Letters to the Editor
-
Off topic but hilarious.....
Josh Marshall informs us that Joe Klein is on crack.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/062946.php
-
@LWM
You’re right about my not being a naval expert. My skepticism about what Pentagon experts say may have caused me to be unfair and the provocation could have come solely from the Iranian side. Col. Jacobs on MSNBC who is also not a naval expert talked about the tight space when discussing what might have happened with his friends at the Pentagon. I find it hard to believe that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard vessels would provoke a confrontation without our vessels coming very close to their territorial waters. The straight is very narrow.
The Guard vessels and boxes that they dropped in front of our ships to me does not warrant our boys from almost opening fire and creating a much larger problem. If the Busheviks hadn’t made so many threats against Iran, the Guard vessels probably wouldn’t have worried about our much larger vessels or gone anywhere near them.
bethincary provided some valuable insight in her post in defense of whomever “you all” is.
-
Retired Military Patriot
I agree heartily with everything you said.
I also remember being a Political Science major (a year ahead of Podesta at the same school), and how revelatory I found Timothy Crouse's 1974 book Boys on the Bus. The only differences I can see, a quarter century later, is that the bus/plane is now co-ed, and filing stories is (electronically) easier.
-
Press pack mentality
These bozos are too stupid and too timid for original thought. It's much easier and safer to echo the rest of the pack.
Hence: McCain is a straight-talking maverick; Hillary is cold and calculating; Edwards is a big phony because he's rich and spent a lot on a haircut; Bush is comfortable in his own skin -- the kind of guy you'd like to have a beer with; Gore is a big liar who claimed to have invented the internet; etcetera, etcetera, etcetera...
-
@LWM
The point isn't what happened in the Gulf. What happened in the Gulf is that the Americans thought there was going to be a confrontation and prepared to fire, and the Iranians turned away.
The point is that MSNBC, ABC, the Pentagon, the State Department, and Tony Fratto are willing to have this be much more.
Who is responsible for the incredible level of suspicion on the American ship? Who inculcates the idea that the Revolutionary Guard are mindless suicidal terrorists?
Do you think the press echo chamber stops with Edwards' haircut? If the press want this to be a major incident, they will report it that way. We can examine their motives until we're blue in the face, but the facts on the ground are that they are in control of the emotional impression this incident generates, and they've chosen to make it look like we were almost attacked by crazy Iranians who want to blow up our boys. The fact that it has as much truth to it as the campaign, and as much maturity to it as slavering over Paris Hilton, and that the administration will milk it for all the Cheneyesque reality generation they can, makes the banal echo chamber evil.
Think really hard. Who, when it comes all the way down to it, bears the most responsibility for the lacksadaisical attitude of most Americans toward torture? Who failed to take it any more seriously than banging the jock at the high school parking place? Jim White's questions are right on the money. Everyone knows they won't get asked. The public isn't interested. Why? If Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Murrow were still commanding the airwaves, would the public be interested? The New York Times reported this morning that we are holding 630 prisoners without fundamental rights at Bagram, and that the ICRC has filed complaints, about registration, about interrogation techniques, and about providing their names on a timely basis. Who determines whether this is a scandal, a crisis, an incident, an also ran, or a tidbit that has no relevance to who is the next president of the United States? Same guys who are reporting the crazy Iranians almost blew up our boys? The poofed hair guys?
I'm sorry if you didn't like my crack about Tonkin Gulf. I just thought I'd try to be less serious today. Don't worry, I won't quit my day job.
-
who/what is legal about "on the record" or "off the record"
If the WH gets info from the WH that they say is "off the record" as compared to on-what does that mean? Is it that no source is cited? But the info is?
This is why it has been entirely too easy for the Bush/Cheney WH to play the media- they always say-"a source" says.....it's obvious that the WH is and always has been guilty of violations of free speech-even among it's own govt.
But that's obvious-because they have contempt for anyone who does not go along with thier "New World Order" Plan of globalization. They give little, no, or absolutely ridiculous claims about what Americans can see with thier eyes.At some point Americans should be allowed to challenge that and have the info they request-given. Maybe the press long ago-should have taken the WH to court.
-
Hearings and accountability
I would love to see some Congressional hearings dissecting political reporting/coverage and what drives it. Then, I'd like to see these "reporters" fired and replaced with professionals.
I'll be holding my breath for this to happen, of course, but it'd be fun to watch.
-
Regarding Hearings and accountability.
I would love to see some Congressional hearings dissecting political reporting/coverage and what drives it. Then, I'd like to see these "reporters" fired and replaced with professionals.
So you want elected politicians to investigate how the press reports election politics? Don't you think there might be some conflict of interest issues here? Besides that, can't you imagine some obvious major drawbacks to this scheme?
-
@ ondelette
Please continue being you in they way you find best. We benefit from your insights and humor. It's our loss if one or more of us doesn't "get" you.
As to your points about the news positioning and coverage, please also note that we have been inculcated, encouraged and rewarded for being passive consumers of whatever is thrust at us via print, radio and teevee marketing. Especially in the NCLB era, students are rewarded for learning to take tests of multiple choice questions - there is ALWAYS a single "best" answer. There is no cultural demand to learn about, understand and respond to nuance, to ambiguity and to multiple acceptable alternatives. We live in a binary culture: on/off, right/wrong, good/evil, tune in/tune out, either/or. The notion that issues should be presented in anything other than dichotomy is foreign to a large majority in the US.
Add to that, the traditional media penchant for "breaking news" stories to the exclusion of in-depth and longitudinal reporting, and we have the many rabbit holes of stories sensationalized and quickly forgotten, devoid of context and historical significance.
I believe that this explains some of the ability of the neocons to "re-write history" and lead so many down the jackbooted fascist path so easily. How many of those blind, deaf and not stupid followers actively participate in civic life?
They are glued to their teevee or computer screens, playing games and indulging in virtual reality. But if it feels real, sounds real, and looks real....