Increasing Corporate Domination of the Media Increases Free Speech

Also, Black is White. You see, President Bush's FCC recently created rules that make it easier for the largest Media Corporations to control the market even more. Some Liberals and some Conservatives oppose the idea, and have introduced legislation to stop it. How are the corporate hounds going to stop this; well, Congressman Maurice Hinchey (the extrememly powerful congressperson you've never heard of), has suggested they also might bring back the fairness doctrine.

Now there is no legislative connection between Congressperson Hinchey's suggestion of bringing back the fairness doctrine and the movement to limit corporate ownership; but what does that matter? Rush Limbaugh and the Wall Street Editorial Page have lept into action. Rush Limbaugh's piece is very long and hard to follow; always a sign he's hiding something.

The Fairness Doctrine states that you have to balance viewpoints on the radio and TV. One interpretation is that a radio station would have to pay a liberal to do a failing show in order to counterbalance Rush's three hour; and in effect he'd be off the air. So if I were Limbaugh, I'd be fighting this too. But once again, there is no direct connection between the move to overturn the FCC's decision to allow greater Media Domination and concerns over the Fairness Doctrine. So you can safely oppose having more media control in fewer hands, while also opposing the attempt to bring back the fairness doctrine.

Pyrrhic Victory

Jay Bryant writes today comparing Howard Dean to Barry Goldwater; it's been done before, but he's writing from the right. Barry Goldwater lost the presidency to Johnson in 64, but the ideals his campaign championed returned in the Reagan Presidency and now in the Bush Presidency 2 (Electric Bugaloo). So, Bryant opines, perhaps a Dean victory would give the Presidency to George Bush, but would bring back the Democratic Party.

Bryant assumes that Dean can't win; which I'm not sure is exactly true. He also assumes Dean will get the nomination; again an assumption. It's too early to tell, and if Clark comes into the race that could change the dynamic significantly. He also has bought into the media's description of Dean as the Liberal of the race, when, in fact, Dean is a Centrist Liberal. (Dean doesn't help this impression by suggesting that all foriegn countries will now be held to American Labor Standards. But his position is a bit more nuanced than reported in the media (big surprise)). Anyway I guess we will have to see what happens down the road; as with most things.

Good Article on September 11th

It's about what we know and what we think we know about that awful day. Check it out.

Two Years Later

This is the first September 11th I've written on for this blog; although it seems like it's been a heap long time since I started this thing, it was really only since late October, 2002.

The day of September 11, 2001, was much like today. I had a ton of stuff I was working on to get ready for a big meeting next week. I stayed in my office focused on the task at hand. I came out at 10:30 or so, and saw that the TV had been moved into the lobby. I couldn't figure out why; and even when told I didn't believe it. Except then I did believe it.

I was angry against the people who did this for weeks; and when I think about it, I still am. But I quickly became angry at Conservatives as well. They were and are doing the same things they are doing now; specifically telling me that as a Democrat I now have a duty to support President Bush and the Republican party no matter what they do. This trope showed up within a few days from Rush Limbaugh and others. It was predictable, but sad.

Anyway don't know I'll post a lot today; looks like most of the other articles out there are retrospectives as well, and it's harder to be funny about this situation.

Your Weekly Rush

Well, it's no surprise that, in Rush's opinion, liberals are scurvy dogs who should be sent to Davy Jones locker as soon as possible. By questioning this war in Iraq, they are showing that they like terror, and don't want to fight it. "It's silly to look at this as a mistake or to make the irrelevant point that we could have avoided dealing with Saddam. Yet a portion of the left believes just that because they do not believe in America or in our greatness. Instead they believe America and its military are the opposite of the last best hope of mankind."

Yep, we have invade Iraq; there's no question about that. And so we must support staying there. Questioning the lies the Bush administration told us to get us in Iraq is not only silly, it's a sign that we hate America. I really don't know what to write about this. Is Rush really so warped that he can't see any disagreement with the President? =

For the record I love my country and I want to see justice brought to those people murdered 3,000 two years ago tomorrow. None of the hi-jackers were Iraqi and there is no proof whatsoever of Iraqi complicity in September 11. So why are we there? Oh, the weapons of mass distruction that we haven't found and may not find. And the chance to remake the Middle East. Now that is a practical plan; but we are already turning tail and running. Can't let President Bush's War interfere with the tax cut.

Here's the pisser. I understand to a certain extent where Rush is coming from in his suggestions for the middle east. I disagree with him; but I understand that he has a right to his opinion; and that opinion may very well be coming from a love of his country. But Rush and a growing segment of the Conservative movement will not return the favor. I think we made a foolish move entering Iraq; what is there about holding that opinion that lets Rush automatically label me an America-hater or unpatriotic? Nothing and everyone knows it. It's just one of those big lies that they are getting away with.

Ben Shapiro, Wise Man

Not content with being a Boy Prognosticator, Ben has taken on the duties of a wise man, by relating the 6 great lessons he learned from September 11th.

His first lesson is that our enemy is Islamic Fundamentalism. We should be ready to search Islamic Men at all times, and they should submit happily to the extra scrutiny.

His second lesson is, stepping away from his colleagues in the right wing, the economy sucks but that's not important. That flies in the face of what many on the right are saying; the economy is roaring back. I have no doubt that few of the professors and students that Shapiro encounters are that worried about the economy; but I wager if he walked through the steel towns of the rust belt he might see a different picture.

His third lesson is that Democrats don't mindlessly support whatever half-baked idea the president comes up with and are thus traitorous dogs. He reminds us all that it was the Democratic party who caused us to lose the Vietnam War by protesting it; he fails to comment on whether we should have engaged in that war at all, nor does he comment on the costs inflicted on our troops and the Vietnamese people.

His fourth lesson is that it's all Bill Clinton's fault. Yep the Republicans are the party of new ideas and the Democrats keep using the old play book. Oh, and it's unreasonable to suggest that maybe, since September 11 happened on President Bush's watch, he should take at least part of the blame.

His fifth lesson is that we are afraid of the Saudis, even thought they clearly had a hand in September 11; he's right on this one, but he neglects to mention President Bush's close ties with the Saudis.

His sixth lesson is a bit chilling; "Americans must be ready to sacrifice certain liberties for a little temporary safety." Great! We must accept the Government spying on us without our knowledge and trust that they will use the information they get correctly.

Yep Ben has certainly earned the title Wise Man. Or at least Wise Guy.

Rush Limbaugh's Audience

Rush Limbaugh commented today that he has a daily audience of 12 million people and a weekly audience of 20 million people. Do you know how many that is? If each of Rush's 20 million people were to kick in $100.00, the president would still be short $85 billion.

How's that for a meaningless comparison?

You Are Either with President Bush or you are with the Terrorists

Watched Hannity and Colmes last night and this morning (Tivo); they had Newt Gingrich on. Fun stuff. Colmes asking reasonable wussy questions and Hannity basically saying that Democrats who don't support their president are traitorous scum. I mean he didn't say that openly, of course; just suggested that our enemies will be watching the polls to see who the American people support.

Cal Thomas suggest the same thing in his column today. "Terrorists know they cannot win a conventional war against a behemoth power like the United States. But they also know the United States might lose heart and cut and run. It has happened before - in Vietnam and Lebanon and Mogadishu. That is what they are counting on. The president's speech gives them no reason to expect retreat. America's enemies will be watching the polls to see if citizen resolve matches that of the president."

The Right have apparently decided that President Bush's plan to fight terror is the only possible solution; and to fight against it is to fight against protecting America from Terrorists. Now I'll admit that some of the candidates have been more vocal in their criticisms of the President's plan than they have been in putting forward their own. Part of that is the influence of TV. The Democratic Candidates' attacks on the President are better television; you can show a two second clip of Gephardt saying that the President's plan has been a miserable failure and hold peoples interest. Try showing the five minutes when he lays out his plan and all America (or so they believe) reaches for its remote.

To sum up; it is entirely possible to think that the President's plan to fight terrorism is crap without wanting terrorists to come here and invade the United States.

On the Speech

Due to work constraints have to do this piecemail--but the complete text of the speech is readily available.

"For a generation leading up to September the 11th, 2001, terrorists and their radical allies attacked innocent people in the Middle East and beyond, without facing a sustained and serious response. The terrorists became convinced that free nations were decadent and weak. And they grew bolder, believing that history was on their side."

In case your are unclear as to what President Bush meant; he was saying that this mess is all Clinton's fault.

" . . . we are committed to expanding international cooperation in the reconstruction and security of Iraq, just as we are in Afghanistan. Our military commanders in Iraq advise me that the current number of American troops -- nearly 130,000 -- is appropriate to their mission."

Both John McCain and Joseph Biden disagreed yesterday on Face the Nation. Both have been in Iraq since the invasion, and both have a sense that what is needed is more forces one the ground. They made the comment that of coures loyal troops aren't going to gainsay the administration. Makes you wonder which direction the "fact" that more troops are unnecessary is going. Up from Iraqi command or down from Karl Ro . . I mean President Bush.

"I recognize that not all of our friends agreed with our decision to enforce the Security Council resolutions and remove Saddam Hussein from power."

Translation: France and Germany, I'm looking at you.

"Yet we cannot let past differences interfere with present duties. Terrorists in Iraq have attacked representatives of the civilized world, and opposing them must be the cause of the civilized world."

Translation: Are you part of the civilized world or not?

"Members of the United Nations now have an opportunity -- and the responsibility -- to assume a broader role in assuring that Iraq becomes a free and democratic nation. "

Translation: Remember earlier this year when the UN was irrelevent? That's nothing compared to what's going to happen if you don't bail me out of this mess I've created.

"Later this month, Secretary Powell will meet with representatives of many nations to discuss their financial contributions to the reconstruction of Afghanistan. Next month, he will hold a similar funding conference for the reconstruction of Iraq. Europe, Japan and states in the Middle East all will benefit from the success of freedom in these two countries, and they should contribute to that success. "

Translation: You'd damn well better give us the money, or I might have to consider raising taxes.

That guy who runs the McCaughlin group, who is really annoying (and is quite possibly named McCaughlin), says that having to go to the UN at this point, after all we said last year about then, is on the humiliation scale (1 to 10, 10 being the most humiliating) a 10. We are as humiliated as it is possible to be. And by we, I mean President Bush and the Neocon Hawks who dragged us into this mess. But he could be wrong.

President Bush and his address

For those of you interested; President Bush's address, for reading or viewing, can be accessed here. I have some comments on the speech, but they will have to wait till mid morning or so.

Helpful News

For those who don't know, President Bush is scheduled to speak to the nation tonight at 8:30 about the need for American Patience and understanding in the Iraq rebuilding effort. Caught Colin Powell on Face the Nation; they seem to be adopting the "Yeah everything went opposite of what we predicted; but that's just what we wanted" strategy.

I'll post more on Powell later, if I think of it.

New Quote

Updating my quote page, and changed the quote at top. Enjoy. That's an order!