THIS is what people are getting from the media: Gonzo fired Dem US Atty's!!

[loudsue]

Last evening I went to visit some good Dem friends out in the country near where I used to live. These are some folks who are old farmers (now semi-retired) in the South, and who HATE bush. They don't "do" the internet (they're in their 70's & 80's, but still very healthy & aware and funny and sharp as hell), but they try to keep up with newspapers and tv news.

Without exception, all of them were under the impression that Gonzo/bush had fired US attorneys who were DEMOCRATS (appointed by Democrats), and that it was "standard" for republicans to replace them with republican attorneys. They thought that Gonzo fired these attorneys because they weren't prosecuting things that were important to bush's agenda (immigration, terrorism, etc.).

When I told them the true nature of the US Attorney firings, it took quite a while to convince them, because they had ALL gotten the same impression from our "news" media.

Our media is continually CONFUSING the public about what the real issues are. That is malfeasance, IMHO, and the FCC and congress need to do something to start making issues more clear to people. This intentional obfuscation has got to stop! Our Democracy depends on it!! The American people are ENTITLED to have access to the truth about what is going on in our world.

These congressional hearings on C-SPAM 3 are NOT getting seen by 80% of the people. The FCC is allowing our airwaves to be used to CONFUSE people.

[paparush]

1. Misleading often leads to confusion.

[xultar]

2. That is my number one worst fear in the world ever.

[loudsue]

5. It's one of my top two, xultar: The media & the voting machines.

I don't care whether the truth hurts Dems or repukes, as long as it is all told truthfully. The press is SUPPOSED to be the way that our people oversee our government. THAT was why it was put in the constitution, that we'd have freedoms such that the government couldn't stop us from speaking out about what our government was doing, and so that we could be informed.

At the time, the framers of the constitution didn't know we'd be using our radio waves as one of the primary means of "press", but it IS the press, and has been since the early 20th century. And it's NOT free! The government has taken control of it, for all practical purposes, by allowing monopolies, and even by paying (OUR tax dollars) to have journalists spew lies and/or half-truths that help the party in power.

:kick:

[Kagemusha]

3. It's not the FCC's job to censor the news for untruth. It's just not.

That's totally inappropriate and I won't support it from any party.

Now as for the impression that these US attorneys were Democrats, Rush, Hatch etc. have pushed this hard and I find it not surprising at all that this is the impression that went out. The Big Lie theory is proven to work over and over again: people just can't get it in their heads that their high officials would lie about important things unless the evidence is absolutely overwhelming, which assumes that these people are plugged in to get that overwhelming evidence, which in most cases they are certainly NOT.

The war is about the only thing that's sunk in because, just like with the Soviets in Afghanistan, at some point the bullshit becomes untenable just from too many people knowing better from non-media sources.

[loudsue]

4. The FCC issues licenses for OUR airwaves, and it seems that they should

be able to determine what's "news" programming. Dunnit? Shouldn't they be able to make certain rulings? Like not using profanity and not showing nipples? And, maybe telling the truth?

:kick:

[Kagemusha]

6. As much as I abhor Republican lying, my answer is: hell no!

The FCC should absolutely not be determining what the truth is and demanding it be told. Let's say it was the FCC's job.. who's to say that what the FCC says is the truth, really is? What if it says the truth is that the marketplace McCain strolled in with 100 infantry and 3 Blackhawks and 2 Apaches really is safe? What if it says the truth is that troop tours of duty in Iraq are being lengthened because Democrats aren't approving the war supplemental funding bill that the President prefers? What then?

And no, it would not be any better if the FCC was trying to enforce the Truth, as believed by Democratic grassroots activists. Letting people arbitrarily define the truth for themselves and others is the fast track towards arrogance and decoupling honesty and integrity from political beliefs. That would not be a positive long-term development for the left.

[rurallib]

8. I called the FCC on another "content" issue and I was told

in no uncertain terms that the FCC has NOTHING TO DO WITH CONTENT!. Since 1990 that has been a function of the marketplace. Period.
Fox also won a court case in NY several years back in which they were exonerated for false news reports. Same reason.

[Supersedeas]

7. is the GOP/Media Establishment serving the public good -- no, just advertisers

[coalition_unwilling]

9. During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, I canceled my subscription

to the LA Times to protest their whoredom. Many others followed suit when the LA Times fired Robert Scheer (the only one on the opinion pages to get it right before the invasion). Hard to avoid the impression that the LA Times fired those who "got it right," while protecting and promoting the whore mongers who brought us the war.

In my opinion, the solution is simple: boycott corporate whore media and boycott their advertisers. Make a point of letting the media know you're boycotting and definitely make a point of letting their advertisers know you're boycotting them because they subsidize (read: enable) the corporate whore media.

Sure, it's the type of movement you build one lonely soul at a time. But paid daily readership at the LA Times is now down below 1,000,000 and showing no signs of increasing, no matter what the Tribune Co (owners of the LA Times) do. And, yeah, the Times' profits have actually increased slightly in the past couple years, even as readership has declined. But once advertisers figure out people no longer read it, the LA Times will become outwardly the hollow, corrupted shell it already is to those of us paying attention.

[Cha]

10. That's why I make sure when

I'm talking about the bush-gonza USAttorney Firings ..I tell people that they were republican USAttorneys who weren't doing bush's bidding and the ones they were replaced with are put there to help steal the 2008 "election" among other bushit bidding.

[loudsue]

11. Bingo!

Actually, THAT was the point that finally helped my friends to believe what I was saying. They all thought that bush stole 2004 from Kerry, even though there wasn't NEARLY enough coverage of the Ohio mess. They saw all those people on the news who stood in line, many in the rain, until 2:30 a.m. trying to vote in Ohio.

So when I told them that the attorneys that were let go were the ones who weren't going to help the republicans steal the 2008 election, and the ones they were replaced with WOULD help republicans, they finally saw what I meant about "those who would, or would not, leave politics at the door".

:kick: