Your comments about Ron Paul are most telling indeed as with your fear of militia groups and or any it would appear "patriot" type of movements in this country against their government.

The comments you make tying Ron Paul to militia groups and thereby implying "white supremacist's" agenda or perhaps even antisemitism logically from the track record of these types of arguments always digress into is itself misleading and telling in and of itself of the use of sound bite arguing for the purpose of changing the subject and attention to a name calling format of hatred and fear.

The founding fathers if memory serves were considered criminals early on in a little freedom movement that seemed to overcome most obstacles.

Ron Paul has the highest voting record of conservative issues and because of his belief for the Constitution and America first voting record it makes some very uncomfortable that prefer their global masters.

The so called patriot movement was infiltrated years ago in the 1980's by cointel operatives acting as provocateurs to establish them as "dangerous subversives" by trying to encourage them into breaking laws and "proving" that they are a dangerous group by these agents. Just like government agents are behind almost all KKK marches, which has been proven if one wants to look. There is no darker government than the one we now have, the one you want to support.

Journalists hold a basic responsibility to society, which nearly all of the journalists in the mainstream media have ignored.

Finally, let me vent flame upon John Byrne at Rawstory. For his headline "Democratic Committee requests deposition from Secretary of State".

Democratic Committee? Really? Political parties now have oversight powers? Can anyone envision how such headlines might give the public the impression that this is all just insignificant political nitpicking?

Excellent point. I scanned most of the comments on that thread and didn't see a single other person besides you who pointed that out. It's very important that the bought and sold incorrect framing of oversight committees being Democratic Party committees be corrected.

As a Canadian, the widespread 'So what's new?' acceptance among many journalists of the profound ignorance of the American people on this vital topic - was a real shocker. Do they all truly believe that the battle for public education is so irretrievably lost? How sad that is - and (even worse) what if they're right?

Take a moment, and understand the laser-focused relevance of the Founding Fathers' view of the "press", even today.

While there's no doubt a thriving 'access'-oriented dynamic between power & press, I still find it more of a symptom than a root cause.

While I don't believe MSM reporters are explicitly 'paid to lie', the complex alchemy of reporting Glenn describes so well in this piece no doubt includes a natural, powerful tendency to consider the needs and point-of-view of the entity that supplies a reporter's paycheck.

This 'employer affect' has well-documented layers, ranging from major MSM outlets being mere divisions of corporations with many other product lines, regulatory and 'access' interests of their own, to large newspapers which, being publicly held, chase the cocaine of 'access' in pursuit of the ratings/ profit/ growth demanded by insatiable shareholders who generally expect far more than traditional private newspaper owners.

All of which brings us back to the Founding Fathers.

They had no elevated view of the press or reporters. Journalism was no 'lofty profession' to them. (Check the opinions and use of the press by Washington, Jefferson...)

But what they did value was the diversity of a large number of independent voices among the press. The Founders strongly voices a belief in the ability of a free market of ideas to reliably fuel the Fourth Estate's check on government.

Just as we recognize an atrophy in the press worthy of Gibbons' "Decline and Fall...", we must urge our representatives to powerfully, decisively fracture the levels of consolidation, ownership by other-industry parents, and who knows?... perhaps even shareholder ownership of journalistic entities.

The Huns are not far from the city, my friends.

I know it's a very complicated soap opera... And you never know when someone's little Carribean island has a doomsday device, or when someone is going to wake up from their coma, or another Blonde will disappear on wealthy island watering hole. Very tangled web...

It's an aristocracy.

Jefferson would have recognized it, and so would Madison.

Journalists hold a basic responsibility to society, which nearly all of the journalists in the mainstream media have ignored.

-- abrau

This is a great observation, but this is not the case.

Your "Society" is the problem. In the form of "pre-emptive strikes," your countries "Culture" has been decimated and replaced.

Screaming that there is a war on God, the Christians have attacked everything from evolution to global warming... Pbs shows the war against environmentalism has gotten to the point that residents in Montana get death threats all the time... Terrorized by people who call them on the phone and loosen the lug-nuts on their daughters cars... Again, the word is "Terrorized." The mayor (a conservative Republican) says he doesn't think there's anything he can do. He seems to think that it's terrible, but I guess he can't figure out phone taps or tracing letters sent from the town mailbox. Meanwhile... People who protest the war or Bush are spied on by their own Federal Government. You sent your soldiers to fight terrorists in the middle-east, so that the terrorists in your backwards country could run roughshod over you, with the blessings and encouragement of your media and your government.

Now you don't even have a military that could take on KBR... Hell, you couldn't fight in Iraq without your pirate armies (which are on a one to one ratio with your soldiers).

The reason is not that your media won't be responsible to your society... The problem is your society is an Aristocracy, and your "Media" is responsible to nothing BUT the aristocrats who own it.