. But, failing to muster any honest data to counter this momentum and failing to produce any non-troglodyte to champion your ambiguous cause, you have created a topsy turvy world wherein suddenly altruism is socialism, ambition, when not profitable, is unpatriotic aggression, beauty is ugly, god is dead, and Obama is Hitler.

  You are responsible, Republican party, though you may claim to be merely an old man behind a curtain. You are responsible for smothering our soul, for stifling our progress, delimiting human evolution, and cock blocking democracy. There is no forgiving you. Because you have moved from being ideological adversaries to destructive, malicious, mean spirited assholes. You have taken a collective national commitment to progress and sent it right off a cliff with empty promises of some goddamn tea party. And you've duped the dumbest twenty percent of America into thinking that they are fighting for a brighter tomorrow when, in reality, they are fighting to remain in shackles, sick, fat, and stupid, just as, it seems, you would like them to be. And sadly, twenty percent seems to be enough because dumb people yell the loudest.

  So, Republican Party, as you have abandoned the guidelines of polite debate and constructed a club house from discarded outhouses. As you have completely dismissed any urge for honesty or sincere investigation or reading or thinking or considering. As you have shrunken your vocabulary to that of a WWF announcer. As you have ended any intellectual curiosity I had about your views or any delusions I had that you are in possession of any measure of humanity whatsoever. As your brainless, brainwashed identity has become too submerged in the muck of pure idiocy to even bother debating you anymore, I heretofore cast you off to the frozen foods aisle of the Super Wal-Mart in my mind. You are dead to me. Fuck off.

  Yours Truly,

  Sam Mossler

• At September 8, 2009, Rove Lies: Obama Is Encouraging Students To Write To Him Personally For ‘Political Utility’ | linkthe.com wrote:

  [...] Republicans Need to be Careful What They Say (democracyforvancouver.org) [...]

• At September 9, 2009, Steve Zemke majorityrules.org wrote:

  Electing Obama was just one step in changing what was wrong. To be effective progressives must be active for the long term. The campaign did not end with Obama's election. The campaign goes on year after year. You need to be engaged for the long term.

  If you are not communicating your concerns on a regular basis to your elected officials, your concerns are easily drowned out by those who are.

And then again some people make up their own vitriol without anyone’s help:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-Rd2d-7eEw

And with “newscasters” like this, is it any wonder people are confused?

[...]]]> It is amazing the power of TV to make people stupid especially with stooges like Glenn Beck around:

And then again some people make up their own vitriol without anyone’s help:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-Rd2d-7eEw

And with “newscasters” like this, is it any wonder people are confused?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjBA5H4RBHA

Frank Rich has an Op-Ed in the New York Times today worth a read about Cronkite and why he was so admired.  Today’s mainstream lapdog news people can learn from him:

What matters about Cronkite is that he knew when to stop being reassuring Uncle Walter and to challenge those who betrayed his audience’s trust. He had the guts to confront [...]]]>

Frank Rich has an Op-Ed in the New York Times today worth a read about Cronkite and why he was so admired.  Today’s mainstream lapdog news people can learn from him:

Even though Cronkite was an archetype of the establishment at the time, he had the courage to speak out against the war when he realized it was wrong:

And Cronkite was not afraid to speak out against a criminal Presidency when no one else in the upper echelon of the media dared to do so:

Where is our Walter Cronkite today? Who is effectively speaking truth to power in our media? More importantly, who is speaking out in the media today with the trust and respect of a large enough audience to make positive lasting changes?  Instead we get Limbaugh, Coulter, Beck, O’Reilly, et al informing us the way it is not today.  We need more people like Walter who will tell us the way it is and that will help us change it.

1 Comments

• At August 2, 2009, A Cronkite Moment | linkthe.com wrote:

  [...] This Is The Way It Was And Is Not Today (democracyforvancouver.org) [...]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkrABAfX2kI

And That’s the Way It Was

At July 18, 2009, Angie in WA State dailykos.com wrote:

I remember Richard Nixon, Watergate, the Apollo 11 moon landing - and all because of Walter Cronkite.

The guy simply reported the news. He didn't pick sides, unless the problem was so apparent and vast (like his bit after the Tet Offensive, wherein he stated that the US could not now win in Vietnam, and thereby helped to start the end of the War). He just told us what was happening, to whom and where.

I do enjoy Keith Olbermann, and respect Rachel Maddow greatly, but they are relatively young (in news broadcasting) compared to Mr. Cronkite.

Hopefully, as they (and other younger reporters and tele-journalists) mature, and so does their audience, they will help to fill the void he leaves in the american news landscape.

At July 19, 2009, John democracyforvancouver.org wrote:

For many news people today, the distinction between fact and opinion has become so blurred as to be unrecognizable. And when people lie often enough, they end up believing their own alterations and twisting of the facts. Unfortunately we as consumers of news really do not want the news. We want something that is sensationalized, fictionalized and/or prejudiced. And what we get is often propaganda with a hidden agenda.

It should be a law that whenever a provider of the "news" states something other than a fact that is properly sourced, they inform the public that they are not reporting a fact but an opinion, theory, construct, assumption, etc.

And we should have coursework in the schools on how to decipher the messages in the media and how to tell fact from fiction. :star: Otherwise we as a country will continue to be brainwashed into supporting things that are not in our interest and ignoring things that are important and require our attention.