Author: pc

 

I have been wondering why I am so galled and appalled and really deeply disgusted about the recent events regarding Sarah Palin, when I am a democrat.

I think I finally hit the root of my deep perturbation. And yes, I am a woman, and loathe the way her family life has been paraded all over the place, but it goes way beyond sexism.

If we are supposed to believe that a political candidate can go beyond their own PERSONAL opinions and self-interest to work for the benefit of EVERYONE in the country, regardless of political affiliation, or even whether they can vote (eg, those under 18), we can and should be able to expect no less from news-related journalists.

They are supposed to present us with FACTS, regardless of which way they have decided to vote.

This election has shown that we need to hold BOTH up to high standards from, now on, and make them accountable for all their words and actions.

And that includes the internet bloggers and email writers who have produced wholesale FICTION on both sides. Which was then reported as FACT by no less than the New York Times.

Why? Because it was what that journalist WANTED to believe. Because the “FACTS” were filtered through their biased lenses based on their own PERSONAL point of view.

Gibson snapping EXACT WORDS was the last straw for me.  They were NOT her exact words that he was quoting, nor was his definition of ‘the Bush Doctrine’ accurate.

The media are actually making themselves MORE powerful than the people meant to govern this country.

The Geraldo Rivera fake war reports in 2002, Dan Rather letters in 2004 and the coverage of this campaign all proves they can build a person or issue up, and equally easily tear it right back down–after all, it makes for great headlines, and viewers, and readership.

Obama was up 14 points in the polls, he is now down 4. Up, down, up, down.

Who benefits from these ‘lies, scandals, and poorly edited videotape’?

The media moguls benefit. They sell ads, they get more and more money. They win no matter what.

We are still left wondering when someone is going to talk about REAL issues, real suffering by real people all over this country, like homeless women living in San Francisco in organized, patrolled car parks to try to stop them from being raped or worse, being homeless because they have been foreclosed upon.

Kids who can’t afford to go to school if they lose their free bus pass, unless they choose not to eat.

REAL people, real suffering.

But the media (and some of the candidates) would rather rant about pantsuits, lipstick, pitbulls, who can or can’t use a computer, and scrappy kids from Scranton.

On Monday, one harmless, inexperienced journalist, with the help of Google, a 6 years old news article,  and his own lack of checking of the facts, nearly brought down United Airlines on the stock market in less than an hour from the time his story hit the Bloomberg newswire.

He was NOT badly intentioned. Just think if he had been intent on mischief, though.

Which demonstrates that the media has TOO MUCH power.

Freedom of speech is a positive value, but not if it is being used against the American people to manipulate in order to achieve their own agendas, be they those of the left, right, green etc.

And not when a personal attack becomes indistinguishable from a political one, and vice versa.

 

 

Barbara Walters interview on The View with the McCains.

So on Friday, hard on the heels of the Gibson debacle we were treated to yet another remarkably biased piece of journalisms thanks to Barbara Walters and the View.

Every fair-minded person is complaining about this ‘interview’ now as well.

Taken with the Gibson  and Palin interview, WHAT was ABC thinking?

We don’t need journalists as opinionated attack dogs, we need them to listen to both sides.

Even the debates are going to be tainted at this point unless someone reins them in to stick to issues, not personal slurs.

MSNBC removed two of their people due to their extreme bias. It is looking more and more like ABC is going to have to look seriously at their team as well.

Many people are saying it’s getting like Dan Rather and the fake papers against Bush at the 11th hour in the 2004 election to try to dent his chances.

That would be the last thing we need, because it is just swinging opinion as extremely in the opposite direction from what they intend.

After all, we want to weigh the issues ourselves,  not be told what to think, or who to take the ‘high ground against’.

If we are supposed to believe that a political candidate can go beyond their own PERSONAL opinions and self-interest to work for the benefit of EVERYONE in the country, regardless of political affiliation, or even whether they can vote (eg, those under 18), we can and should be able to expect no less from news-related journalists, who are supposed to present us with FACTS, regardless of which way they have decided to vote.

As they said on ABC’s Good Morning America, if you asked 500 current white house staffers the Bush doctrine point that Sarah Palin was asked in her interview that she is now being mocked for, most would not know the answer.

And most Americans would disagree with it, if they knew what it was and seriously thought he believed it. There is a difference between tough talk, and tough action.

As for the Google media coverage and headlines,

When I went to Google News to look, I saw a whole slew of articles.

Charles Krauthammer: Palin steals Obama’s fading spotlight

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10444672?source%253Dmost_viewed.20F88DA3D7D369F5BB70F372987EAE1F.html

ABC’s Gibson grilled Palin hard, but it may backfire

http://www.upi.com/news/issueoftheday/2008/09/12/ABCs_Gibson_grilled_Palin_hard_but_it_may_backfire/UPI-81241221234472/

Palin and Gibson re-enact ‘High Noon’ in Alaska

and others with more or less opinionated comments

Many of the articles listed are written by men, by the way, but several of the men ALSO complained about Gibson’s attitude, sexism, and ‘grilling’ behavior, and they are certainly NOT all Republican periodicals. And NOT women!

I thought she was pretty clear–why he kept asking the same question over and over again just seemed an attempt to trip her up, not elucidate anything.

Then he said she gave him a ‘blizzard of words’ which meant he clearly was NOT listening to what she had said.

Having tried to be fair to what she was saying, I do have to say that I am concerned about unsanctioned incursions into Pakistan.

The Israel question was clearly out of line on Gibson’s part, 3 times, 3 same responses, why show it in the edit, and not some other question?

However, I have to say here that any talk of war with Iran makes me nervous–nuclear power plants are the issue here, not nuclear weapons.

If we are REALLY so concerned with them enriching uranium, to the point where we think they might stumble upon weapons grade plutonium ( a huge stumble!!) , why not do what other countries have done successfully, GIVE them the technology and technicians to run it, so it is under the West’s control. We do not need another war, this time with Iran.

And we can see why Pakistan would be nervous, not to say peeved. We bolstered the military regime of Musharraf for how long? Nearly a decade–what about THEIR freedoms?

What about Benazir Bhutto–Musharraf assassinated her before she could win the election, and the USA did NOTHING. Now her widower has won. What happens next? Do we have the right to just go into any country that we don’t agree with?

Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, Iran does not either. Do we cross borders under the guise of looking for Bin Laden and Al Qaeda?

I am also worried about the idea ‘if we have “legitimate and enough intelligence” given how much we know now about how much of his supposed legitimate and enough intelligence was manufactured in recent years.

Finally, Georgia–S Ossetia and one of their provinces want to become part of Russia. Georgia does not want them to breakaway. Both sides are therefore interfering with the autonomy of the people of the region, Russia in Chechnya, Georgia in S Ossetia.

According to Wikipedia, “Virtually the only significant economic asset that South Ossetia possesses is control of the Roki Tunnel that used to link Russia and Georgia, from which the South Ossetian government reportedly obtains as much as a third of its budget by levying customs duties on freight traffic.

“In late 2006, a large international counterfeiting operation stretching from South Ossetia was revealed by U.S. Secret Service and Georgian police.”

I am going to therefore guess that it is an important transport hub and whoever controls it has the ability to move around a lot more at will-traffic goods, drugs, weapons, whatever.

North Ossetia is in Russia, BTW. So one could say the regions want to be united.

Also Wikipedia-The tunnel, completed by the Soviet authorities in 1985, is one of only a handful of routes that cross the North Caucasus Range.

Clearly it is strategically important to both sides; the lives lost are deplorable, and I have to say, I WOULD like to see us live in a world where war is NOT the first solution, but the last resort.

Good luck getting Putin to see that side of things, but I am glad Palin said it.

Gibson just dismissed her point to make one of his own.

My point-she did well all things considered, but she clearly needs to study faster and harder.

On the other hand, no one except a rare few people ever want to be Pres or VP when they grow up, and start planning it from the moment they can talk.

I think Obama IS one of those people, so he is pretty upset that, in the words of quite a few commentators, Palin is now ‘eating Obama’s lunch’

The ABC ratings are soaring, but in summarizing all i have read, Gibson actually seems to have come off the worse of the two despite her obvious missteps (which might not have been so obvious, or looked like such missteps, had the editing been different?)

I did not see the domestic policy interview, but they said she did a lot better there.

I also saw several headlines about ABC ‘planning what to do’ about the tapes–which means they are all being edited–whatever way it suits them to edit it. I used to make films and can tell you I could splice tape to a hair’s breadth. With digital media, you can make a person look or sound like they are literally saying anything.

I am not being paranoid, I am just saying, if the edits last night were anything to go by, we are definitely being given what they want us to see.

I want to hear about the issues, not what journalists think I should be allowed to hear about the issues.

I just got this in my email box this morning.

http://www.debbiefordnewsletter.com/message.asp?msgid=222

I was so offended by it, I wrote a reply and unsubscribed.

Here is my reply:

I am writing about today’s newsletter entry here because your mailbox there is full, no doubt with other fairminded men and women equally appalled at your post.

Your post is not written with love,as you claim, but nasty accusations of Palin being self-serving, when eldest her son is going to Iraq to serve TODAY, hence the reason for the interview now, she has been spending time with him and getting her governor affairs in order.

I am an H. Clinton Democrat and can’t abide women attacking other women. She has REFUSED to do so on the campaign trail, and Women Count is actually supporting her to try to remove the disgusting sexism from this campaign.

As for her ‘riding roughshod’ over us, polticians need to have a mandate from us and the House and Senate offer checks and balances, so all this talk about abortion is just obscuring the REAL issues and suffering in this country, when there is so much WORK to do, not endless whining and attacking.

You say “use what we see not to beat them up but to find a bigger voice, a voice for true change, a voice for moving forward instead of backward, a voice that respects women, all women, and all their choices.”

and yet in this post you beat her up for being a self-serving beauty queen, and worse still, you beat HER up for her choices, even having a Down’s syndrome child, just like all the MEN in the media who have been attacking her.

What, you think having a disabled child is a media ploy? You have the nerve to say her daughter’s pregnancy is a sign Sarah Palin is a bad mother, rather than that the daughter TOO is FREE TO CHOOSE, the very topic of your message? What a hypocrite you are.

You think OBAMA is that respectful VOICE you speak of? He sure is a voice, all right, but with no substance behind it, so little in fact that all of his best stump speeches these days are ones that H Clinton already gave about the things that REALLY count, health, education, social welfare and so forth.

No one asks Obama if HE can manage to be a good parent and political leader at the same time.

Your hypocrisy in this entire email is breathtaking, and nauseating.

I will be unsubscribing and leave you to deal with your own obvious knee jerk shadows.

–And I have to say it is irresponsible of all these media people with TV shows, lists and so on to be ramming their own personal political opinions down our throats. So much for OUR right to choose! We have the right to choose to agree with them, or else.

As a lifelong Democrat, I found Gibson’s actions last night interviewing Sarah Palin totally deplorable, and your edit of the interview not much better.

 

The Bush doctrine has been defined in several ways since Charles Krauthammer first used in in 2001, and by your own journalists. It was a trick question. She gave the right answer the first time.

 

Exact words–nope. We saw the actual video.

 

Your edits–why keep the same Israel question 3 times–you asked, she answered. Trying to make her seem like she is being evasive, “were you,”you just came off as rude and so determined not to listen to a word she said that all you heard was yourself pontificating.

 

Combine that with tone, body language and facial expression, and I have never seen a worse performance from a supposed media professional.

 

Hats off to Palin for not uncrossing her legs and ‘accidentally’ kicking him!

 

I have given up on any hope of any rationality in this election and you should all be ashamed of yourselves.

 

Give us REAL issues, not what YOU or Gibson think they should be.  You may have won the ratings war, because people genuinely want to see what she has to say, but you have lost viewers!

According to the Blog MommyLife:

http://mommylife.net/

Oprah shuns Sarah Palin

“There has been absolutely no discussion about having Sarah Palin on my show. At the beginning of this Presidential campaign when I decided that I was going to take my first public stance in support of a candidate, I made the decision not to use my show as a platform for any of the candidates. I agree that Sarah Palin would be a fantastic interview, and I would love to have her on after the campaign is over.”

Oprah, who has endorsed Obama wholeheartedly, has hosted Obama twice — in January, 2005 and again in October, 2006.”

This is complete hypocrisy.

I lost my respect for Oprah when she publicly endorsed him before anyone even knew who he was and made him a media rock star. It is ironic that they are now scrambling to hog as much media air time as they can to make sure she does not get any airplay. Even more amusing is the fact that his own advisors have said they can’t let Sarah Palin ‘steal his story’ of humble origins to meteoric rise.

She has been on the national stage for 4 days. Obama for months. He never would have got where he did without Oprah and he knows it. So to have Sarah Palin on would be to risk undoing all the damage to the little darling.

As Sarah Palin said, this is a man who has written two memoirs, but never AUTHORED a single piece of important legislation.

As John McCain said, Obama is a person who is running for president because a-he wants to WIN; b-he thinks it is HIS time and place in history, not that he wants to govern and lead and serve this country. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Obama has proven he will say or do anything to get elected.

His supposedly magnificent speech was everying HILLARY CLINTON argued for when she was running, education, health care. In fact, she has spent her whole life working for those things. Not just paying lip service to them.

No, it is not enough to say that it just shows they are both Democrats. It shows that SHE was the one who would have been able to lead from day one.

Obama may well have 300 foreign policy advisors. Perhaps they flip, he flops? Or is he just cynically manipulating the American people to get what HE wants? He changes position so often watching him is like watching a tennis match.

Oprah said it was not about race, that she was not that small and petty. Well, honey, it sure seems like you ARE small now by not welcoming Sarah Palin on your show to tell her story. Or John McCain. Or Cindy McCain. Or Hillary Clinton.They are certainly a lot more interesting that Obama. Why? Because it is all about HIM. With H. Clinton, Palin and the two McCains, it is all about helping OTHERS.

You talk about giving back? How about just giving fairly?