Answer the question, Tim ... Stop complaining about the cards you're being dealt.

I just got back from shopping and was going to respond but saw Glenn had already done so. I thought, well, that retort is probably better than my retort (all [mysterious] inches of me--and I love "retorts," especially the raspberry kind).

No no Party control of all media is the only fair solution. All TV, radio, internet must be strictly controlled and managed by our state overlords. For fairness and openness, like in China.

Don't be foolish.

I think the Internet and programming like Democracy Now! are really leading the way. If you have the misfortune of tuning into any of the cable "news" programs, you'll find an array of Natalie Holloway stories (or something along those lines), prison programming (which is essential, were it presented as reality, namely, the prison-industrial complex that shames our nation, rather than the "Good Lord! I'm glad that's not me!" approach), and maybe some weather stuff.

The point: the general misdirection provided by traditional media is slowly asphyxiating under its own preposterous weight, or so I hope (lacking evidence). For those who are truly interested in what's going on, other outlets provide access to genuine information (which doesn't mean the corporate channels ought to be allowed to evade their responsibilities--although I wonder, is there such a thing anymore?).

Finally, regarding another (but not quite) matter, someone wrote I'm not saying GE doesn't benefit from war. I'm just saying to update your talking points.

Talking points?! What!? Didn't you get the TalkingPointsMemo?! (and that's enough with the ?!, isn't it?!)

Does General McCaffrey's 'analysis' qualify as "war profiteering" or "propaganda"? I'm being quite serious here. His continued work on NBC, absent public disclosure of his financial stakes in the ongoing conflict, smacks a bit of the sort of profiteering Blackwater and Halliburton have been noted for.

I agree with this. Unfortunately, I don't see any reasonable/legal recourse. I've often thought that the best, most rational, response is to simply walk away from these outlets. I really mean that.

BlackCat argues: The National Media MUST be broken up, removed from control of large corporations, or ANY corporations. And the existence of corporations should be re-evaluated. There is something grotesquely rotten there.

This is true, to my mind, but not reasonable in that it simply won't happen. And apart from that, there needs to be a monetary rationale for any news outlet. This is why I favor outlets such as Democracy Now!--they depend on donations from viewers who support their programming. None of this is new to you; I only repeat it for those to whom it is.

How About The "Milblogs?"

This is a good point. I don't read these although I'm aware of them. I suspect it's a heavy-handed/ham-fisted effort to try to wrest control of a medium they don't understand.

What's that line from Yeats? Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;

I don't know if that's true, but I like to think so.

The goundwork is being laid by none other than guys like Grover Norquist:

Well, the economy’s in the present state because when the Democrats took the House and Senate in 2006, you knew that those tax increases were going to come in 2010. The stock market began to collapse as soon as you recognized that those old tax rates were coming back. So, we’re in the middle of responding to those tax increases.

http://tinyurl.com/6qcv3d

Brilliant! Get this man a job at the Fed!

post. I was astonished (well, not really) at that Our relationship with General McCaffrey is based on trust, a basic tenant of journalism. The "tenant" tells us something, too, but that idea of trust is, as you rightly note, a laughably pathetic "understanding" of what journalism is supposed to be and what journalists are supposed to do.

One last point: I do hope none of this ruins my chances of succeeding Tim Russert on Meet the Press.

You wouldn't have liked that gig anyway. As I understand it, you have to bring mounds and mounds of clippings from the likes of Broder and Brooks and interview personages such as Brokaw who, in return for being so favored, would drone on and on about the greatest generation.

Thanks for those links.

My favorite part from Tom "they are truly America's greatest generation--have I ever mentioned that" Brokaw was this:

...it’s what they read in blog sites, and what they see in video games. It’s that kind of stuff that I think is cancerous. And I’m a free speech absolutist, but ....

Guess not. And I say this as someone sitting in a bathrobe in a basement apartment in the Bronx which is, I think, a prerequisite for writing, reading of responding to cancerous blogs.

It's the you know who And their control of all media.

Ah, the Peruvians. I wish you'd just come out and say it. We have nothing to fear from the Inca (unless APPAC wields more influence than I've been led to believe).

@T3 are you Derbig?

No, but he was my spiritual father until we had a spat over providing links to support one's position. After that, well, I've been forced to wander the planet, orphaned. Kinda like Kung Fu's Kwai Chang Caine.

to me is the polling data from the Pittsburgh Business Times which has this:

Sixty percent of those polled said they didn't know enough about Matthews to form an opinion of him, while Specter has a 62 percent approval rating.

So much for the vast scope of influence wielded by his show (which means, I guess, that not enough people wanna play Hard ball).

Wake up and smell the brainwashing.

I believe few here are asleep. And if we were brainwashed, well, I don't think we'd be here in the first place. I think you've misread Glenn Greenwald, today's post, his archives and your fellow commenters.

Other than that, man, that was a dead-on comment!