« Let's Make Grover Norquist So Small We Can Drown Him in the Bathtub. | Main | Saving Hiroshima and Nagasaki from the Memory Hole »
MSM & Bloggers - Juan Cole Makes a Case
Next year the YearlyKos convention will be expanded in order to accomodate more the idea of the progressive blogosphere in general. It will be called Networks Nation. Suz and I attended a Forum where bloggers were able to question some members of the mainstream and also alternative media and asked some hard questions. In the process of reading some of the current articles on the mainstream media and bloggers I came across this article by Juan Cole, who was one of the speakers at YearlyKos. He makes some thought-provoking points.
Mainstream Media and Bloggers
by Juan Cole
Matthew Haughey says he won't read our blogs if we use the term "mainstream media" (a.k.a. MSM).
A news flash for Matt: We don't care.
We don't care if you read our web logs.
The difference, Matt, is that we are independent actors, not part of a small set of multi-billion dollar corporations. The difference is that we are not under the constraints of making a 15% profit. The difference is that we are a distributed information system, whereas MSM is like a set of stand-alone mainframes. The difference is that we can say what we damn well please.
If we were the mainstream media (perhaps better thought of as corporate media), we would care if you threatened to stop reading us. Because although we might be professional news people, we would have the misfortune to be working for corporations that are mainly be about making money.
We would be ordered to try to avoid saying anything too controversial (and I don't mean "Crossfire" controversial), because we would be calculating what would bring in 15% profits per annum on our operating capital. Would hours and hours of television "reportage" and discussion of Michael Jackson or of Terri Schiavo or Scott Peterson (remember?) bring in viewers and advertising dollars? Then that is what we would be giving the public. Bread and circuses.
Would giving airtime to Iraq, where we Americans have 138,000 troops and are spending $300 billion that we don't have, be too depressing to bring in the audience and advertising and the 15% profit? Then we would dump it in favor of bread and circuses. We'd dump Afghanistan as a story even faster, since there are "only" 17,000 US troops in that country, and it is only a place where Ben Laden may be hiding out and from which the US was struck on 9/11, leaving 3,000 dead and the Pentagon and World Trade Center smouldering.
If we were the mainstream media as Ashley Banfield was, our careers would be over if we mentioned a little thing like the replacement of journalism with patriotism in the coverage of the Iraq War. Or if we said things like Ashley did of March-April 2003,
"You didn't see where those bullets landed. You didn't see what happened when the mortar landed. A puff of smoke is not what a mortar looks like when it explodes, believe me. There are horrors that were completely left out of this war. So was this journalism or was this coverage-? There is a grand difference between journalism and coverage, and getting access does not mean you're getting the story, it just means you're getting one more arm or leg of the story . . . I can't tell you how bad the civilian casualties were. I saw a couple of pictures. I saw French television pictures, I saw a few things here and there, but to truly understand what war is all about you've got to be on both sides. You've got to be a unilateral, someone who's able to cover from outside of both front lines, which, by the way, is the most dangerous way to cover a war, which is the way most of us covered Afghanistan. There were no front lines, they were all over the place. They were caves, they were mountains, they were cobbled, they were everything. But we really don't know from this latest adventure from the American military what this thing looked like and why perhaps we should never do it again. The other thing is that so many voices were silent in this war. We all know what happened to Susan Sarandon for speaking out, and her husband, and we all know that this is not the way Americans truly want to be. Free speech is a wonderful thing, it's what we fight for, but the minute it's unpalatable we fight against it for some reason."
If we were mainstream media we would be wholly owned subsidiaries of General Electric, the Disney Corporation, Time Warner, Rupert Murdoch, Viacom and so on and so forth. Ninety percent of cable channels are owned by the same companies that own the big television networks.
It isn't a matter of journalism being a business. How good journalism is when practiced in the service of a business depends on the owner's philosophy and economic goals.
(for continuation by Ted Turner, keep reading)
(photos of bloggers, young cameraman and Fox News cameraman by DiAnne Grieser)
Ted Turner writes:
"When CNN reported to me, if we needed more money for Kosovo or Baghdad, we'd find it. If we had to bust the budget, we busted the budget. We put journalism first, and that's how we built CNN into something the world wanted to watch. I had the power to make these budget decisions because they were my companies. I was an independent entrepreneur who controlled the majority of the votes and could run my company for the long term. Top managers in these huge media conglomerates run their companies for the short term. After we sold Turner Broadcasting to Time Warner, we came under such earnings pressure that we had to cut our promotion budget every year at CNN to make our numbers. Media mega-mergers inevitably lead to an overemphasis on short-term earnings."
If we were the mainstream media, we would be accountable to CEOs and editors and advertisers, all of whom have motives for suppressing some pieces of news and highlighting others. You might think to yourself that this is a diverse enough group that the story would still get through. But with media consolidation, fewer and fewer persons make the decisions.
Turner adds:
"These big companies are not antagonistic; they do billions of dollars in business with each other. They don't compete; they cooperate to inhibit competition. You and I have both felt the impact. I felt it in 1981, when CBS, NBC, and ABC all came together to try to keep CNN from covering the White House. You've felt the impact over the past two years, as you saw little news from ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, Fox, or CNN on the FCC's actions. In early 2003, the Pew Research Center found that 72 percent of Americans had heard "nothing at all" about the proposed FCC rule changes.
Why? One never knows for sure, but it must have been clear to news directors that the more they covered this issue, the harder it would be for their corporate bosses to get the policy result they wanted. A few media conglomerates now exercise a near-monopoly over television news. There is always a risk that news organizations can emphasize or ignore stories to serve their corporate purpose. But the risk is far greater when there are no independent competitors to air the side of the story the corporation wants to ignore. More consolidation has often meant more news-sharing. But closing bureaus and downsizing staff have more than economic consequences. A smaller press is less capable of holding our leaders accountable.
When Viacom merged two news stations it owned in Los Angeles, reports The American Journalism Review, "field reporters began carrying microphones labeled KCBS on one side and KCAL on the other." This was no accident. As the Viacom executive in charge told The Los Angeles Business Journal: "In this duopoly, we should be able to control the news in the marketplace." This ability to control the news is especially worrisome when a large media organization is itself the subject of a news story. Disney's boss, after buying ABC in 1995, was quoted in LA Weekly as saying, "I would prefer ABC not cover Disney." A few days later, ABC killed a "20/20" story critical of the parent company."
Matt thinks it matters that he and other bloggers have been on television, or that mainstream media now maintains blogs. Neither thing matters. Blogs operate in a different political economy than does mainstream media. Bloggers' "editors" are the readers and the Daily Kos and Eschaton commentators who use collective intelligence to improve them. Their motive is not the profit motive for the most part. Most bloggers are hobbyists.
So, yes, Matt. There is a difference between these little dog and pony shows we post from our homes, with no editor, no CEO, no boss, and no resources beyond our personal experiences, talent and acumen. If Josh Marshall's Talking Points Memo was published by mainstream media, would he still be allowed to say everything he now says? Would Tom Engelhardt be allowed to discuss the ways in which the Iraq quagmire suggests the limits of superpowerdom if he were working for the Big Six? If Bill Montgomery worked for The Weather Channel, would he be allowed to criticize Senator Rick Sanatarium for trying to keep Federal forecasters from "competing" with private weather forecasting companies? Would Riverbend be allowed to be so incisive if she worked for a big Iraqi computer firm? Remember the famous question, "Can blogging get you fired?"
And this difference, my friends, accounts for why bloggers get vilified. Journalists can be switched to another story, or fired, or their stories can be buried on page 36. We can't be fired. So if Martin Peretz doesn't like what we have to say, he will publish a hatchet job on us in The New Republic, seeking to make us taboo. If you can't shut people up, and you really don't want their voices heard, then all you can do is try to persuade others not to listen to them or give them a platform. The easiest way to do this is to falsely accuse them of racism or Communism some other character flaw unacceptable to polite society. Because of the distributed character of blogging "computing," however, such tactics are probably doomed to fail.
We are not the mainstream media, and we are here. Get used to it.
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0426-20.htm.
Now Juan Cole, Ted Turner I am familar with but who is Matthew Haughey ?
Some people need to get over themselves Matt!
Who the hell is Matthew Haughey? Never heard of him. But if he's that huffy about being called 'mainstream media,' he dang sure wouldn't be pleased that I call MSM Lamestream Media!
Heh.
;-)
Tell you what, Huffy Haughey, bloggers are here, bloggers ARE mainstream, bloggers keep people informed with all the nitpicky and very important details we never, ever get from Lamestream Media, so if you want to censor yourself, it's your right to keep yourself uninformed. Just don't blame bloggers for your willful ignorance (aka stupidity).
Go cheney yourself, Huffy Haughey.
Great photos, as usual, DiAnne!
On the blogger thing: One aspect that the MSM keep overlooking is that blogs are not ONLY message-out conveyances.
The conversation that goes across the comments (although it sometimes flies by too fast to deal with!) can make a difference in what people understand and know.
I keep reading about how the blogosphere is independent media and citizen journalism and that is true. It is also a large and informed conversation. That is the other part the mainstream misses.
We actually listen to each other and learn.
We actually listen to each other and learn.
hahahaha~don't you know that learning is for folks who might be wrong and these guys are not wrong......?
learning-what a quaint notion!
Ruffian,
Don't you learn from your "family" here at the DCP?
I know you always listen to ME--hahahahah!
Got to put in a plug for Media Matters
http://mediamatters.org/
They gave away t-shirts and sponsored some great forums, including the one with those who came from the right, such as David Brock, Arianna Huffington and John Dean.
Would he rather we call it the "corporate" media? That's my preference and it reminds the reader who the sponsor is.
Corporate media is good--it reminds us that they are PROFIT making and driven by that. We, on the other hand, are nowhere NEAR anything to do with PROFITS!
Quite the opposite.
However, our rewards come in other forms. We do know the truth, after a fashion anyway.
REGARDING LEAKS IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION:
Thomas Tamm, a former Justice Department lawyer in the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review, a secret unit that is supposed to oversee FISA warrants (which Bush bypassed completely), is accused of leaking the warrantless wiretapping program to the New York Times for the Pulitizer-prize winning story by Eric Lichtblau and James Risen.
FBI agents searched his home last week. As a former Justice Department attorney who leaked anonymously and then was subject to a brutal leak investigation that still has deleterious consequences for me today, I plea with Congress to stop this bogus, pretextual investigation immediately.
@@@@@@
If there charge Tamm with some crime, immediately the talk should start about why Richard Armitage, Scooter Libby and Karl Rove can leak with almost no consequences. I believe even Ari Fleischer talked to the press about Valerie Plame.
They are reporting 4 killed not 3
Three US soldiers killed, 12 wounded in Iraq attacks (1st Lead ...
http://news.monstersandcritics.com/middleeast/news/article_1337870.php/Three_US_soldiers_killed_12_wounded_in_Iraq_attacks__1st_Lead_
Baghdad - Three US soldiers have been killed and 12 others wounded in separate attacks in Iraq, the US military in Iraq reported on Thursday. ...
14 U.S. troops killed in 3 days in Iraq - CNN.com
On Sunday, three soldiers were killed and another was wounded when a ... Around 4:30 p.m., a parked car bomb in the Bayaa neighborhood killed at
least three ...
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/30/iraq.main/index.html
Dianne,
Those were great shots. I love the artistic comparison of wide spaces with honest bloggers and the tiny but earnest videotographer compared to the big bulking Fox news guy who was trying to escape your camera.
brings back memories of the strident confrontation during the msm v blogger conference.
For instance, Dlindorf, from Kos and epluribus media was able to confront the Time editor about his continual siting of someone like Kristol. Lindorf is a professional journalist of more than 16 years who now works for the online journalism site epluribus media. He gave it to them but good! And that was something that also showed the power of yearly kos--for more than 100 people to be able to confront the media bout their poor siting, their use of known liars, and their poor job performance. For that alone, I was happy to be there.
(Click on the link to read more about him.)
http://dlindorff.dailykos.com/
Ok so I have permissions, so open the link and enjoy!! Hat tip to Nyc Alberts from the Big Apple.
Subject: The REAL Reason Bill O'Reilly Hates On The KOS (was: Re: YearlyKos LiveBlog)
http://www.mrdrinkwater.com/2007/8607.html
It's from his friend Dave Schell, who's been doing work like this for over 25 years now, plenty more like it here:
http://www.mrdrinkwater.com
Let him know what you think! I am impressed!
Sparrow
I'm glad you provided that link! If I had good notes or a good memory I would have really wanted to talk about that exact thing and wasn't able to.
Thanks to you, we can share it! Hope you're all rested!
It amazes me that it's ok to go to war based on lies or to spy on people with warrants, but it's not ok for the public to know. That is what is punished.
Sorry to be off topic already. This is the complete article and the link. Perhaps Gonzales was to look after them and can't remember who he gave them to.
US weapons missing in Iraq
Washington
August 7, 2007
The Pentagon has lost track of about 190,000 AK-47 assault rifles and pistols given to Iraqi security forces in 2004 and 2005, raising fears some of the weapons have fallen into the hands of insurgents fighting US forces in Iraq.
A report by the Government Accountability Office indicates US military officials do not know what happened to 30 per cent of the weapons the US distributed to Iraqi forces from 2004 as part of an effort to train and equip the troops.
The US has spent $US19.2 billion ($A22.4 billion) trying to develop Iraqi security forces since 2003, the office said, but distribution of weapons was haphazard and rushed and failed to follow established procedures.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/us-weapons-missing-in-iraq/2007/08/06/1186252628024.html
Woz
Wonder what will happen to all the weapons we're providing to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait, Bahrain, Israel etc etc etc? Could it be they'll get in the wrong hands and kill our own military & be used by all factions on all sides?
I have added another component of YearlyKos - the Shriners.
(Click on my name) The politicos and celebrities are last, as contrary to what MSM (or Corporate Media) thought, it was "people-powered," not celebrity-driven.
A friend points out:
We (the US), 5% of the world's population, with our $13 trillion dollar GDP, have 20%, or better, of the world's $60 to $65 trillion dollars worth of GDP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29
Then he went and looked up the stock market capitalization of the the so-called "liberal" Corporate Media, to include General Electric, Microsoft, Time Warner, Viacom and News Corp.
Turns out that their combined value, as determined by the NYSE, is just about $1 trillion dollars, or about 8% of the USA's total GDP.
Think they don't have any influence on elections & so forth?!
Posted by: not my president at August 6, 2007 08:49 PM
It's more than scary huh?
"Christy and any Y-kos doubters. Ralph did a good job of addressing why the Y-kos is important and a tremendous step for Americans."
Posted by: sparrow at August 6, 2007 11:56 AM
I am sorry if I made you think I doubt Kos. I don't. He is what he says he is. I also believe it is a step forward, and that he, it, is important.
I have read lots of Kos site, and while overall I believe it is a good thing, it is not really a group I feel comfortable with.
Kos has a tendency, among his followers, to morph into a cult of personality at times. It is not acceptable when republicans do it, democrats doing it is just as unpretty. I have been told he is the 'unofficial PRIEST of the democratic party'. Guess what? I don't trust priests.
As a political tool he is very powerful and is providing a great service.
Yet on the other hand it is ALL POLITICS, all the time, and I don't trust any of our political system at the moment, not even the so called 'good guys'.
Not priests, not presidents. Not republicans...not even other democrats.
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and Dianne Fienstien and Jack Murtha and John Conyers are all good examples of why.
Christy
I don't pay all that much attention to him in that role (Kos).
I don't actually go to the site that much - people recommend links for me and I seldom read the loads of comments. I didn't recognize the name tags with nicknames on them that much.
I went both times to see what was going on with my own eyes. I actually got more out of the vendors and media idea people and independent film makers and so on. Wanted to see how technology can be used for things we're already doing and how different generations are doing things.
One thing about YearlyKos - it's people of all ages, so there are some tech-savvy young people from the Millennial generation who are good multi-taskers and then there are us crusty of veterans of the various literal and figurative wars.
I think there is some discussion over at Kos as well about the inevitable tension between the netroots moving into more powerful and influential realms and the degree of co-opting that happens as a result.
Think about it. While many were out at parties or carousing in general, or even doing legitimate networking, the Congress was selling democracy down the river. For people as aware as those attending, it must have been tough to have the candidates politicking while Rome, err.. Washington burns.
On a personal note, I did appreciate the reports and updates from those who were there when they were sharing what they were learning. I do not think it was a waste of time to go.
But I think, as we reflect on what was accomplished, we have to consider that we are at an interesting point in time at the grassroots and netroots levels.
I've been thinking about Peter Daou and others like him who are deeply inside the campaigns now and I do wonder at times how they are dealing with trying to get the longtime insiders to get what the netroots are doing for them.
I know what it WAS like, and I wonder if things have changed much.
The reports from Kos are fascinating and I look forward to seeing how this all plays out over the next few months.
DiAnne and Suz--I am not talking about your well-reported experiences here. I am talking about Markos and Matt Stollard and Jerome and Peter and all those former young uns who are now on payrolls and who are learning new scripts and lifestyles.
Whose information do you trust now? And why?
Karen
I take all of it with a grain of salt, in a way!
Ok here's a homeboy, Ari Melber. Let's see if he sells out. I had a chance to talk with him some.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070813/melber
Another account:
http://salon.com/news/feature/2007/08/06/yearlykos/index_np.html
I suspect fragmentation during the primaries will occur, then we will need to coalesce.
The larger picture is our loss of civil liberties as these goons are in charge and scare as many as they can with "terror" and it does seem surreal when many aspects of life go on as usual. That said, there is only so much we can do as individuals. & we have to do it.
woz--Yes, it appears we sold our enemies the guns they are shooting us with.
And to link this up with my comment above, both Richard and I have had separate experiences in the past few days of being asked to apply for or work with companies we would never ever consider supporting, and the money offered was obscene.
And that is partly why I was interested in the tensions in the netroots about insider/outsider roles.
As the space between the haves and the have-nots widens ever further, it is clear that the haves will be in ever-growing positions to offer the have-nots entree, in ways we cannot even imagine. Or at least, I could not have imagined until these recent opportunities became evident.
We have had conversations about "going inside" in order to change the system vs. staying outside and feeling frustrated and ineffective (not to mention poor).
We made our decisions but we would not judge someone badly for trying it the other way. You never know what you can accomplish.
And so, I had the luxury of contemplating what it would be like to make a lot of money while trying to improve the climate that produced the situation woz mentions above.
It's challenging to imagine what any of us might do if offered a great deal of money to give advice to those who have been making such a mess of our country.
And it's challenging to think about what any of us might do if, after paying us a great deal of money, they just went ahead and ignored our advice.
That is sort of what happened to the netroots, and sort of what might happen to me. So I am thinking really really hard.
Christy, Karen, and NMP,
Good points on the role of Kos.
I've been in a foul mood all day, between the reactionary propaganda on the radio in Korean (my father was in my office all day today) and some Kossacks thinking I am a troll simply because I dare accuse these Koreans of tax evasion.
I won't go back to Kos often, unless it's to recommend some DCPers' diaries there. While some Kossacks want me to put out a diary of my own regarding Asian-American Republican politics, I will not do so, as some hopelessly PC types WILL troll-rate me.
And that overly PC-ness is what will kill the liberal movement.
I am, however, still more than willing to participate in next year's YKos. Any venue that can attract almost every presidential aspirant, and still open enough for everyday people to participate, is a valuable opportunity that can't be squandered.
nmp, Yes, salt is a good way to think about it. It's nice to have your placid going amidst the noise and haste.
Karen
What kind of deals were made when they all keep saying the FISA vote was "temporary?" What can it mean?
Yes I guess I am usually placid! LOL Or you could maybe call it jaded, I don't know.
Karen
Any time I have been offered or made good money, I have had to sell out something. As an academic, I would have to be narrow and not question certain things. As a worker in for-profit healthcare, I could have but chose not to engage in actual fraud.
Now I prefer to make money to live on that is good work (harms no one, in the sense of Hypocrites) but isn't directly related to my political work, because there is less chance of conflict of interest.
If you're talking about working on campaigns or something, I think it's a matter of degree but there would definitely be compromise. It's amazing how much it reminds me of some of the academic things I passed up, because of the pressure to put on blinders and focus on a narrow goal.
You're freer if you're not owned. I think you're on the right track thinking about inside/outside, up/down and what drives what. I am glad I went to the NW caucus to see what OR and WA need, because I got an idea of the ethics of some of the candidates and what they expect/understand/"get" about the netroots.
nmp,
I THINK (I don't know cause they all must have lost my cellphone number--hahah) they think they are going to fix it later. It's a six-month period and I have heard rumors that they are going to amend, alter, fix, etc.
The problem is that the train left the station. You can TRY to call it back, but by the time September rolls around, it's possible the train will have picked off a number of citizens along the way.
If you have relatives in other countries and you talk to them on the phone, rest assured you are being tracked.
I feel sort of weary about it, actually. But that does not mean we should not see the danger here.
If you have relatives in other countries and you talk to them on the phone, rest assured you are being tracked.
Posted by: karen at August 6, 2007 09:33 PM
And they BETTER track me. I got folks in Australia and South Korea - the two countries that have irreparably damaged our politics.
If they are tracking some innocent instead of the true danger - me - then they are really screwing up.
Ally
I can check first hand who people donate to and there are some people in all races who help the greedy, bad candidates and hold their values. Some knee-jerk liberals don't believe this as it flies in the face of their beliefs in that they would not expect such people to sell out others. I don't like it either but at least I know for a fact that you are right, based on who I have met and what I have seen.
My friend from Thailand has a co-worker from Indonesia who has a framed picture of his idol, John Ashcroft. Yet I have a good friend from the same country who registered enough voters for our governor to win a close race, though he is not a citizen.
Those people (on Kos, DU etc.) have to realize that they can't have one stereotype. It's wrong. We used to live on an Indian reservation and there were "apples" (red on the outside, white on the inside) who supported or became Bureau of Indian Affairs bigwigs, and then there were the American Indian Movement people who came into open armed conflict with the FBI. There were all sorts. I'm sure this is true with every segment of society.
No, I am not talking about campaign work--believe me, that does not pay!
I agree that going inside means you lose some freedom of speech. I am in an academic institution and I do not have tenure. But I shoot my mouth off anyway...what are they gonna do, FIRE me?
Well, they might. But I decided long ago that that was OK.
But the situation I am thinking about (which may not be real at all anyway) involves perhaps working against my own values and that I just can't do. I need the freedom to, at the very least, be truthful.
Karen
Yes - my friendships overseas are innocent but now I do not trust them. It's just the idea - no warrant needed. It is too close to heading toward a "closed society" like Soros warns about. When I was a kid I was horrified when people couldn't travel (as in the Soviet Union). We are losing civil liberties while our "leaders" speak of freedom, liberty and democracy and bringing them to other countries. It's so ironic!
Karen
I don't think you can be bought!
NMP,
Is that Thai friend of yours Henry, by any chance? I enjoyed meeting with him last year.
And I definitely remember that voter registration Indonesian guy, I think you mentioned one of his speeches on our forum.
Karen,
I work as part of the military-industrial complex (most of my contracts are with the Navy/Marines), and am constantly being brainwashed that I need more military spending to make it. I've repeatedly rejected that viewpoint, that's why I am hanging in there.
When I take over the business though, I am going to change it - more civilian contracts, including possibly those in San Francisco, the ones that many shy away from due to onerous paperwork requirements. If I can comply with all the tough human rights requirements of San Francisco, I should have myself a niche.
When I met with Fe, she recommended expanding my work to NorCal. I still remember that moment, and I feel that I must expand there, if only to keep my sanity.
W and Karzai vow an "end to Taliban":
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6933063.stm
Too little, too late, I am afraid. We stopped halfway, got Pat Tillman killed, then went to Iraq on a war of lie to get more killed. Meanwhile, the Taliban re-grouped.
http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/releases/07/08/20070806censure.html
FEINGOLD, HINCHEY INTRODUCE RESOLUTIONS CENSURING PRESIDENT, VICE PRESIDENT AND ATTORNEY GENERAL
Resolutions Condemn President and Administration Officials for Misconduct Leading Up to and During Military Involvement in Iraq, and for Undermining the Rule of Law
August 6, 2007
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) and U.S. Representative Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) have introduced two censure resolutions in their respective chambers condemning the president, vice president and the attorney general for misconduct regarding our military involvement in Iraq and for their repeated assaults on the rule of law at home. Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) is a cosponsor of both Senate censure resolutions and Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) is a cosponsor of the Senate censure resolution regarding Iraq. The House resolutions have 19 original cosponsors.
“Congress cannot stay silent when the American people are demanding that this administration be held accountable for its blatant misconduct regarding Iraq and its attack on the rule of law,” Feingold said. “These censure resolutions will let future generations know that Congress stood up to the destructive policies of this administration that have weakened our national security, cost more than 3,600 American lives, and undermined the principles on which our country was founded. I applaud Congressman Hinchey for leading this charge for accountability in the House of Representatives.”
...
Cosponsors of the House resolutions are Representatives Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Michael Capuano (D-MA), Steve Cohen (D-TN), Danny Davis (D-IL), Sam Farr (D-CA), Bob Filner (D-CA), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), John Hall (D-NY), Michael Honda (D-CA), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), James Moran (D-VA), Ed Pastor (D-AZ), Steve Rothman (D-NJ), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Carol Shea Porter (D-NH), and Diane Watson (D-CA).
The Senate censure resolution regarding Iraq is available at http://feingold.senate.gov/censureiraq302.pdf. The Senate censure resolution regarding the rule of law is available at http://feingold.senate.gov/censureruleoflaw303.pdf. The House resolutions are identical.
Well, that's SOMETHING...
Karen
I don't think you can be bought!
Posted by: not my president at August 6, 2007 09:41 PM
No, no one has ever managed to come up with just the right combination of cold cash and respectful honest treatment that I would seek...
Not to mention, chocolate...
Ally
Henry is the one you met - he's just returned from Thailand but he's lived here since his freshman year of college. Ben Doko is the one from Indonesia who did impressive work registering voters. He also went to Boston for John Kerry's 60th birthday party and met up with mbk and Marjorie G.
Marjorie G will be here in a couple of days on the way to cruise Alaska and she will meet Elizabeth, since they are both voting integrity activitss. We will have dinner at Wild Ginger, which is Teresa Heinz Kerry's favorite restaurant.
I met an Indonesian couple at YearlyKos who, like me, worked for Eugene McCarthy back when I was in high school and they were in college. They were from near DC - very nice people.
At YearlyKos, Suz and I spent alot of time with John Kerry's netroots coordinator and some other people who frequent his site alot. Saw Fe very briefly and was introduced to Violet but as I said, missed a couple of others I'd liked to have met but there will be other times.
So that's the social rundown. Next year there should be both the Netroots convention and the 2008 Dem convention in the summer so it would take some planning to go to both. If we're all still here ..
.. duck and cover!
Giuliani's daughter supports Obama, according to her MySpace profile. "Is that the one with his cousin?" asks my son.
..after Slate posted her article, she took down her entire site.
Damage done. Poor kid.
Good summary of the "Protect America Act" - it's another of those Orwellian things
http://www.slate.com/id/2171747/
NMP:
On your comment:
Posted by: not my president at August 6, 2007 09:40 PM
That is the supreme irony to me. So many of these "Love it or Leave it" types love to go on about how people have given their lives for freedom, and in the exact same breath go on to say this is why we should give up our freedom to save our lives.
I know there is something else going on there. I need to think on that. I think it has to do with who the speakere thinks "we" are.
Chuck in Houston
Christy:
On your comment:
Posted by: Christy at August 6, 2007 09:23 AM
Everything has its season. I am hopeful. I don't feel any ecstatic hope -- that burned out of me a long time ago. I believe we have turned some deep, serious corners in this world of ours, and while the path to a better way is still a mystery to me, and while I doubt I will see a sea-change in my lifetime, or even understand what that change might look like, I think a lot of deeper things are moving in the right direction: toleration, respect for life, respect for families, and respect for the idea that individuals should be free to make choices as long as they don't harm others (kind of closes the circle back to toleration). We may still blow ourselves up, one way or another, on that path, but my faith tells me that over time people are moving in the right direction. Sometimes it happens fast, and sometimes it happens slow. I believe our mission is to just keep it moving.
Chuck in Houston
It's like this documentary I watched the other night -- the US vs. John Lennon or something. Lennon was saying, "people, so flower-power didn't work. It was a joke. So what? Does that mean you quit trying?" or something to that effect. And his answer was something like "no; if the idea was right, you take another run at it from a different tack." War is over, if we want it, and not a moment before. How do we get there from here? Everything I've seen in this life tells me you get there by finding the your guiding-light and then never letting it out of your sight, while never forgetting that somebody still has to pay the rent and put food on the table. In fact, everybody has to do that last bit. So you have to rely on faith to balance the two.
Chuck in Houston
PS: I will no doubt be very embarrassed if I was to read this tomorrow. So I guess I'll just click "Post" and be done with it.
I guess if i had to paraphrase the above to a Republican, I'd say "war is over if they want it," with a follow-up: "So what is the best way to make that happen?" It's really the same principle, because "they" are "us" or "we" to "them." Oh, nevermind....
Chuck in Houston
Yet on the other hand it is ALL POLITICS, all the time, and I don't trust any of our political system at the moment, not even the so called 'good guys'.
Not priests, not presidents. Not republicans...not even other democrats.
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and Dianne Fienstien and Jack Murtha and John Conyers are all good examples of why.
Posted by: Christy at August 6, 2007 08:55 PM
I come to the conclusion that the democrats are not going to reign in Georgie Christy, because they want that power, if and when they get into the White House, and they will not even have to fight for it, because they have already put it in place.
Chuck waxing philosophic...
night, all!
Rossiann:
What particular power are you talking about? And if your analysis is correct, why doesn't the Republican Party in the US fight Bush on this?
Chuck in Houston
Karen:
Well, what can a poor boy do?
Except to play in a rock and roll band,
Cause in sleepy London town there's just no place for a....
Street-smart middle-aged Democrat.
Chuck in Houston
And of course put food on the table and a roof over our heads. And do the dishes. And etc.
Chuck:
You do dishes??
Come on over...!
In this life
In this life
In this life
In this old sweet life
We're coming in from the cold....
It's you
It's you
It's you I'm taling to....
Why do you look so sad
And forsaken?
When one door is closed,
Don't you know, another is open?
Would you let the system get into you head again?
No, dread no.
Would you let the system make you kill your brother man?
No, dread no.
Well, the biggest man you ever did see
Was once a baby
In this life.
In this life
In this old sweet life
We're coming in from the cold....
Brother Bill Marley
Chuck in Houston
Karen:
I cook a lot too. And my rule is if I cook it, I eat it. My wife has night classes so I have to "Batch" it with my daughter a lot. But I am really much better at watching action-adventures and driking beer.
Chuck in Houston
Oops! Brother Bob Marley! (Must have been thinking on Brother Bill Rancher at the same time.)
Chuck
Beer, rock & roll, good comments - I guess I checked in at the right time but am headed off to bed myself.
Brother Bill Rancher!
Brother Bob Marley!
Chuck
YouTube has them! Search! There is more!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMqRErUVt4A
More on music! Kayakbiker was so lucky!
Saw Patti Smith Group tonight. I sat about 5 rows from the stage. Someone left the Onion in our lunch room and I read that Patti Smith was coming to the State Theater, a small venue in downtown Minneapolis. I thought it might be a fake ad; after all, it was in the Onion. I ran to my office and bought a ticket off of the computer.
I was surprised I was so close to the stage. The announcement for her concert appeared in the City Pages the following week. That's what most music followers read and probably the reason I got such a great seat. Maybe too that others are not real kean
about her new album.
She was performing a lot from her new covers album. I liked her old stuff that she did off of Easter and Redondo Beach better than the new stuff. The old stuff has a lot of soul and her 2 hour long concert had a lot of variety.
Patti Smith had some funny interactions with the audience. She said she did the covers because her record company wanted her to do it and her career sucked. Now, she says, she did the covers and her career still sucks. It was tongue in cheek (I think, she has a weird affect), but it rang true for me.
She also complained about Iraq and said people need to do stuff, including boycott. Everyone cheered.
Tony Glover, a Minneapolis legend on mouth harp, joined her on stage. He did a few songs with her, including Helpless (a Neal Young cover). Her version was ok but the mouth harp was great. Glover requested that one, and you can understand why he did.
Here's a youtube commentary about Glover:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ-TQ8S5rLw
Someone asked for her boots, She said she would die with her boots on.
NMP:
Thanks so much for that link. Back then, we were so too cool for the New Wave!
Chuck in Houston
Rossiann:
What particular power are you talking about? And if your analysis is correct, why doesn't the Republican Party in the US fight Bush on this?
Chuck in Houston
The power, that means an intelligence official is now empowered to sort through the legalistic, secretive world of FISA, rather than a judge or the nation's highest law enforcement officer.
Any Democratic President, would be a fool not to gather that power for later use, and why would the repulicans fight Georgie on this, if they get one of the GOP freaks elected President, they would want that same power.
And scary as that possibilty seems, there is a chance one of them will be elected, or your New York Independant might come into the election,
and then it up for grabs, because the democratic senate have made some democrats very angry, and looking for another place to put their vote.
Anyways that is what I am thinking,
For about a decade, Boehner has been trying to crucify my Congressman (McDermott) for "leaking" information that was unhelpful to Newt Gingrich. It's been a costly multi-stage legal battle.
NOW look who is the "leaker" - Boehner himself!
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/08/06/crew-files-complaint-against-rep-john-boehner-for-possible-leak-of-classified-information/
Rossian
It could be like the guy i Slate said - they really wanted to go on vacation so they were willing to vote for anything Bush would approve, just so they could get onto the golf course.
More scandal, but will anything be done? Why do people send me this creepy stuff late at night when I have to get to sleep.
So..
DOJ was notified about postings at TPM Muckraker and traced them back to Thomas Tamm's house. That is why they confiscated his computer and his children's laptops, all likely using the same Internet service provider.
This investigation by the Bush Administration has been quiet for almost a year and a half, and suddenly when more information is revealed through blog postings, it kicks into high gear again.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/6/9614/26491
I always keep an open mind, but it seems as though we have lost the 4th Amendment.
Rossian
It could be like the guy i Slate said - they really wanted to go on vacation so they were willing to vote for anything Bush would approve, just so they could get onto the golf course.
Posted by: not my president at August 7, 2007 12:31 AM
I dont think so, and if their vacation was so important, it says it all.
Do you think any Democratic President would take back any of the power that they have given to Georgie, I don't think so.
I listen to your citizens daily, on air and they are absolutely enraged with their party and are saying that they will vote Independant, if there is an Independant Nominee, and that will certainly blow the election wide open,
This election is not going to be the given, that I think the Democratic Senate thinks it is going to be,
I think Bloomberg is sitting quitely by with all his billions, and letting both parties make all their mistakes not listening to the people, who are certainly making themselves heard, and will come in at the last minute and blow the election wide open.
America is angry, the people are angry, As Christy always says you could not feel it before, now I can feel it here in the Land Down Under
NMP:
Ain't been the same since those go-go boots left town.
Rossiann:
Doesn't address the underlying issue: the Legistlative would fight this becuase it gives an unconstitutional power to the Executive. Power in the US is split.
Rossiann:
Doesn't address the underlying issue: the Legistlative would fight this becuase it gives an unconstitutional power to the Executive. Power in the US is split.
Posted by: Chuck at August 7, 2007 12:59 AM
Yes, but do you think the Legistlative would fight this, or get enough of a majority to win the fight. I think either the Democrats or the Republicans if that power was there, would hold on tight to it. Just imagine if the Democrats hand it all to Georgie and Bloomberg comes in and takes it all.
You have got angry republicans who would vote for Bloomberg after all they put Lieberman back into the Senate, you have the independant voters, and now you have some very, very, angry democrats looking for somewhere else to put their vote.
Can you just imagine Fuax news, They would be all out for Bloomberg, 24 hrs, just like they where for lieberman in the last lot of elections, Joe should never have gotten that Senate Seat, but he sure as hell did, anyone but the democrats for Faux News, and lets face it Georgie the GOP freaks dont give then anything to brag about 24 hrs a day now.
Rossiann:
The US Constitution has held tight for some two-hundred years and weathered a few storms in the process. Angry "Democrats" got George Bush in office in the first place by voting "Green." Angry Republicans have been in the ascendancy for decades, except to the extent to which Bill Clinton foiled them. Maybe the angry Republicans will start to act like Democrats and vote for some spoiler. If not, the current regime will remain in power. I haven't run a Monte Carlo on this scenario so I really can't say with any degree of confidence. My guess is angry people will cancel each other out over the next decade or so. Any of these that back one branch of government over another will likely back the wrong horse a not. That's the way it's usually worked out in the past.
Chuck in Houston
It hasn't weathered Georgie and his thugs though,
I don't think anyone would have thought that this illiterate, impotent, little thug would have gained this much power,and still keeps demanding, and the Dems still keep giving.
I hope your right Chuck, but I am getting a very uneasy feeling about this next election, also.
I thought the Dems were home and in the White House in 2008, definitely not sure now though, the way they are voting in the Senate
If Rudy or Romney gets in the White House, consider me exterminated.
Seriously.
And that's why I will follow NMP's example and vote for whoever ends up as the Dem nominee - even if she is Hillary.
Otherwise, see you in Canada.
Rossiann,
The difference between Repukes and Dems:
Repukes serve their base - corporations and churches - very well.
Dems are beholden to too many corporate backers to truly serve their base - minorities, unions, Jews, and LGBTs.
I wish I could tell you otherwise but this is true. Hence the rise of corporate Hillary, who has no support among the netroots.
Rossiann:
Our Constitution weathered the Adamses and the "Foreign and Seditious" BS (sp?) and it finally got us through slavery and equal rights, despite the suspension of Habeus Corpus, or however you spell that (not to mention justice Taney), and the absolutely illegal and disgraceful internment of "Japanese Americans" in WWII, and saw us through Civil Rights. Don't worry, we'll get there, one step at a time. We've done it before and we'll do it again.
Chuck in Houston
More for Rossiann:
We are not a parliamentary system, so the rules of fighting are a little different.
Our two-party system is so rigid, you are pretty much stuck voting for the lesser of the two evils.
Honestly, in an ideal world, the Greens should hold half the seats in Northern California, and the reactionary American Independents (Constitution Party outside California) should be representing my hardcore conservative district. But again, the grip of the Dems and the Repukes is too much for these smaller parties to ever crack.
Posted by: Chuck at August 7, 2007 01:58 AM
Alien and Sedition Acts. Blatantly unconstitutional, on the same level as W's unitary executive theory.
Ally:
In that case the "netroots" ought to take a good long think about who they are and what they hope to achieve an how they hope to achieve it. Are you saying that unions, Jews, and LGBT's are "corporate" or am I missing something?
Chuck in Houston
Ally:
We survived Alien and Sedition and we will survive this -- as long as we keep our eyes on the ball. That's my point.
Chuck in Houston
Looks like it Ally, Hell I wish I had not been watching that darn election in 2000, and gotten so pissed off, and involved in your darn politics. I keep saying enough is enough, but friking Georgie is still there every morning when I wake up, and I get more pissed off, and read to see what he has done this day.
But remember Ally, Nader put Georgie into the White House, Bloomberg could put Rudy or Romney into it.
hahahahah Ally seriously Exterminated
Rossi
Off topic totally. Where in Qld. I moved from Hervey Bay in 2003, to Tassie. For the climate!
Well the boom chuck rocking it's a rocking sound
You hear it in the country and in every town
They call it boom chucking it's a boom chuck sound
The boom chuck rocking is the only kind of rock around....
Well everywhere you go you hear the boom chuck sound
In the cowboy halls and the punk rock towns
They call it boom chuck rock it's just the same thing twice
Boom chuck rock well it sounds so nice...
We want some Boom Chuck Rock now!
Billy Rancher
Chuck in Houston (no relation to Boom Chuck) Clear
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mlJjBYllQY&mode=related&search=
Well, it was the early eighties back then....
And that was a live performance.
Team:
I'm sorry for getting bogged down in nostalgia. Now you have me back on a misty morning on the Nestucca going after the mighty Steelhead when life was young and full of promises, the most important of which came true....
I hope my daughter has that same chance. Let's make that happen. How's that, Wild Salmon?
Chuck in Houston, far from home
ex-SE Portland (Hosford GS 1975 Cleveland HS 1979)
I'm trying to find transcripts of these 3 parts of an investigative documentary made by UK journalists. For now, I will just give the blurb for each part. I missed the first 2 parts and will watch part 3 tonight.
1. Kidnapped To Order
Tuesday, 24 July at 8.30pm
An exposé of a new phase in America’s war on al Qaeda: the detention of women and children. Last year, President Bush confirmed the existence of a CIA secret detention program, but refused to give details and said it was over.
The program reveals new evidence confirming fiercely-denied reports that many of the CIA captives were held and interrogated in Europe. Those prisons may now be closed, but the program is by no means over, it's just changed. A new front has opened up in the Horn of Africa and America has outsourced its renditions to its allies.
2. Spying On The Home Front
Tuesday, 31 July at 8.30pm
In a permanent war against a hidden enemy, how far has the government gone in hunting terrorists by watching us?
9/11 has indelibly altered America in ways that people are now starting to earnestly question: not only perpetual orange alerts, barricades and body frisks at the airport, but greater government scrutiny of people’s records - there’s been a shift in electronic surveillance of governments after 9/11 to a strategy of pre-emption at home - not just prosecuting terrorists for breaking the law, but trying to find and stop them before they strike.
3. Secrets, Sources And Spin
Tuesday, 7 August at 8.30pm
This documentary examines recent first amendment battles between the Bush Administration and the press in America. How much can the press reveal about secret government programs in the war on terror without jeopardizing national security?
It explores today’s high-profile debates over the roll of the press, including clashes between journalists and the government over whether or not a reporter has the right to keep a source confidential.
In the summer of 2003, the news media were raising questions of Saddam Hussein’s weapons regime just as news about the war grew more violent by the day. New critics emerged, and there were more questions over whether or not the Administration overstated the problem of WMD.
I'm in Brisbane, woz born and bred here, never to leave that is for sure. Travelled the world a bit but cannot wait to get home to Brisbane again.
Family all the way up the coast to Cairns Babinda Innisvale, hundreds of them I think nearly all in QLD
People are migrating here by the thousands every week. Darn it all.
And if Christy Asses Georgie out of the White House, I dont care how she does it, I might just might go visit her in Louisiana. Remember Christy I have that Unit in Rio Di Janero any time we want it.
"Remember Christy I have that Unit in Rio Di Janero ..."
OMG What a horrible time to be on a list.
I am dreaming of Rio.
I agree Rossi, the dems are more worried about being the next master, not about freeing the slaves.
And Chuck, I agree we must hold on to that inner light, but, the truth is our Constitution has now failed, for the first time in all our years, it has failed.
Not because it should have or even would have eventually. But because georgie murdered it.
There is a strange sense of cold blooded nervousness breaking through us now, unlike anything I have ever seen or felt before.
Holding onto that light is becoming more difficult by the day.
Do you know what I think is going to happen in 08?
I don't care how much the WaPo or NY Times does polls that show Obama trailing Clinton, I think Obama is going to win it, by a large margin. I think those polls are overlooking 60% of those who will be voting, but are otherwise silent.
I hear a lot of people in my life talk about politics, but when Obama comes up, something strange happens. All of the younger people I know (Under 35) are in total agreement for why they will vote for Obama.
1) He is a Constitutional expert, in a way the others only wish they could be, and we currently have a mortally wounded US Constitution.
And 2) He is black. My generation, and the ones behind me are most eager to finally, finally put a man of color on the throne.
In some ways it goes even beyond being the right thing to do, into something that resembles more of a reckoning.
I think in 08, the young people are all the sudden going to show up unexpectedly, intent on putting Obama into power and showing our elders that our politics are no longer their daddys toy.
My mother does not understand how we could be talking about voting for Obama, as she says, 'simply because he is black'.
But I do not think she realizes how important it is to our generation.
I think older white people in this country have no idea how very sick and tired we are of old white people driving this nation off of a cliff repeatedly at high speed.
A Reckoning is coming.
I think it will be ...beautiful.
I read thru everything posted last night, bottom to top, of course. What sticks in my mind is Chuck's angry mobs cancelling each other out. How wierd!
Ralphs idea that we need to 'move the blogosphere out of the ghetto' is still wierd to me.
I am from the ghetto. It is the blogosphere that should be moving INTO the ghettos.
If you want to go mainstream, you need to go ghetto.
If you want poor people to be represented, then go get them. And bring them here. If you want young black people and single mothers on Medicaid to be represented, bring them here then.
Why is Kos also forming up as a mob of angry old white men? Because white males are not only the most likely to have computers they also have the money to travel.
If you want to break out of the 'blog ghetto' then you need the people of the ghettos to help. They are the ones whose voices are most lacking.
And trust me, once politics becomes 'hip' in ghettos, or el burrios, or the trailer parks, it will spread like wildfire and get us all out of the ghetto.
Lessons Not Learned
by Russ Feingold
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sen-russ-feingold/lessons-not-learned_b_59302.html
Christy
I think Ralpheh is referring to the Pajama Ghetto. It's virtual.
A friend found the "new talking points" on Crooks and Liars.
The day after President George W. Bush marshaled political forces in Congress to grant him greater authority to engage in counter terrorism-related spying, the president stated that he would seek greater changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act when the legislative branch returns to work in September.
“While I appreciate the leadership it took to pass this bill, we must remember that our work is not done,” the President said in his Sunday statement. “This bill is a temporary, narrowly focused statute to deal with the most immediate shortcomings in the law.”
The President said next month he would focus on further immunizing private companies that cooperate with government wiretapping. However, he used complicated language to describe these activities.
“When Congress returns in September the Intelligence committees and leaders in both parties will need to complete work on the comprehensive reforms requested by Director McConnell, including the important issue of providing meaningful liability protection to those who are alleged to have assisted our Nation following the attacks of September 11, 2001,” he said.
Yep. Toast. Burnt Toast. Oh but don't worry...... there's a sunset provision. 6 mos down the road. I am literally sick. But what makes me SICKEST is that I went to work with about 100 other Citizens today and not one seemed to notice anything different about today versus the previous work day. Nor will they ever. Sickening.
----- Original Message ----
The 4th amendment is toast, right?
Good reader comment to an MSNBC columnist:
Stop reading Drudge, stop clicking on its page and stop linking to it in articles. He is poison for your industry.
Even MSM account of warrantless wiretapping bill has scary overtones. Why did they do it? What is the plan? Is there one? I am starting to think they really did want to get onto the golf course.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-08-05-FISA_N.htm
Most revealing Kos-related diary - what the shoes reveal!!
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/7/12925/28280
Virtual, yes, but it plays out in a literal sense.
And to clarify, when I said I am from there, I mean I have lived my life in all three. Ghettos, el burrios, and trailer parks.
I have spent more time in black ghettos (the hood) as opposed to the Latin or White ghettos, but yet in all three of them, you see the same thing.
People who are so hungry to be involved. People are so hopeless that they will never be able to activly engage on a personal level with our larger body politic.
Many have given up even trying.
The only main political difference I see is that white poor people tend to trust the Fox News types completely, where as Mexicans and Blacks would rather cut off their own arms than trust the powers that be.
All three could use a huge dose of internet tubing.
As a democrat, I can not think of anything more important right now than bringing those people in from the cold. Mounting an army.
I guess what I find strange is Ralphs unintended assertion that somehow being in the 'ghetto' is a bad place to be, either virtually or literally.
I know in the literal sense, when I am in the ghettos, I am completely comfortable. The truth is, on the streets of such communities anything you want is available. Legal, illegal, needed, luxury...whatever you desire. If you can pay to play, you can play all day long. The people are so diverse and much more clever than old rich white people give them credit for.
I am heartened by what I see as a huge, and I mean HUGE consumer base, and a virtual, and literal political army just waiting to be mobilized in a real sense.
They are hungy for the generals to show up and show them HOW to march.
It goes back to the basic premise of what the DCP is for. What organizations like Kos are for.
A group like Kos, with the enormous resources they can command, could easily empower the very people they want to represent, to stand up for themselves.
Ever seen Braveheart..? Yes, I know it is incredibly inacurate and maybe even cheesy, but it did give an interesting overview of why Scottish Politics made sure Wallace failed.
In one scene, the English king had landed an army behind Wallace and he goes to Sir Robert The Bruce and begs him to 'unite the tribes' to stand against England.
He demands it, 'UNITE THEM!' The Bruce agrees and then betrays him.
Our ghettos are our tribes.
It is high time they are united in a common cause. When they do become united, it will be a political force unlike any ever seen before.
I understand Ralphs argument, but I believe instead of trying to leave the ghetto, you should instead embrace it in both the virtual and literal sense.
We will all suddenly find ourselves in the same neighborhood.
CENSURING BUSH BY SENATE:
(symbolic but it is better than nothing at all - perhaps laying the groundwork for impeachment)
Feingold Introduces Resolutions Censuring Bush, Others
By Frederic J. Frommer
The Associated Press
Monday 06 August 2007
Washington - Sen. Russ Feingold has introduced resolutions that would censure President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales for what Feingold calls the Bush administration's misleading the nation into war, and undermining the rule of law.
In the House, Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-N.Y., introduced companion resolutions.
"Congress cannot stay silent when the American people are demanding that this administration be held accountable for its blatant misconduct regarding Iraq and its attack on the rule of law," Feingold, D-Wis., said in a statement Monday.
"From misleading this country into invading Iraq to establishing a warrantless domestic spy program, this White House has continuously misled and deceived the American people while disregarding the rule of law that guides our democracy," Hinchey said in a statement Monday,
Feingold announced last month that he would introduce the two resolutions.
One would censure Bush and Cheney for what it calls misleading the country about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's regime, and inadequate planning for military action in Iraq, among other things.
The other would censure Bush and Gonzales for the warrantless surveillance program against suspected terrorists, and what the resolution calls misleading Congress about the firings of U.S. attorneys, among other things.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080707K.shtml
Ralphs idea that we need to 'move the blogosphere out of the ghetto' is still wierd to me.
I am from the ghetto. It is the blogosphere that should be moving INTO the ghettos.
If you want to go mainstream, you need to go ghetto.
@@@@@
Yes, I am refering to the "in your pajamas, sitting at the kitchen table, on the internet ghetto". Figurative use of the word "ghetto".
We have two options:
1) bring the blogs to the people by getting them online.
2) bring the blogs to the people via more traditional media - TV, radio, newspaper, direct mail etc..
Posted by: Christy at August 7, 2007 09:51 AM
Christy,
Agreed with you.
The white liberal community assumes that nonwhites will just follow their orders, because conservatism is NOT an option for these nonwhites. Guess what? WRONG. Conservatism is a very attractive option for nonwhites, and white liberals ignore that at their peril.
Disagreed about blacks and Latinos not following Fox News. Where I live, Latinos ARE the mainstream - and they watch Fox News and vote for W.
Posted by: not my president at August 7, 2007 09:46 AM
Being the resident fashion icon of DCP, I loved looking at all the footwear on the great people who attended YKos.
Major Danby, one of those featured, looks so California casual in sandals. He is the campaign manager for Ron Shepston, who is the DCCC-funded challenger to my neocon Congressman.
Madame and Ellen: your own challenger, Dan Seals, looks great too.
Posted by: Chuck at August 7, 2007 02:04 AM
Chuck, my point was that minorities, Jews, unions, and LGBTs are NOT corporate types (maybe except for the largest of the labor unions), and that Dems are too entangled with the corporate backers to truly represent these grassroots demographics, at least at this time.
Christy,
A ghetto isn't necessarily ethnic or poor. My own ghetto is ethnic (Asian, sure), but it's full of BMWs and other obscenely expensive cars (and the multimillion-dollar mansions to go with them). Similarly, the gay ghetto (i.e. Castro in San Francisco) is often very upper-class (and not ethnic at all).
Even the ghetto that Ralpheh is talking about is pretty upper-class and white.
Our goal is to interconnect all these ghettos with common themes that matter to everyone, and build a better country.
new thread, heads DOWN!