~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The NY Times----are they going to bring up the MoveOn.org online primary at any point in time?
They are quick to bring up right weblog activism (see William Safire's article about the Gray Davis recall campaign).
SAFIRE QUOTE: "If enough voters are egged on by TV advertising, talk-showboating and Weblog fury, the governor's recall will be on the ballot along with a separate list of potential successors."
All I see at the NY Times website is this AP article which includes a highly interesting and questionable quote:
"If I were a Democrat, I would be looking at this as something that's not helpful,'' said Curtis Gans, director of the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate. ``People have got to begin to have a longer term perspective than maneuvering for position six to eight months before the first real primary.''
I say: Why not?
WHY NOT?
We already have a Republican candidate for 2004.
Why pretend Democrats don't yet care about the candidate they think will do the best job of leading their nation?
Why do we wait until the last moment?
What is the fear all about, really?
You have to REALLY wonder why the New York Times is remiss in taking note of the MoveOn.org historic grassroots effort to involve the voting community via the internet. My opinion is that the NY Times is afraid of getting on the wrong side of history. Meanwhile, history rolls right past their noses, which are apparently firmly stuck up the asses of the powers-that-be. They lost their nerve and their professional intuition after 9-11.
The New York Times, along with a lot of other forms of corporate media, is fast on the road to historic irrelevance.
Meanwhile, on other websites, Joe Lieberman is WELL aware of the MoveOn.org primary....and is apparently worried.
His quote from this ridiculous article(from "Republicans for Sharpton"):
"Officials in Joe Lieberman’s campaign said they received several calls and e-mails Tuesday from supporters who got an error message after trying to cast electronic ballots. As it turns out, the system blocked out the blonde candidates as well.
"It's been problematic," said Sen. Lieberman "We've heard from dozens of supporters who have either signed up to get an e-mail and haven't gotten it or can't get online or can't get on the site."
Internet muse.
Daring, bold, never sold.
My daily weblog of politics, humor, philosophy...and a constant and nagging reminder of the existence of universal love....
Thursday, June 26, 2003
~~~~~~~~~~~~
HOWARD DEAN
Speech
June 25, 2003
Council on Foreign Relations
Washington DC
See text here.
HOWARD DEAN
Speech
June 25, 2003
Council on Foreign Relations
Washington DC
See text here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A compelling plea for rightists (too often blind Bush supporters)
to speak out against the FCC-facilitated BigMedia takeover of America's local press/radio/TV- -
Can rightists break the chain of blind partisanship and see what they stand to lose?
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/26/opinion/26SAFI.html
""There has to be a clear perception of public outrage," says Burr. And to move Bush and DeLay, that expression of snail mail and e-mail outrage must come from the right — from believers in strong local say about the means and content of communication, acting while there is still time."
A compelling plea for rightists (too often blind Bush supporters)
to speak out against the FCC-facilitated BigMedia takeover of America's local press/radio/TV- -
Can rightists break the chain of blind partisanship and see what they stand to lose?
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/26/opinion/26SAFI.html
""There has to be a clear perception of public outrage," says Burr. And to move Bush and DeLay, that expression of snail mail and e-mail outrage must come from the right — from believers in strong local say about the means and content of communication, acting while there is still time."
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear GOD!
This is downright catty...
"MEOWWWWWWW", hisses William Saletan, "MEOWWWWWWW!!"........
A prime example of Corporate Media in action...biased action!
ABSOLUTE HOWARD
"For months, I've been scratching my head over the Howard Dean problem...."
*Hey, kitty girl, if you scratch that dome of yours as hard as your scratching at Howard Dean, you're going to have one bloody scalp!*
This is a further indication that media is just a lame extension of the 2004 Bush campaign!
Dear GOD!
This is downright catty...
A prime example of Corporate Media in action...biased action!
ABSOLUTE HOWARD
"For months, I've been scratching my head over the Howard Dean problem...."
*Hey, kitty girl, if you scratch that dome of yours as hard as your scratching at Howard Dean, you're going to have one bloody scalp!*
This is a further indication that media is just a lame extension of the 2004 Bush campaign!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Judith Miller---What WERE you thinking?
When embedded journalism becomes incestuous between Military and journalist...it's an embedding indeed.
Embedded Reporter's Role In Army Unit's Actions Questioned by Military
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
"The April trip to Chalabi's headquarters took place "at Judy's {Judith Miller's} direction," one officer said...."
"This was totally out of their {MET Alpha's} lane, getting involved with human intelligence," said one military officer who, like several others interviewed, declined to be named because he is not an authorized spokesman. But, the officer said of Miller, "this woman came in with a plan. She was leading them. . . . She ended up almost hijacking the mission."
"Asked why Chalabi didn't simply call his official Pentagon liaison to turn over an important Iraqi, Sethna said they wanted to make sure that Sultan was transported quickly and safely and that he was "very surprised" when MET Alpha agreed to take the prisoner..."
***HMMMMMMM......this sounds like fodder for the National Enquirer...***
"Miller formed a friendship with MET Alpha's leader, Chief Warrant Officer Gonzales, and several officers said they were surprised when she participated in a Baghdad ceremony in which Gonzales was promoted. She pinned the rank to his uniform, an eyewitness said, and Gonzales thanked Miller for her contributions. Gonzales did not respond to a request for comment...."
Judith Miller---What WERE you thinking?
When embedded journalism becomes incestuous between Military and journalist...it's an embedding indeed.
Embedded Reporter's Role In Army Unit's Actions Questioned by Military
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
"The April trip to Chalabi's headquarters took place "at Judy's {Judith Miller's} direction," one officer said...."
"This was totally out of their {MET Alpha's} lane, getting involved with human intelligence," said one military officer who, like several others interviewed, declined to be named because he is not an authorized spokesman. But, the officer said of Miller, "this woman came in with a plan. She was leading them. . . . She ended up almost hijacking the mission."
"Asked why Chalabi didn't simply call his official Pentagon liaison to turn over an important Iraqi, Sethna said they wanted to make sure that Sultan was transported quickly and safely and that he was "very surprised" when MET Alpha agreed to take the prisoner..."
***HMMMMMMM......this sounds like fodder for the National Enquirer...***
"Miller formed a friendship with MET Alpha's leader, Chief Warrant Officer Gonzales, and several officers said they were surprised when she participated in a Baghdad ceremony in which Gonzales was promoted. She pinned the rank to his uniform, an eyewitness said, and Gonzales thanked Miller for her contributions. Gonzales did not respond to a request for comment...."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Norman Solomon- One of Our Most Gifted Political Writers
TILTING DEMOCRATS IN THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE
By Norman Solomon / Creators Syndicate
The corporate Democrats who greased Bill Clinton's path to the White House are now a bit worried. Their influence on the party's presidential nomination process has slipped. But the Democratic Leadership Council can count on plenty of assistance from mainstream news media.
For several years leading up to 1992, the DLC curried favor with high-profile political journalists as they repeated the mantra that the Democratic Party needed to be centrist. Co-founded by Clinton in the mid-1980s, the DLC emphasized catering to "middle class" Americans --
while the organization filled its coffers with funding from such non-middle-class bastions as the top echelons of corporate outfits like
Arco, Prudential-Bache, Dow Chemical, Georgia Pacific and Martin Marietta.
In a 1992 book, "Who Will Tell the People," political analyst William Greider noted that the Democratic Leadership Council's main objective was "an attack on the Democratic Party's core constituencies -- labor, schoolteachers, women's rights groups, peace and disarmament activists, the racial minorities and supporters of affirmative action." During the eight years that followed, President Clinton "moderately" shafted many of those constituencies.
Clinton proved to be a political survivor. But his presidency led to the destruction of Democratic majorities in both the House and
Senate.
Now, the Los Angeles Times reported in late June, "the centrist 'New Democrat' movement is struggling to maintain its influence in the
party as the 2004 presidential race accelerates." DLC stalwart Sen. Joe Lieberman is getting nowhere. Other DLC-friendly candidates, such as Sens. John Kerry and John Edwards, are hardly catching fire.
One of the key "New Democrats" is DLC favorite John Breaux, a senator from Louisiana who distinguished himself by trying to protect deregulation measures approved in early June by the Federal Communications Commission. Breaux unsuccessfully proposed amendments to help TV networks to further consolidate media ownership. His efforts were even too flagrantly corporate for many Republicans on the Senate Commerce Committee.
Despite its setbacks, the Democratic Leadership Council need not despair. Most of the nation's political journalists, including pro-Democrat pundits, insist that the party should not nominate someone too far "left" -- which usually means anybody who's appreciably more progressive than the DLC. That bias helps to account for the frequent mislabeling of Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor who has risen to the top tier of contenders for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination.
After seven years as governor, the Associated Press described Dean as "a moderate at best on social issues and a clear conservative on fiscal issues." The news service added: "This is, after all, the governor who has at times tried to cut benefits for the aged, blind and disabled, whose No. 1 priority is a balanced budget."
When Dean officially announced his presidential campaign on June 23, some news stories identified him with the left. It's a case of mistaken identity. "He's really a classic Rockefeller Republican -- a fiscal conservative and social liberal," according to University of Vermont political scientist Garrison Nelson.A recent memo by a pair of DLC honchos, Al From and Bruce Reed, linked the party's progressive-leaning activists with "elitist, interest-group liberalism." The salvo is laughable. It would be difficult to find any organization of Democrats more deserving of the "elitist, interest-group" tag than the DLC, which has long been funded by oil, chemical, insurance and military-contracting corporations -- and has served their interests.
As a fiscal conservative, Dean is aligned with the status quo of extreme inequities. That alignment was on display during a pair of June 22 appearances.
In an interview on NBC's "Meet the Press," Dean delivered a one-two punch against economic justice. He advocated raising the retirement age
for Social Security, and he called for slowing down the rate of increases for Medicare spending.
Later in the day, at a Rainbow/PUSH Coalition forum, Dean went out of his way to emphasize support for out-of-control military spending
after a rival candidate, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, said that "the only way we're really going to close the (digital) divide in this country is to
start cutting the Pentagon budget and put that money into education." Dean's response: "I don't agree with Dennis about cutting the Pentagon
budget when we're in the middle of a difficulty with terror attacks."
The next day, at his official campaign kickoff, Dean gave a 26-minute speech and didn't mention Iraq at all. It was a remarkable
performance from someone who has spent much of the last year pitching himself as some kind of anti-war candidate.
Dean is already sending a message to his announced supporters among peace and social-justice advocates: Thanks, suckers.
Usually, major-party candidates wait until they have a lock on the presidential nomination before diving to the center. Eager to avoid
being hammered by the national press corps for supposed liberalism, Dean hasn't bothered to wait.
My own comment: Howard Dean cannot afford to wait. If he is going to "trip" the media system, he must act as quickly as they do. We live in an ADHD-induced media atmosphere. Americans seem to follow the flow of the never-ending influx of media babble..the loud and constant ramblings of the "here and now" ...and they tend to forget what they heard just the day before. In this Information Age, a politician must adjust to the known public tendency to be fickle (in a media-infuence sense). We must learn to be open to affording our Democratic candidates some level of forgiveness for the necessity to fight the media flow.....for it must be done until the media changes..and I don't see that happening anytime soon!
We need to understand that, without giving up important democratic principles, candidates like Howard Dean must appeal to more than the idealists
in order to win the 2004 election. Taking the office from its unrightful owner George Bush is the goal. We should not forget that for a moment!
Other particularly important and relevant writings from Norman Solomon:
http://www.juicycerebellum.com/solomon027.htm
http://www.mediamonitors.net/solomon19.html
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1018-07.htm
A collection of Norman Solomon:
http://www.alternet.org/alsoby.html?Author=2874
TILTING DEMOCRATS IN THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE
By Norman Solomon / Creators Syndicate
The corporate Democrats who greased Bill Clinton's path to the White House are now a bit worried. Their influence on the party's presidential nomination process has slipped. But the Democratic Leadership Council can count on plenty of assistance from mainstream news media.
For several years leading up to 1992, the DLC curried favor with high-profile political journalists as they repeated the mantra that the Democratic Party needed to be centrist. Co-founded by Clinton in the mid-1980s, the DLC emphasized catering to "middle class" Americans --
while the organization filled its coffers with funding from such non-middle-class bastions as the top echelons of corporate outfits like
Arco, Prudential-Bache, Dow Chemical, Georgia Pacific and Martin Marietta.
In a 1992 book, "Who Will Tell the People," political analyst William Greider noted that the Democratic Leadership Council's main objective was "an attack on the Democratic Party's core constituencies -- labor, schoolteachers, women's rights groups, peace and disarmament activists, the racial minorities and supporters of affirmative action." During the eight years that followed, President Clinton "moderately" shafted many of those constituencies.
Clinton proved to be a political survivor. But his presidency led to the destruction of Democratic majorities in both the House and
Senate.
Now, the Los Angeles Times reported in late June, "the centrist 'New Democrat' movement is struggling to maintain its influence in the
party as the 2004 presidential race accelerates." DLC stalwart Sen. Joe Lieberman is getting nowhere. Other DLC-friendly candidates, such as Sens. John Kerry and John Edwards, are hardly catching fire.
One of the key "New Democrats" is DLC favorite John Breaux, a senator from Louisiana who distinguished himself by trying to protect deregulation measures approved in early June by the Federal Communications Commission. Breaux unsuccessfully proposed amendments to help TV networks to further consolidate media ownership. His efforts were even too flagrantly corporate for many Republicans on the Senate Commerce Committee.
Despite its setbacks, the Democratic Leadership Council need not despair. Most of the nation's political journalists, including pro-Democrat pundits, insist that the party should not nominate someone too far "left" -- which usually means anybody who's appreciably more progressive than the DLC. That bias helps to account for the frequent mislabeling of Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor who has risen to the top tier of contenders for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination.
After seven years as governor, the Associated Press described Dean as "a moderate at best on social issues and a clear conservative on fiscal issues." The news service added: "This is, after all, the governor who has at times tried to cut benefits for the aged, blind and disabled, whose No. 1 priority is a balanced budget."
When Dean officially announced his presidential campaign on June 23, some news stories identified him with the left. It's a case of mistaken identity. "He's really a classic Rockefeller Republican -- a fiscal conservative and social liberal," according to University of Vermont political scientist Garrison Nelson.A recent memo by a pair of DLC honchos, Al From and Bruce Reed, linked the party's progressive-leaning activists with "elitist, interest-group liberalism." The salvo is laughable. It would be difficult to find any organization of Democrats more deserving of the "elitist, interest-group" tag than the DLC, which has long been funded by oil, chemical, insurance and military-contracting corporations -- and has served their interests.
As a fiscal conservative, Dean is aligned with the status quo of extreme inequities. That alignment was on display during a pair of June 22 appearances.
In an interview on NBC's "Meet the Press," Dean delivered a one-two punch against economic justice. He advocated raising the retirement age
for Social Security, and he called for slowing down the rate of increases for Medicare spending.
Later in the day, at a Rainbow/PUSH Coalition forum, Dean went out of his way to emphasize support for out-of-control military spending
after a rival candidate, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, said that "the only way we're really going to close the (digital) divide in this country is to
start cutting the Pentagon budget and put that money into education." Dean's response: "I don't agree with Dennis about cutting the Pentagon
budget when we're in the middle of a difficulty with terror attacks."
The next day, at his official campaign kickoff, Dean gave a 26-minute speech and didn't mention Iraq at all. It was a remarkable
performance from someone who has spent much of the last year pitching himself as some kind of anti-war candidate.
Dean is already sending a message to his announced supporters among peace and social-justice advocates: Thanks, suckers.
Usually, major-party candidates wait until they have a lock on the presidential nomination before diving to the center. Eager to avoid
being hammered by the national press corps for supposed liberalism, Dean hasn't bothered to wait.
My own comment: Howard Dean cannot afford to wait. If he is going to "trip" the media system, he must act as quickly as they do. We live in an ADHD-induced media atmosphere. Americans seem to follow the flow of the never-ending influx of media babble..the loud and constant ramblings of the "here and now" ...and they tend to forget what they heard just the day before. In this Information Age, a politician must adjust to the known public tendency to be fickle (in a media-infuence sense). We must learn to be open to affording our Democratic candidates some level of forgiveness for the necessity to fight the media flow.....for it must be done until the media changes..and I don't see that happening anytime soon!
We need to understand that, without giving up important democratic principles, candidates like Howard Dean must appeal to more than the idealists
in order to win the 2004 election. Taking the office from its unrightful owner George Bush is the goal. We should not forget that for a moment!
Other particularly important and relevant writings from Norman Solomon:
http://www.juicycerebellum.com/solomon027.htm
http://www.mediamonitors.net/solomon19.html
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1018-07.htm
A collection of Norman Solomon:
http://www.alternet.org/alsoby.html?Author=2874
Crossroads
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The United States is at a crossroads....
The choice is so big....
Bush & the End of Reason
By Nat Parry
Bush & the End of Reason
By Nat Parry
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)