« How to Assure Fair Elections | Main | Hanging Together, or Separately »
Media And The Narrative
There is a very good article by Kirsten Powers at Huffington Post on just how the RNC has gone about, and is going about, implanting the "negative narrative" about either a Democratic candidate for office, or a member of the opposition party.
This week, we saw Republicans launch their first attempt to negatively brand one of the contenders for the 2006 Democratic presidential nomination. Regardless if you are a Hillary lover or Hillary hater, anyone who is a Democrat should have their antennae up as a result of the RNC Chairman’s statement that “Hillary looks angry.” Republicans are trying out a narrative that will scare most Americans: the specter of the “Angry Woman.”
If you have any doubt about the complicity of the media, just check out the headlines on "Hardball". In less than 24 hours, RNC leader Ken Mehlmen's remarks that Hillary "looks" angry, has become Hillary "is" angry, with a not so subtle question mark after it.
Ms. Powers continues:
If this strategy seems eerily familiar, it’s because it is. It’s been relentlessly used in the last two presidential elections and it’s known in political circles as the “negative master narrative.” What it means is that Republicans test out different negative narrative threads about Democratic candidates in an attempt to caricature some minor trait – real or imagined – that they have determined American voters will reject. Reporters latch onto the caricature because they like themes. Before you know what happened, the average American voter is claiming John Kerry seems “French” (read: not like me) or that Al Gore lies and exaggerates and claims he invented the Internet (which he never said).
This is just the first two paragraphs of the article. She goes on to deconstruct the process and provide a great education on the issue.
Along the same theme of discussing the importance of narratives, is this Peter Daou piece. Peter's article gets at the same issue, but provides more context for the media's role in the process. I also recommend Peter's piece as part of a great education on media and electoral politics.
What both of these articles have in common is their agreement that something is seriously wrong with how the news is reported and the role of the media in electoral politics.
The role of news outlets, both television and print media, has changed dramatically, beginning with the mass and rapid dissemination of information available worldwide. If the news isn't "new", what is their role?
Their new role is the narrative. No longer is the reporting of events their central role. Their role is now to provide the narrative, the emotional context and meaning for any event that occurs. Which might be fine, if the narrative had anything to do with the truth. Unfortunately, the narrative has a much closer relationship to truthiness, than truth.
What is the effect on modern electoral politics?
Simple. He who wins the positive narrative game for their candidate, has the edge. And if you win the positive narrative for your candidate, while winning the negative narrative against your opponent, you can get anyone elected to office.
Just one problem-getting elected by means of the truthiness narrative, doesn't mean that the guy getting elected knows anything whatsoever about governing, and woe betide the electorate who bought the narrative.
More and more, it looks like the biggest role of the modern media is that of seriously damaging democracy.
Sorry for the re-post.... The thread changed as I was typing... and we're in for more war and terra propaganda today, it seems....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060209/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_8
Bush to Detail 2002 Attack Plot in Speech
WASHINGTON - President Bush, in a speech about terror, will focus on a foiled attack in 2002 in which plotters planned to use hijacked commercial airplanes to strike the West Coast.
Bush has referred to the plot before, but White House officials said he planned to provide more specifics in a speech Thursday.
In an address last October, Bush said the United States and its allies had foiled at least 10 serious plots by the al-Qaida terror network in the last four years, including plans for Sept. 11-like attacks on both U.S. coasts.
The White House initially would not give details of the plots but later released a fact sheet with a brief, and vague, description of each.
{{{ Click on link for more. Hmmm... "Vague"... Okay. I'll bet a whole penny that he will "justify" his use of illegal wiretapping in the speech, too, saying that's how the plot was foiled (IF there ever was a plot, that is!!!).... I wonder what kind of LIES he will come up with about the plots that would "justify" illegal wiretapping and more LIES to us... all designed, I'm sure, to solidify his 'unitary executive' stance of protecting the American people while LYING to us and taking away our rights in the process...??? Terra, terra, terra... yeah, yeah, yeah... What-ever! I wanna know what he doesn't want Lamestream Media to talk about while their attention is diverted to 'terra' - again...! LIES about how to get us into a war with Iran based on his paranoia about terrorists - I'm thinking he will try to tie Iran to the "plots" in 2002 to "justify" his LIES about why Iran is a threat and 'needs' (in his paranoid little mind) to be invaded - remember the Iran Oil Bourse is set to open in March, so he has some quick 'splainin' to do to get others to ratchet up the warmongering rhetoric and attempt to get the support of American people and the rest of the world, just as he "had" to attack Iraq when their Oil Bourse started (which must have been dismantled by now?)..., Abramoff, Fitzgerald's grand jury, DeLay, Social Security private accounts he slipped into the latest legislation.... Pick a topic, or all of the above and others that aren't on my sore brain at the moment, and he wants Lamestream Media to talk about that instead of something else that will go under the radar as he yaks on and on and on about more terra....}}}
great comments from the last thread, but follow-up question:
IF we coordinate local actions--from supporting people in the progressive community who take on voting issues as elected or appointed officials all the way to sit-ins at Members' offices or recruiting stations--across the country--how should those be coordinated so the media understands what is happening? How do we make loud enough noises?
Or do we simply go about our business quietly and clearly and issue no press releases--the 20-30 year takeover model?
It's GOOD to be an "angry woman," man!
I read Charles Mudede's article in The Stranger (Seattle weekly) this morning - on SuperBowl & rise in domestic violence. He tracked violence before during and after the game & found a 50% increase in domestic violence locally.
He reminded me about a commercial that was aired by Michelob during the SuperBowl, in which a man slams a woman onto the ground and then says coldly, "You were open .. and now you're closed."
If a woman does not have the right to be angry about injustice, then we're doomed. Coretta Scott King said that if 10% more women voted, we would see an end to budget cuts that hurt women and children.
I work with all women and my clients are mostly women and children. When I walked into work, a woman brought up the proposed budget cuts immediately. It's the easiest way to politicize this group.
It seems to me things have gone backward in the last 30 years when it comes to attitudes toward women. One of the controversial Danish cartoons shows veiled women with just their eyes showing and then there is a man with a black bar over his eyes so he can't see. I do not agree with the publication if those who made them knowingly did so to incite violence or insult religion.
But that one cartoon made sense to me because it discussed patriarchy and sexism more than religion and needn't apply to one religion because mysogyny is rampant in every culture, regardless of which religion is prevalent in the society.
Keep it up, Mr. and Mrs. Diplomacy
Bush, Rice told to ‘shut up’ over cartoon issue
Hezbollah leader speaks to huge protest after Bush urged calm
MSNBC News Services
Updated: 8:39 a.m. ET Feb. 9, 2006
BEIRUT, Lebanon - Hundreds of thousands of Shiite Muslims transformed a religious ceremony in Lebanon on Thursday into an emotional but peaceful protest against cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad.
“Defending the prophet should continue worldwide,” Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, told the crowd. “Let (U.S. Secretary of State) Condoleezza Rice, (President) Bush and all the tyrants shut up: We are a nation that can’t forgive, be silent or ease up when they insult our prophet and our sacred values.”
“Today, we are defending the dignity of our prophet with a word, a demonstration but let George Bush and the arrogant world know that if we have to ... we will defend our prophet with our blood, not our voices,” Nasrallah added.
more... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11251690/
Posted by: karen at February 9, 2006 11:09 AM
Karen...we need to chat sometime...either in IRC or in person...some good ideas are starting to develop.
Posted by: karen at February 9, 2006 11:09 AM
My two cents' worth: PUBLICITY, PUBLICITY, PUBLICITY...!!!
IMHO, we do NOT want to follow the meek and quiet road of our Democratic politicians who can't get media attention for anything other than rubber-stamping The Cretin's policies and administration.
Quietly trying to change things is clearly not working. Time to yell, do sit-ins at politicians' offices or anywhere else it might prove effective. Keep everything non-violent, yes, but it's past time to make our voices heard - and in Lamestream Media when we can get the attention.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
I have that on a sticky note on my computer monitor.... and Democratic silence has yielded no good publicity and we're down to not even being mentioned most of the time, which is currently Lamestream Media's greatest Sin of Omission.
If we don't make a splash, there's no way for the ripples to radiate out and hit the shore.....
William Rivers Pitt: Trapped Like a Rat
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/020906Z.shtml
William Rivers Pitt writes that on Tuesday, by his own design, George W. Bush was trapped like a rat at the funeral of Coretta Scott King. He was forced to listen to eloquent denunciations of his politics and his policies, perhaps for the first time since he took office.
AL FRANKEN, PURVEYOR OF TRUTH
Laura Barcella, AlterNet
The famous funnyman speaks out about his latest book, Air America's future, and his potential run for the Senate in '08.
http://www.alternet.org/story/31957/
{{{Check out what Franken has to say about why he believes the student loans have been cut in the proposed budget....}}}
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/08/AR2006020801062.html
Bush Shifts on Muslim Protests
Violence Is Criticized, Not the Cartoons
The Bush administration yesterday condemned the violent response to European cartoons mocking Islam and accused Iran and Syria of exploiting the international controversy to incite unrest and protests in the Middle East.
"I have no doubt that Iran and Syria have gone out of their way to inflame sentiments and have used this for their own purposes," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters yesterday. "The world ought to call them on it."
{{{ I saw the sound byte on last night's news that CondiSleazy made and wondered why she mentioned Iran and Syria. In view of the 'terra thwarted' speech that will apparently be given today, it makes "sense" - the jab at Iran, especially, since The Cretin wants to start a war there, now, too. Will someone please wake me up from this deja vu nightmare?}}}
More and more, it looks like the biggest role of the modern media is that of seriously damaging democracy.
Posted by Casey Morris at February 9, 2006 10:12 AM
Casey, I agreed with you up to your last sentence. The goal of media is (a) to entertain, and (b) to make profits.
Whoever gets out in front of the media and both feeds them information (video, photos, press releases) and escorts them in to receive "the scoop" from the front lines effectively controls the media message.
This was extremely obvious in Katrina. There were several different agencies and groups rescuing people, but the Coast Guard was the only one with a focused media strategy that was constantly, immediately feeding the media beast and allowing the media "exclusive" access to front-line operations. This completely controlled the media picture - there were many parts of CG operations that were overlooked, as well as many of the CG's shortcomings - as well as putting the focus on the CG as the "only hero of Katrina" or the "only responding agency"...which it wasn't.
But now...think of how long it took the neocons to develop an effective media strategy. It's relatively simple though:
1. Control your image. Think of how carefully neocons script and stage.
2. Have your own "journalists". In other words, take your own pictures, video, and write your own press releases.
3. Supply the news from your "journalists" to the media before they can get their own people on screen.
4. Escort members of the media around your incident or to a private interview with your candidate. In this way they get "exclusive" access, which they love, and in exchange you control the extent of that access - what they see and what they don't. They won't even realize you're hiding things because they are excited they're getting "exclusive" access.
5. Be sensitive to the "news cycle". Remember "you never introduce a new product in..."? Slow news day? Just in time for evening news? That's when you push your message.
6. Know your audience and target your message. Have a different message for different audiences. You wouldn't talk to kids the same way you'd talk to MBA students. Make sure the right messages go to the right people.
7. Keep the information consistent, and flowing consistently. Even if your candidate is knocked out of the running, your "journalists" lose their press passes, your pet program knocked down...find some other way to create and distribute your media message and get it out there. This shows the strength of your organization - both its resilience and its decentralized ability to keep going without the need for a specific "leader".
Now go get 'em!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/08/AR2006020802511.html
Secret Court's Judges Were Warned About NSA Spy Data
Program May Have Led Improperly to Warrants
Twice in the past four years, a top Justice Department lawyer warned the presiding judge of a secret surveillance court that information overheard in President Bush's eavesdropping program may have been improperly used to obtain wiretap warrants in the court, according to two sources with knowledge of those events.
The revelations infuriated U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly -- who, like her predecessor, Royce C. Lamberth, had expressed serious doubts about whether the warrantless monitoring of phone calls and e-mails ordered by Bush was legal. Both judges had insisted that no information obtained this way be used to gain warrants from their court, according to government sources, and both had been assured by administration officials it would never happen.
The two heads of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court were the only judges in the country briefed by the administration on Bush's program. The president's secret order, issued sometime after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, allows the National Security Agency to monitor telephone calls and e-mails between people in the United States and contacts overseas.
James A. Baker, the counsel for intelligence policy in the Justice Department's Office of Intelligence Policy and Review, discovered in 2004 that the government's failure to share information about its spying program had rendered useless a federal screening system that the judges had insisted upon to shield the court from tainted information. He alerted Kollar-Kotelly, who complained to Justice, prompting a temporary suspension of the NSA spying program, the sources said.
Yet another problem in a 2005 warrant application prompted Kollar-Kotelly to issue a stern order to government lawyers to create a better firewall or face more difficulty obtaining warrants.
{{{Click on link for more details....}}}
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/09/politics/09gitmo.html
Tough U.S. Steps in Hunger Strike at Camp in Cuba
United States military authorities have taken tougher measures to force-feed detainees engaged in hunger strikes at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, after concluding that some were determined to commit suicide to protest their indefinite confinement, military officials have said.
In recent weeks, the officials said, guards have begun strapping recalcitrant detainees into "restraint chairs," sometimes for hours a day, to feed them through tubes and prevent them from deliberately vomiting afterward. Detainees who refuse to eat have also been placed in isolation for extended periods in what the officials said was an effort to keep them from being encouraged by other hunger strikers.
{{{Click on link for more....}}}
Posted by: Veritas at February 9, 2006 12:04 PM
Excellent points!!!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060209/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush
Bush Says Cooperation Thwarted 2002 Attack
{{{1. The Cretin stays on message by repeating 'terror' and 'terrorist', etc. 2. The rest of the article is too vague to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. 3. The Cretin stayed on message about how fearful 'the enemy' is (what enemies that he did not create - he's never defined these alleged 'enemies'?!?) because of constant vigilance to keep them away from us and keep them from attacking us again. 4. I still have a feeling of revulsion every time I see/hear the word 'homeland' - reminds me of reading Hitler's speeches when he talked about 'homeland' and 'fatherland.'}}}
Posted by: Veritas at February 9, 2006 12:04 PM
Excellent work, V.
Though my last sentence was a thought on the current state of the media's role in electoral politics, you post reads like a virtual instruction booklet on how to successfully navigate the media in its present dismal state, in order to gain the best advantage for your candidate.
Well done, Veritas.
Roll out the attacks on Obama too.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007624.php
Posted by: suz at February 9, 2006 01:55 PM
Them or us?
I totally loved Obama when he was speaking before the DNC.
I started frowning in concern, however, when he sounded so blatantly defeatist and conciliatory over whether or not to filibuster the Alito nomination. I wondered if he had been bought off already....
Posted by: NonnyO at February 9, 2006 02:11 PM
In this case them.
But I suppose we did too.
Sadly, it's hard to maintain a clean reputation when there are so many people willing to abuse you.
I often wonder WHY anyone would want to put up with that.
and I'm really thinking the media MUST be taken down. Perhaps protests IN FRONT of their stations. Maybe we should go camp out there and just demand justice and integrity and truth.
Jason Leopold | Cheney Spearheaded Effort to Discredit Wilson
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/020906J.shtml
Vice President Dick Cheney and then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley led a campaign beginning in March 2003 to discredit former Ambassador Joseph Wilson for publicly criticizing the Bush administration's intelligence on Iraq, according to current and former administration officials.
{{{LYING is grounds for IMPEACHMENT!!!}}}
US Plans Massive Data Sweep
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/020906M.shtml
The US government is developing a massive computer system that can collect huge amounts of data and, by linking far-flung information from blogs and e-mail to government records and intelligence reports, search for patterns of terrorist activity.
{{{Oh, ya, sure, you betcha.... I believe it will only plot 'terrorists' and 'terrorist plans' - NOT! The criminals who committed terrorist acts who were successful have used low-tech non-trackable communications, remember?!? Duh...!}}}
Cindy Sheehan: "I Have Decided Not to Run"
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/020906Y.shtml
Cindy Sheehan: "I have decided not to run, but I am calling on all Californians and Americans to support all anti-war candidates to promote a paradigm of peace in the world, and I will be supporting and working for dozens of anti-war candidates all over the country."
{{{Sheehan had some stern things to say about Feinstein and other Dems who have repeatedly voted to fund Georgie's war, and she's pledged to be a thorn in the side of politicians who continue to do so, including Hillary and Barbara Boxer. I agree with her. We need to keep reminding politicians they work for US - nor Georgie, not fascist corporations... US, "we, the people"!}}}
Agreement reached on Patriot Act
Senate Republicans reach tentative deal with White House
BREAKING NEWS
Updated: 2:56 p.m. ET Feb. 9, 2006
WASHINGTON - Several Senate Republicans who are key to extension of the terror-fighting Patriot Act have reached a tentative agreement with the White House on a compromise version, congressional officials said Thursday.
Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H. and three other GOP lawmakers who had been at odds with the Bush administration on a long-term extension of this key law were expected to announce details of the accord later Thursday.
No immediate details were available on the changes they wrung from the White House. These Republicans had joined a Democratic-led filibuster late last year that blocked passage at the time of a bill extending the life of the law. Critics claimed that the versions before Congress would have given shortshrift treatment to civil liberties.
Instead of a long-term extension, lawmakers decided to extend the government’s power to conduct surveillance against suspected terrorists with a short-term bill. The current extension expires March 10.
The congressional officials declined to be identified by name, saying they did not want to pre-empt the news conference.
Sununu was joined by Republican Sens. Larry Craig of Idaho, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska in supporting a filibuster by 41 Democrats in December. Democrats could still block the new version if all of them who opposed the bill then also balk at the new version.
Breaking a filibuster in the 100-member Senate requires 60 votes, compared with a simple majority for passing a bill.
The existing law was to have expired Dec. 31, but Congress has extended it twice while negotiators worked on a compromise.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11257992/
Posted by: suz at February 9, 2006 02:26 PM
Sounds like a plan....
The alternate route is via foreign media, BBC for one (since they have a TV network), and whoever else anyone knows about. People in other countries also need to know that there are millions of people in this country who never approved of The Cretin's war in the first place and detest it even more now, and I'm sure they don't realize how adamantly anti-war (anywhere, but especially Iraq) many of us really are because they only see the the face of The Cretin and hear his yammering on endlessly in Lamestream Media propaganda about war and 'terra'.... It couldn't hurt for other people around the world to know we despise this administration as much as they do.
Actually, it could be to our benefit if people overseas pick up the news first, and those news agencies can then contact Lamestream Media and ask why there is no news here about anti-war protests (and pro-impeachment demonstrations).... In theory, it could shame our own media to wake up and pay attention to what's right under their own noses, and not just on slow news days either.
Other than pulling a bare-breasted stunt like on Boston Legal, the other route is psy-ops wars against our own media for being corporate propagandists and failing the people of this nation so badly.
Personally, I am sick and tired of talking heads "interpreting" (erroneously) news that I can make up my own mind about if I have all the facts to deal with, and we are sorely lacking facts and truth from The Cretin and his Criminal Cabal. If Lamestream Media is not willing to air the views of the majority of Americans who deplore the war and the LYING antics of The Cretin and his Criminal Cabal, we have no recourse other than turning to foreign media for help - and the internet, of course. It would hit them where it hurts most: their profit margin and lack of viewing audience during the evening snooze.... If profits and ratings fall, who would they broadcast their propaganda to except the 'true believers' who have drunk too much kool-aid?
Posted by: monkey at February 9, 2006 03:10 PM
What, pray tell, is in the Patriot Act that replaces any laws that were in existence before the neoCons shoved it through Congress before anyone could even read it?!?!? Other than maybe giving more 'unitary executive' (dictatorial) and/or snooping power to The Cretin to keep the balance of power between the three branches of government totally out of balance...?
BEFORE the Patriot Act was passed without any due deliberation, the laws already in existence for legal methods of gaining information on criminals already knew the intelligence about Bin Laden.... and The Cretin FAILED to read or heed the information in the Aug. 6, '01 PDB.
If anyone can take the 'blame' for the hijackers' success on 9/11, it's The Cretin himself for ignoring perfectly valid intel and info about what was going to happen only a month later. And all of that info was obtained BEFORE any extraordinary powers granted the government (and/or executive branch) in the Patriot Act.
Hmmm.... The Patriot Act is the one with the provision for the uniformed secret service personnel, isn't it? I wonder if that part is still intact?!?
NonnyO
I agree about foreign media.
I have felt that way for a long time.
We can't do it all alone, & some of our
countrypersons are never going to
help us, even if they are getting
hurt.
I depend on NPR, internet, papers.
I don't think MSM can be reformed.
It's conglomerated.
Posted by Casey Morris at February 9, 2006 10:12 AM
"They" are even writing the narrative into the jokes of the late night show hosts (comedians), because they know alot of young people tune in, and that is the ONLY time they hear ANYTHING about candidates.
For instance, last night Jay Leno had a joke about Hillary being an "ice woman", and ALWAYS his narrative about Hillary is that she is cold and mean, and that Bill is still cheating on her. One joke however, referred to voting in men who are "horny", and "stupid" (Clinton and Bush?).
To me, that is further proof that before many of our major hosts in the major networks are allowed to say a word, someone has either censored, or written part of what they have to say.
Our local news is the same. Much of what our local NBC, CBS, and ABC hosts read during their first few minutes of the nightly local "news" broadcast, is the same garbage that is spewed on Faux news...(themes of patriotism and When Johnny Comes Marching Home, for example).
They are everywhere.
Hey, BushCo foiled an attack by asians via aQ on L.A. My heroes!
I also heard they intend to smoke out the easter bunny from his hole this spring as well.
Thai Ming is everything.
Say goodbye to your advantage on this issue with the electorate stupidicus...
Reid Aided Abramoff Clients, Records Show
By JOHN SOLOMON and SHARON THEIMER, Associated Press Writers
4 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wrote at least four letters helpful to Indian tribes represented by Jack Abramoff, and the senator's staff regularly had contact with the disgraced lobbyist's team about legislation affecting other clients.
more... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060209/ap_on_go_co/abramoff_reid
Good work going on here!
I am reading everyone's feedback, so keep it coming. This discussion is critically important--yesterday I had four conversations with reps from many different groups about what should happen next, and the plain truth is--we all need more input.
Dwahzon and Casey are on their way to DC to continue the discussions with people further inside than we are, so keep the feedback coming in. We already know how deeply everyone here cares, and how much you read and think and talk with friends about everything that faces us all. Tomorrow we hope to represent the collective wisdom.
Veritas--great stuff, as always--and I will try to be in the irc this evening so we can discuss further. You can always email me phone contact info. as well--as can any of you.
Back at the beginning of January I wrote that the next four weeks or so would be very telling--they have been. But I still don't like what they are telling us. IMHO, we need a lot more coordination, and a lot more active participation, all across the country.
I HATE saying that, because I know how hard we are all already working--me too! But more is being asked of us, because more is being snuck by us. I don't think we can avert our eyes and look away from it all--but I recognize the impulse to do so.
Let's just keep talking, and connecting, and building whatever this is...
Posted by: Veritas at February 9, 2006 12:04 PM
Oh, I hope it is only a matter of who gets there first.
And, Veritas, I respect you so very much because I know you are highly educated and well read, and extremely intelligent, like everyone else here.
I feel it is being controlled more than that. I feel that even if we get there first, use psy-ops, frame things in a way that is true and "sell-able", that we are fighting the conglomerate, and I am concerned that they screen out so much already, and would ratch up their screening.
MSM didn't give Kerry a chance in '04. He was slimed, swift-boated, purple band-aided, ignored, danced around, and his voice was almost snuffed out over the MSM by the likes of Candy Crowley and ilk.
Even now, we see a brief shot of Cindy Sheehan being led out of the SOTU address, but I don't remember seeing much about the cops admitting they screwed up with Cindy. Just a mention. Did she EVER get to tell her side of the story to an audience in a news program, or any kind of media program during peak viewing hours?
And, too, I worry about ALL THE STUFF that is happening that we don't EVER hear about! Imagine, if this much has LEAKED OUT, it's like seeing a brown spot on one apple in a bunch. Imagine what it must be like on the inside.
Something else that concerned me too, was that I took a poll last week sent to me by a major pollster. They asked me my views on Bush and asked about my buying habits, then zinged in with a couple of questions that really, are nobody's business but mine. I answered it, but regret doing so now, and have decided to never do so again. They asked me how I get my news, which television network I watch to get news from t.v., then asked about internet use, and asked if I got a majority of news from blogs.
We have to be so careful.
L.A. Mayor Blindsided by Bush Announcement
By MICHAEL R. BLOOD, AP Political Writer
2 hours, 23 minutes ago
LOS ANGELES - Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said Thursday he was blindsided by President Bush's announcement of new details on a purported 2002 hijacking plot aimed at a downtown skyscraper, and described communication with the White House as "nonexistent."
"I'm amazed that the president would make this (announcement) on national TV and not inform us of these details through the appropriate channels," the mayor said in an interview with The Associated Press. "I don't expect a call from the president — but somebody."
The mayor also suggested that some funding from the Iraq war could be redirected to homeland security, including the protection of high-risk targets in Los Angeles. He did not advocate an immediate withdrawal of troops.
"I go to work every day knowing that we are a target," the mayor said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060209/ap_on_re_us/la_terror_plot
(pppst, Mr. Mayor.... you didn't know cuz they made it up... don't feel bad, it's what they do.)
Posted by: monkey at February 9, 2006 05:19 PM
Not only do they make it up, but they also tend to bring up the lies at opportune times...like when they want something or want to divert attention from something or try to provide false information to prove their past actions...
...like illegal wiretapping...
What a coincidence that nobody -- including many Republican senators -- believes what Gonzales said in this week's hearings...
Monkey:
You da kine, sistah (bra?). Great post! "Don't feel bad, it's what they do" -- LOL
Chuck in Doha
Also, given my poor short-term memory, was that you who is also USAF?
Just sharing:
http://www.progressiveu.org/104845-blog-posts-that-make-an-impact
http://www.progressiveu.org/201041-erosion-of-our-freedom-speech-part-2
http://www.progressiveu.org/131034-how-high-up-does-the-plame-scandal-go-anyways
http://www.progressiveu.org/105601-how-do-you-treat-a-man-indicted-over-ethics-issues-money-laundering-and-illegal-gerrymandering
Posted by: monkey at February 9, 2006 05:19 PM
Yup, that was my FIRST thought, too, when I saw "vague" in that one article.....
But I bet Lamestream Media goes after the LIES in that false propaganda story like a dog following a bitch in heat.... and whatever The Criminal Cabal is trying to slip under the radar will be read or heard about by no one except bloggers!!!
Grrrrrrrrrrrrr..........!
Posted by: monkey at February 9, 2006 04:29 PM
RE: Reid & Abramoff
Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo is debunking this already...
...I got hold of Ron Platt, the lobbyist referenced in the passage above, on his cell phone while he was down at a conference in Florida. I asked him whether, to the best of his recollection, Reid had taken any action against the Kennedy bill. "I'm sure he didn't," Platt told me.
According to Platt, the purpose of his contacts was to see what information he could get about the timing and status of the legislation. Reid's position on the minimum wage issue was well known and there would have been no point trying to get his help blocking it. That's what Platt says. "I didn't ask Reid to intervene," said Platt. "I wouldn't have asked him to intervene. I don't think anyone else would have asked. And I'm sure he didn't."
Now, obviously, both Reid's office and Platt are interested parties on this question. If there were evidence to the contrary you wouldn't necessarily want to take their statements at face value. But as far as I can tell there is no evidence to the contrary. And that's after speaking with supporters of the legislation who would probably know. They don't seem to think Reid had anything to do with tanking the minimum wage bill. Nothing.
In this case, despite the AP story's narrative of lobbyist contacts, there doesn't seem to be any evidence whatsoever that Reid ever took any action on behalf of Abramoff's Marianas clients.
Read the rest here ==>
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007647.php
Madame:
Chill on that! Who was it that once said: "Laws are for the little people." I can't recall but I think it had something to do with Manhattan. Constitution? For suckers.... They don't need no stinkin' Constitution.
Little people.
Chumps.
Bah, humbug.
Chuck in Doha
PS: Please read the above as sarcasm
PPS: Oh well.
"How do we make loud enough noises?"
As long as we're focused on making loud noises at the expense of making quiet truths instead, we're still missing the boat (and drowning our chances in the process).
Meaningful change doesn't happen overnight. And it doesn't happen from the top down. It happens from the roots upward, and that means it takes time to grow and bloom also.
Power could, should -- and, given the opportunity, would -- flow FROM the people TO the politicians, not the other way around. We ignore that at our cost; and we forget that at our peril also.
And our peril is everybody else's peril, too. Like it or not, we really are all in this together. And we need to act together down here, not up there... or else we're only hanging on for another few cycles' worth of the same old shrinking same old before the lights go out for everybody altogether.
just my 182.573 Iranian rials,
Otter
Otter:
All good things take time.
Chuck in Doha
PS: I've set you up for some kind of a come-back there, huh?
Cheney 'Authorized' Libby to Leak Classified Information
Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, testified to a federal grand jury that he had been "authorized" by Cheney and other White House "superiors" in the summer of 2003 to disclose classified information to journalists to defend the Bush administration's use of prewar intelligence in making the case to go to war with Iraq, according to attorneys familiar with the matter, and to court records.
According to sources with firsthand knowledge, Cheney authorized Libby to release additional classified information, including details of the NIE, to defend the administration's use of prewar intelligence in making the case for war.
Libby specifically claimed that in one instance he had been authorized to divulge portions of a then-still highly classified National Intelligence Estimate regarding Saddam Hussein's purported efforts to develop nuclear weapons, according to correspondence recently filed in federal court by special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald.
http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2006/0209nj1.htm
Follow up on this with:
KENNEDY ON REPORTS CHENEY AUTHORIZED LIBBY TO LEAK CLASSIFIED INFORMATION
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Laura Capps/Melissa Wagoner (202) 224-2633
These charges, if true, represent a new low in the already sordid case of partisan interests being placed above national security. The Vice President's vindictiveness in defending the misguided war in Iraq is obvious. If he used classified information to defend it, he should be prepared to take full responsibility. President Bush has clearly said he would 'clean house' of everyone who had anything to do with the Plame leak.
The American people are also entitled to know whether the President knew that classified information was being used for this purpose, and whether he authorized it himself.
In addition, they are entitled to know that the case will not be scuttled by the administration when the decisions are made on declassifying documents necessary for the trial.
http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/06/01/2006209932.html
And of course, there's nothing in the MSM about this...
Otter:
You (one) can parallel track the urgent and the important. Still, I agree, got to keep the eye on the important, though, absolutely agree. Slow and steady wins the race. Patience is a virtue! We've all got to remember that truism.
Chuck in Doha
"Laws are for the little people."
Posted by: chuck at February 9, 2006 06:03 PM
Leona Helmsley?
Madame:
Bingo!
Chuck in Doha
"Dwahzon and Casey are on their way to DC to continue the discussions with people further inside than we are, so keep the feedback coming in. We already know how deeply everyone here cares, and how much you read and think and talk with friends about everything that faces us all. Tomorrow we hope to represent the collective wisdom."
Karen... have you given any thought to how elitist that comment might sound to those of us out here in the heartland -- those of us who have not been invited, and/or lack the flexibility, to come down there and rub shoulders with the PTB in Washington and chitchat about what we believe and how we feel in person?
Maybe you have. I dunno. But whether or not you meant it that way, it's still much too easy to take that as yet another expression of Washington-centric top-down thinking on y'all's end.
You know me well enough by now to know that I'm on your side in all of this, Karen. But if even we DCPeeps who adamantly agree with you can still feel mildly miffed about being seemingly represented in absentia by a chosen few in these sorts of ongoing high-level strategy sessions, well...
Maybe y'all over there might just take an extra second to think about the upspoken but not unnoticed message that sort of thing sends to the rest of us down and/or out here outside the inner circle, that's all I'm saying.
of course as always your mileage may vary,
Otter
Otter:
But maybe they can't play bass! Each in their own way, I say!
Chuck in Doha
PS: All things considered, I'd rather play bass
Posted by: madame defarge at February 9, 2006 06:09 PM
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm....... Now, what about that oath that everyone in top government positions has to sign that says they can't give out any top secret info, and if they even accidentally do so they can be brought up on charges.... (I just can't remember what the criminal charge is right now - read the info too long ago).
Wonder what they can be charged with when they purposely give out classified info???
"All things considered, I'd rather play bass."
Apparently, so would I.
bbiab,
Otter
Otter:
If it ain't broke, why fix it?
Chuck in Doha
Otter,
Anyone is welcome to come on down. I am sorry if this sounds Washington-centric, but Washington is simply where the discussions are happening. If the discussions were in NYC, I would be traveling there.
I shared that these discussions are happening expressly because I thought it would be nice to have input from this community. You see, we are REPRESENTING people here.
Feel free to participate, or not.
Heads up...Apparently, MSM TV (CNN specifically) is discussing Cheney's authorization to leak...classified information. Watch Hardball & Wolfie, if you can handle it...
Is it just me being blindly hopeful or is the s**t finally hitting the fan... Two big news stories coming out tonight seem to be railing on the regime... That's two more than last time I checked...
- CBS, NBC, CNN are all covering the Cheney leak story
- CNN is reporting about the missing emails between the WH & Abramoff
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/09/just-announced
Driven To Tears
by The Police
How can you say that you're not responsible?
What does it have to do with me?
What is my reaction, what should it be?
Confronted by this latest atrocity
Driven to tears
Driven to tears
Driven to tears
Hide my face in my hands, shame wells in my throat
My comfortable existance is reduced to a shallow meaningless party
Seems that when some innocent die
All we can offer them is a page in a some magazine
Too many cameras and not enough food
'Cause this is what we've seen
Driven to tears
Driven to tears
Driven to tears
Protest is futile, nothing seems to get through
What's to become of our world, who knows what to do
Driven to tears
Driven to tears
Driven to tears
Driven to tears
Driven to tears
Driven to tears
(p.s. contains one of my favorite 15 seconds or so of flat out 3 piece jamming... ever)
BTW, I have a local story, similar to the one that Truth Shall Prevail has been telling us about how people are starting to talk...
In the car dealer service garage today, they had CNN on with the "breaking news" with George droning on and on about the terrorist plot they stopped in Los Angeles. I made a (slightly) snarky comment to the two (middle aged) ladies behind the checkout counter, "And they're just now telling us about this? What's up with that?" to see their reaction. To my surprise, the two ladies said (almost in unison), "Oh, it's just more lies to tell us that the sky is falling..."
Needless to say, we had a pleasant chat about how good it is that people are starting to catch on to this regime's tricks.
Northern Security Wall Planned, Eh?!
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html
U.S. to deploy high-tech security on Canada's border Security wall idea surfaces again
WASHINGTON -- The United States will deploy high-tech safety measures at the Canadian border, said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who suggested a security wall would only make sense if a lot of people were sneaking into the country from a big city.
Chertoff said he has no knowledge of any problem like that. But he didn't entirely discount the notion Thursday of a northern security fence, an idea condemned as ridiculous by business groups and dismissed as impractical by the previous Canadian government.
Some U.S. legislators are intent on studying the issue and slipped the plan into a border security bill that would expand a barrier along the Mexican border, which is plagued by increasing violence, drug-runners and the arrival of more than one million illegal immigrants a year.
The legislation has made it through the U.S. House of Representatives but still has to go through the Senate. "Fencing has its place in some areas. But as a total solution -- I don't think it's a good total solution,'' Chertoff told a news conference.
(snip)
While the U.S. security focus is mostly on the south, Chertoff made it clear advances in security technology will also be employed in the north. "We're looking at this (same) mix of solutions,'' he said, including unmanned aerial vehicles, cameras and satellite imagery in uninhabited areas.
"This is a comprehensive approach to the whole border ... It's all a question of adapting the right tactics and the right mix of infrastructure and technology to the landscape you're dealing with.'' The Homeland Security Department wants to spend an extra $100 million in the coming year on technology as part of a multibillion-dollar effort to gain firm control of the borders and reduce illegal migrants in the run-up to this November's U.S. mid-term elections.
But there have been few details of plans to roll out high-tech gadgets between ports of entry. Officials will request proposals in March from private companies. The United States will also start using Blackhawk helicopters and planes this summer along the Montana border with Alberta and Saskatchewan to watch for terrorists, drug-runners and illegal immigrants. There are already surveillance units in Washington state and New York.
Observers said Canada, which accounts for only some three per cent of the people Americans apprehend, is being caught in the cross-fire of election-year politics, where southern legislators are anxious to assure constituents they're not penalizing one border over another.
(snip)
Canada doesn't offer anywhere near the same immigration problems as Mexico. U.S. officials apprehended some 10,500 people at the Canadian border last year, compared with 1.2 million in the south. Still, officials said they'll speed up removing illegal immigrans caught near the border with Canada, extending a program already in effect along Mexico. The so-called expedited removal involves thousands of new detention beds to cut down on chances people will be let go for lack of space and slip into the country.
Canada, however, is mostly fighting U.S. perceptions it's a haven for terrorists. The would-be millennium bomber, Ahmed Ressam, was caught by U.S. customs officers as he crossed in Port Angeles, Wash., in 1999. And many Americans mistakenly believe some of the terrorists involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks entered the United States from the north.
John Negroponte, the U.S. director of national intelligence, told a Senate hearing last week U.S. officials are slightly more worried about the border with Canada than Mexico when it comes to terrorists.
(snip)
U.S. officials are working on an identity card Americans would need to show after returning home from visits to Canada.
--I've been polled about all this a couple of times by Zogby. Yes, some of the questions do seem very snoopy. The whole thing is starting to make me feel a bit paranoid, so may decline now.
AOL Discussion of Cheney bombshell....
http://messageboards.aol.com/aol/en_us/articles.php?boardId=559365&func=3&channel=News
The full link for the story on the Canadian borders as posted above is too long to fit into an email or here on the blog without it word-wrapping or breaking the page-margin formats. That's why the truncated link as posted above doesn't work. The working TinyURL equivalent to that original story's link, however, is: http://tinyurl.com/8c7df
hope this helps,
Otter
Boycott Michelob for glorifing violence against women in front of 140 million viewers.
Boycott Bush Backers:
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=449
Article about stupid, violent advertising during the rigged militaristic SuperBowl.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060206/ap_en_tv/super_bowl_ads
We're still pissed.
At least this time it was a football game, not a national election.
White House Knew About the Levees Early
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,,-5607196,00.html
Also more articles coming in tomorrow's papers about Libby implicating Cheney.
I was too shocked to grab a pen and paper, but a little while ago there was a militaristic ad, complete with people in uniform, about the war in Iraq, many mentions of al Qaida, and I didn't have my glasses on to see the small print at the bottom at the end to see who paid for the ad.
I'm still having mind blanks about the fact that the ad promoted war in no uncertain terms.....
If anyone else sees the same ad, let me know.
I'm speechless....!
War, what is it good for, absolutely nothing.
Libby is singing like a parakeet, republican governors are forced to cover white house abandonement of medicare members, spy program is about to rip apart paranoid double super secret wanna be government agent playbooks, Rove and Cheney are probably under surveillance by the DOJ...
War is all they have left.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060210/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush
Bush Says Spy Work Helped Stop 2002 Attack
{{{Well, I wondered when THAT headline would appear.... Here comes the even bigger BIG PR PUSH for a war in Iran and 'unitary executive' powers do do more warrantless spying, ETC.... This is going to be shoved down our throats a dozen times a day....}}}
Maybe this is Bush trying to take our minds off the NSA illegal spying. Though I wrote about it, we really must focus on their illegal activities and the ways progressives will help us.
http://www.progressiveu.org/180105-have-standardized-tests-done-so-much-good-that-we-need-to-force-them-on-our-college-students-as-well
What's your opinion? (Please post...)
Irony!
http://www.dakotavoice.com/200602/20060207_4.html
The new disclosure that Libby has claimed that the vice president and others in the White House had authorized him to release information to make the case to go to war, and later to defend the administration's use of prewar intelligence, is significant for several reasons. First, it significantly adds to a mounting body of information that Cheney played a central and personal role in directing efforts to counter claims by Wilson and other administration critics that the Bush administration had misused intelligence information to go to war with Iraq.
Second, it raises additional questions about Libby's motives in concealing his role in leaking Plame's name to the press, if he was in fact more broadly authorized by Cheney and others to rebut former Ambassador Wilson's charges. The federal grand jury indictment of Libby alleges that he had lied to the FBI and the federal grand jury by claiming that when he provided information to reporters about Plame's CIA employment, he was only passing along what he understood to be unverified gossip that he had heard from other journalists.
more ... http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2006/0209nj1.htm#
Another excellent narrative:
http://www.juancole.com/2006/02/cheney-authorized-libby-to-disclose.html
NonnyO
Kill your television.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
I was too shocked to grab a pen and paper, but a little while ago there was a militaristic ad, complete with people in uniform, about the war in Iraq, many mentions of al Qaida, and I didn't have my glasses on to see the small print at the bottom at the end to see who paid for the ad.
I'm still having mind blanks about the fact that the ad promoted war in no uncertain terms.....
If anyone else sees the same ad, let me know.
I'm speechless....!
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
I would call your local station and find out who paid for the ad. They will probably give you the phone number to the National network. I would call them and try to find out..
I have seen one such ad - I think mine however was a recruiting ad by the Army.
They were telling kids how they would be protecting their country, spreading freedom and democracy, and will get a good education and alot of respect in return for doing so. I'm sure we have ALL seen that ad. Poor kids with low self-worth will go for it, especially if it looks like a way out of poverty, gangs - the hood, etc.
Someone told me they start this miliarism with young children by putting war games in the nintendo type games.