Yo Dem_Strategist re: media activism - file this under 'Crazy-Ass Shit'

[WilliamPitt]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2226619&mesg_id=2226619

[Green Mountain Dem]

1. An ominous foreboding of impending.....

disaster for all Americans believing that the "media" will change with a new administration. I read your previous post about the danger of having high expectations for the 1st 100 days of a Kerry Presidency and you are SO RIGHT ON in that respect. However, even if we could give Kerry a Senate and House that would advance his (our) agenda, I fear that until we can also insure a more diverse corporate ownership of our media the message will be subverted.

Taking back the media should be as important to all of us as taking back the WH...one without the other won't change the bottom line.

[gasperc]

2. oh, AAR, this site and alot of other blogs will have to EXPAND

to INCH a fair, balanced and sane agenda forward. I look back at when Clinton got in and right from the get go, the right started pounding him with the gays in the military issue. And who can forget the incredible shrinking president Time cover?? and on and on, until we lost the house and senate in 1994. But our ideas set forth in the '93 budget agreement prevailed and led to the longest expansion in history, an across the board increase in employment among all class sectors, increase in home ownership, and a complete turnaround of the long term budget situation to the point that the debt might be paid off by 2010. Meaning a wealth of resources for retirement funds and health care. Now, in just 3.5 years, it's all down the tubes.

Nothing ends on Nov.2nd, it only begins!!!!!!!!!!

[mzmolly]

3. The FBI is also infiltrating and harassing Bush protest/peace groups.

Interesting isn't it?

Somehow I think they should be infiltrating the KKK and leave US the F alone.

I would also ask if the FBI is infiltrating Anti-Kerry groups? And, now much tax payer money is being spent limiting our constitutional right to free speech? :grr:

[Dem_Strategist]

4. Chilling

thanks for the alert

[troublemaker]

5. But does anyone really BELIEVE this story?

The anecdote is offered as showing that routine calls of comment are forwarded to security, but does that seem likely to you? Do we know anything about this person's words or tone during his call? (This reminds me of friend's stories about being tossed out of a bar "for no reason," but eventually they admit that they had thrown a beer mug at the DJ... but it's not like they hit him, and blah, blah, blah)

Do you really believe that CNN called his number and asked for him by name *even though he had caller ID blocked?*

And I somehow doubt a CNN employee would cite "the new patriot act" while discussing why he called someone.

There is, most likely, a lot of padding and/or exaggeration in this tale, and stories like this just undermine the credibility of more legitimate 'security' outrages, of which there are many.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

7. I share your skepticism.

[volosong]

6. REMAIN CALM, IT'S REALLY A GOOD SIGN

It's a sign that we are hitting home.

I suggest that media contacts be made through the US Congress media site
http://congress.org/congressorg/dbq/media/


Suggest you restrict contacts to e-mails, fax, or writing.

The only time you really need a phone number is for submissions to

Letters to the Editor of your local papers. Otherwise leave blank or put down the white house number 202-456-1414 which is openly published and has been the same number since I spent a summer working in DC before most of you were born.