Saturday, 29 October 2011

{Political_Views} Republicon Controlled House Fiddles as the US Burns

GOP bill would affirm 'In God We Trust' as national motto



HAVE THEY NO SHAME?  HAVE THEY NO HONOR OR DECENCY?  HAVE THEY NO OTHER WORK THEY COULD AND SHOULD BE DOING TO SAVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE SEEM TO DISDAIN SO MUCH?  A REAL JOBS BILL PERHAPS?  WORK ON THE NATIONS' INFRASTRUCTURE?  ANYTHING BUT THIS WASTE OF TIME ..... THIS CLAPTRAP ..... THIS PER FIDDLE .... THIS NONSENSE!!!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Horror In Africa - The LRA {The Lord's Resistance Army)


By MIA FARROW AND JOHN PRENDERGAST

This month President Obama announced that he is sending 100 U.S. military advisers to central Africa to assist regional forces in ending the reign of terror orchestrated by the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA). In a letter to House Speaker John Boehner, Mr. Obama noted that the LRA "continues to commit atrocities across the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and South Sudan that have a disproportionate impact on regional security." He concluded, "I believe that deploying these U.S. armed forces furthers U.S. national security interests and foreign policy."

There is also a human interest.

In improvised camps near Yambio in South Sudan, parents keep children close. "When we go to sleep, we don't know if we will be alive in the morning," a young mother revealed to one of us (Ms. Farrow) this year. Everyone there has a story of murder, torture, mutilation or abduction.

Sister Giovanna, an Italian nun, cares for children who have been abducted by the LRA. "These children have been taught to kill without mercy. Those who are able to escape come back traumatized," she told Ms. Farrow. She pointed to a slight, silent boy of 11 or 12. "That child was forced to kill his father, breaking his head with a log."

Another boy was outspoken; he had killed 82 people, he said. He was forced to cut one of them into pieces with a machete.  "Do you think the children can ever forget what they did?" Sister Giovanna said. "They scream in the night."

During its 24-year existence, the LRA has abducted some 70,000 civilians, mostly children. The group has killed tens of thousands and displaced two and a half million people in four countries. Countless villagers have been mutilated- their lips, ears and noses cut off.

The LRA was founded in 1987 by Joseph Kony, a Ugandan, in the north of that country. His stated goal was to overthrow Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni and establish a regime based on the Ten Commandments. It wasn't long before he had shattered all 10, and then some.

In 2001, the U.S. Patriot Act declared the LRA to be a terrorist organization. Kony and two of his most brutal henchmen are wanted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity and war crimes including murder, rape, sexual slavery, and using children as combatants. 

There are longstanding allegations that the LRA has enjoyed the support of another indicted war criminal, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir.

Five years ago, Ugandan forces succeeded in driving the LRA out of Uganda into the dense brush along the border areas of neighboring South Sudan, Congo and the Central African Republic, where they have continued their depredations. The brutal, messianic Kony long ago abandoned any pretense of a political agenda. The LRA is a self-sustaining predatory guerilla group that replenishes itself through plundering villages and abducting children to use as soldiers, porters and sex slaves.

The Bush administration supported a Ugandan assault on Kony's forested encampment, but when it failed, executive attention faded. However, spurred on by a growing U.S. activist network led primarily by students, in 2010 Congress passed a strong bipartisan bill demanding a presidential strategy to end the LRA and bring the hundreds of captive children home.

Republican Sen. James Inhofe welcomed President Obama's announcement. "I have witnessed firsthand the devastation caused by the LRA, and this will help end Kony's heinous acts that have created a human rights crisis in Africa," he said in a statement.
Fighting in some of the most impenetrable terrain in the world, the Ugandan forces significantly reduced LRA numbers to some 200-400 of its most hardcore fighters. But Uganda has now redeployed some of its best troops to Somalia for counterterrorism operations there.

With U.S. troops on the ground, President Obama has the credibility to ask African and other nations to contribute troops. The mission must be backed by sophisticated intelligence and logistical capabilities from the U.S. and others.

With this additional support, it shouldn't take long to bring Kony and his henchmen to justice, return captive children to their families, and restore peace to this agonized region.

Ms. Farrow, an actor and activist, has traveled throughout LRA-affected areas in the Central African Republic, Congo, South Sudan and Uganda. Mr. Prendergast, cofounder of the Enough Project, is coauthor of the book "Unlikely Brothers" (Crown, 2011).
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} The BIG Picture

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheBigPictureRT#p/u/0/sUal9fRSAwc

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

Friday, 28 October 2011

{Political_Views} Republicons in the House Cut 370,000 Jobs in the Last Year

http://www.youtube.com/user/thomhartmann#p/u/0/VGfhQDMXFDg

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} The FUTURE of the INTERNET

Looks Like Congress Has Declared War on the Internet

Many Internet users in the United States have watched with horror as countries like France and Britain have proposed or instituted so-called "three strikes" laws which cut off Internet access to those accused of repeated acts of copyright infringement. Now the U.S. has its own version of this kind of law, and it is arguably much worse.

Mathew Ingram, GigaOM

The Senate's PROTECT IP Bill, designed to stop piracy, now has a matching bill in the REPUBLICAN controlled House: E-PARASITE. It would have been tough to top PROTECT IP, but they've managed to do it. It contains provisions that will chill innovation. It contains provisions that will tinker with the fundamental fabric of the Internet. It gives private corporations the power to censor.  And best of all, it bypasses due legal process to do much of it.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Political Ad Funders Must Not Dodge Scrutiny

David Kravets, Wired
Political Ad Funders Must Not Dodge Scrutiny

Thanks to the Supreme Court's decision last year to allow corporations and unions to make unlimited campaign contributions, Americans in the coming year may be blitzed by $1 billion of essentially anonymous television ads. Sponsors will hide behind the facade of made-up names for empty organizations. Why? So voters can't question messages because of ad buyers' motives. Congress or the FCC could guarantee the common-sense right to judge a political message by the intent of the messenger. But the REPUBLICAN controlled House has no intention of passing such a disclosure law.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Is Your Local TV Station Hiding Something?

What's Your Local TV Station Hiding?

If you want to know exactly what your local broadcasters are doing to meet public-interest obligations, the best place to look is their public files. Unfortunately, public files are currently difficult to access, requiring curious residents to drive down to the station during business hours. In large media markets, a trip to view the public file could mean traveling over 100 miles. In the coming month, the FCC will hear from broadcasters who want to limit their reporting requirements. It's critical that the agency also hear from viewers who want to know how their local stations are serving their communities.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} News from The Hill: House panel to vote on White House subpoena for Solyndra docs

This is JUST what we need!  To have the House spend it's time on a failed company.  Didn't the Republicons do the very same thing with the failed land deal of the Clintons?  I'm referring to White Water.  You see where that got them didn't you?  Six years of investigations, costing $40 MILLION, and 1 BJ later they tied up the Congress with a limp dick failed impeachment attempt.  

Why are they not investigating the no bid contracts that Dick Cheney engineered for his former company wherein $8 BILLION went missing?  Then there's the fact that the Bush 43 Administration is the ones who got the ball rolling on the Solyndra loan to begin with.  Hey at least with that loan we know where the money went!

This is all a political attempt to smear the present administration with the shit that the last administration left laying around.  Just one more thing to pick up and clean up after the Republicons.  Now they want to complain about the manner in which the clean up is coming about.  Ain't that a crock?

News from The Hill:

House panel to vote on White House subpoena for Solyndra docs
By Andrew Restuccia

A House Energy and Commerce Committee panel will vote next week on whether to subpoena the White House for documents on the Solyndra case.

Republicans scheduled a business meeting of the committee's investigative panel for Nov. 3 to vote on a resolution to authorize a White House subpoena. The meeting comes after the White House rejected Republicans' request for all internal communications related to Solyndra.

Read the complete story here.




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Fox News Attacks Green Loan To Steel Company Severstal

http://mediamatters.org/research/201110270028?lid=1183707&rid=64373909

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Right-Wing Media Freaks Out Over Nonexistent "ACORN" Tie To Occupy Wall Street

'Twas Inevitable: Right-Wing Media Freaks Out Over Nonexistent "ACORN" Ties To "Occupy Wall Street" Folks


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} REPORT: In Immigration Coverage, Fox Shuns Pro-Immigrant Voices

FOX - Can't live with them - can't shoot em either.

http://mediamatters.org/research/201110270008?lid=1183703&rid=64373909

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Right-Wing Media Go On Attack Against Student Debt Relief

http://mediamatters.org/research/201110270002?lid=1183701&rid=64373909

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

Thursday, 27 October 2011

{Political_Views} A Guide To The Smear Campaign Against Occupy Wall Street

http://mediamatters.org/research/201110180014?lid=1182976&rid=64212630

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Shareholders of the World UNITE! - Save the Internet

http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/11/10/27/shareholders-world-unite

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Getting the facts straight on regulation

Dear Friend --

Yesterday, a Bloomberg News analysis found that the Obama administration has passed fewer regulations than George W. Bush had at this point in his presidency -- and on top of that, they've come at far lower costs to the economy than the annual high mark for regulatory costs set by the first President Bush, or regulatory costs in President Reagan's last year for that matter.

It's funny, because a favorite theme from Republicans these days is that the President is passing an exorbitant number of regulations at crippling costs. John Boehner has said it's "misguided" for the President to be "imposing so many new rules with such enormous costs." Rep. Eric Cantor has said President Obama should "reevaluate his position on regulations."

This news kind of makes all those claims about "job-crushing government regulations" seem like what they are: political talking points with no basis in the truth.

Let's take a quick look at what this administration has actually done regulation-wise:

    -- President Obama has taken huge steps to reduce regulatory burdens and costs, and to make regulations more transparent. He signed a landmark executive order requiring agencies to develop tools to cut ineffective, burdensome regulations; issued a memorandum directing agencies to provide taxpayers with easy, comprehensive access to regulatory information; and has, for the first time ever, required those agencies to actually engage with the folks who would be affected by a potential regulation before they propose it.

    -- This administration has made it a priority to do away with the burdens of unnecessary regulations. So far during this administration's tenure, tens of millions of hours of regulation-related paperwork have been eliminated, saving businesses hundreds of millions in related costs. And the President initiated a plan to roll back hundreds of burdensome, unnecessary regulations - all told, this overhaul will save businesses more than $10 billion in the next five years. An example of one of the regulations getting cut? An EPA regulation defining milk as an "oil." This change is going to save the dairy industry $1.4 billion in the next decade.

    -- The regulations that the President has put in place have filled gaps, closed loopholes, and protected taxpayers. Wall Street reform closed the regulatory gaps that allowed banks to grow "too big to fail" in the first place. And it puts consumer protections in place to make sure financial institutions can't continue the deceptive and abusive practices of the past -- shifting interest rates, unfair late fees, and other hidden charges.

Here's what it comes down to: This administration is in favor of smart regulations that protect middle-class families and consumers, and against burdensome ones that don't do anything but waste time and taxpayers' money.

And this campaign is committed to spreading the truth -- not baseless attacks. So help us do just that: Get the word out about how wrong Republicans are on the President's regulatory record.

Share this article on Twitter: http://my.barackobama.com/Bloomberg-Analysis-TW

Share it on Facebook: http://my.barackobama.com/Bloomberg-Analysis-FB

Or, just forward this email.

Thanks,





Share on Twitter    Share on Facebook   




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Medicare

Dear Friend -

Democrats on the so-called Super Committee are caving to Republican demands and pushing a plan that would make drastic cuts to Medicare.

This is bad policy and bad politics. Cuts like these are the worst possible way to reduce the deficit. They protect the status quo for the richest 1 percent while the 99 percent are expected to sacrifice vital healthcare that they need to survive in tough economic times like these -- and they'll hamstring Democrats running for reelection in 2012.

We've been down this road before. Republicans and some Democrats have been pushing plans to destroy Medicare and Social Security for months. We beat them then and we can beat them now with an overwhelming show of grassroots opposition to any plan that cuts Medicare.

Join me and tell Washington that this deal is Dead On Arrival.

Pledge to oppose any candidate -- Republican or Democrat - who votes for a plan that cuts Medicare and Medicaid benefits for the 99 percent.

The facts are simple: The average income of Medicare beneficiaries is about $22,000 a year. Our nation's seniors can't afford to have their benefits cut and hard-working Americans can't afford to have their eligibility for Medicare raised to 67.

As more and more people lose employer-provided health insurance, the last thing the nation's seniors, people with disabilities, and low-income children who depend on Medicaid need is for the federal government to slash these vital programs.

Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid did not cause the run-up in federal deficits. We have President Bush's huge tax cuts for the top 1 percent, the unpaid costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and the Great Recession caused by reckless, un-American, and potentially criminal behavior on Wall Street to thank for the mess we're in.

Washington needs to make sure those who caused this mess pay to clean it up -- not seniors, not Americans with disabilities, and certainly not low-income children who depend on Medicaid to survive.

Send a message to Washington now -- Stand against cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security or stand alone for reelection.

This is a fight we will win, if we stand up and fight. Because when we work together, we're unstoppable.

Thank you for everything you do.

-Jim

Jim Dean, Chair
Democracy for America



Democracy for America relies on you and the people-power of more than one million members to fund the grassroots organizing and training that delivers progressive change on the issues that matter. Please Contribute Today and support our mission.
Paid for by Democracy for America, http://www.democracyforamerica.com/?akid=1446.1865361.g8IfRH&t=3 and not authorized by any candidate. Contributions to Democracy for America are not deductible for federal income tax purposes.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Taking Sides in Syria, Turkey Shelters Militia Fighting Assad



Breaking News Alert
The New York Times
Thursday, October 27, 2011 -- 2:08 PM EDT
-----

Taking Sides in Syria, Turkey Shelters Militia Fighting Assad

Once one of Syria's closest allies, Turkey is hosting an armed opposition group waging an insurgency against the government of President Bashar al-Assad, providing shelter to the commander and dozens of members of the group, the Free Syrian Army, and allowing them to orchestrate attacks across the border from inside a camp guarded by the Turkish military.

The support for the insurgents comes amid a broader Turkish campaign to undermine Mr. Assad's government. Turkey is expected to impose sanctions soon on Syria, and it has deepened its support for an umbrella political opposition group known as the Syrian National Council, which announced its formation in Istanbul. But its harboring of leaders in the Free Syrian Army, a militia composed of defectors from the Syrian armed forces, may be its most striking challenge so far to Damascus.

On Wednesday, the group, living in a heavily guarded refugee camp in Turkey, claimed responsibility for killing nine Syrian soldiers, including one uniformed officer, in an attack in restive central Syria.

Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/28/world/europe/turkey-is-sheltering-antigovernment-syrian-militia.html?emc=na

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Half See 2012 Campaign as "Dull," "Too Long"

Half See 2012 Campaign as "Dull," "Too Long" 
Americans are generally critical of the 2012 presidential campaign so far. More say the campaign has been dull (51%) than interesting (35%). With more than a year to go before the election, 50% already say the campaign is too long. The stories getting the most interest last week were the economy, the Ohio wild animals and death of Gadhafi. Read more


Well folks, you can plainly see that the corporately controlled right wing media doesn't want to cover the news that most folks find interesting.  For example 9% of the people say they followed the Occupy Wall Street news story however the percentage of news coverage devoted to the story was a mere 4%, and most of that was from a derisive point of view.  Here's another example: 12% of the people say the followed the "Withdrawal from Iraq" story and yet the percentage of news presented by the  lame stream media was a mere 5%.  Thirteen percent (13%) of us were interested in the escaped wild animals in Ohio story but again the lame stream media devoted a mere 4% of their news coverage to the story.  Lastly 12% of the people were interested in the Republicans' selection for their presidential candidate and yet the so called "news" devoted 17% of their news coverage to that story.  

In other words they aren't covering the stories we want to know more about, but they sure don't want us to miss out on any garbage the Republicon primary candidates are spewing out and filling our airwaves with.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} The Military-Civilian Gap - PEW

The Military-Civilian Gap

War and Sacrifice in the Post-9/11 Era

10.05.11

As the U.S. marks the 10th anniversary of the longest period of sustained warfare in its history, the vast majority of veterans of the post-9/11 era are proud of their military service and say it has helped them mature as human beings. More than eight-in-ten would advise a young person close to them to join the military.

However, only a third (34%) of these veterans say that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have both been worth fighting. And many report difficulties readjusting to civilian life.

Findings are based on nationally representative surveys of post-9/11 veterans, pre-9/11 veterans and the general public.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} PBS NewsHour and the One Percent


Having trouble reading this message? Access it on our website: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4424

Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR)

Action Alert

NewsHour and the One Percent

PBS newscast presents the upside of inequality


10/27/11

With protesters around the country speaking out against income inequality, public television's flagship newscast made time on October 26 for the pro-inequality side to be heard, featuring a guest who invoked a phony Abraham Lincoln quote to make his case.

PBS wonders: Does Inequality Have a Good Side?NewsHour anchor Jeffrey Brown explained that in the segment, correspondent Paul Solman "gets a contrarian view, suggesting inequality in a free market system may not be as bad as advertised."

The guest was New York University law school professor Richard Epstein, who presented a John Stossel-style view of the economy: "Inequality creates an incentive for people to produce and to create wealth," raising taxes on the wealthy would harm the economy, and the "fundamental truth is the tax system is more redistributive than it was before... and the regulatory burden on the economy is vastly greater." PBS should have disclosed that Epstein is also a director at Global Economics Group, a corporate consulting firm that advises on issues like financial regulation and employment law.

When asked if the top one percent have too much control over the political system, Epstein replied:

Of course they have a disproportionate impact, but that doesn't mean that they control it. They also ought to have it.

The last thing you would want to do in any kind of sensible society is to have a set of rules in which one man/one vote dictates over every issue.

The piece closes with Epstein invoking Abraham Lincoln:

I'm going to quote Abraham Lincoln, because I like to do that--which is, he said, quite rightly, that you do not make the poor rich by making the rich poor.

The NewsHour should, at the very least, tell its viewers that this quote is a well-traveled hoax. It's been falsely attributed to Lincoln for the better part of a century, and has been debunked almost as long. The New York Times (8/19/92) and CNN (8/19/92) pointed out that Lincoln hadn't said those words when Ronald Reagan misquoted him in a 1992 speech. In 1996, Rush Limbaugh admitted that he too had falsely attributed the quote to Lincoln (Extra!, 4/10).

Even better, the NewsHour could explain to viewers why it's so eager to present segments that portray economic inequality as no big deal. Brown's introduction called this a "contrarian" view, but defending inequality is hardly contrarian in elite media--including on the NewsHour.

On September 21 Solman presented a segment featuring American University economics professor Robert Lerman, who was critical of a previous NewsHour broadcast for apparently being too one-sided: "It would be nice if there was more equality, but let's not overdo it." Lerman's point was that seniors enjoy vast riches in the form of Social Security and Medicare (FAIR Blog, 9/23/11).
The segment included a visit to a nursing home, where Solman informed one resident that "Medicare is like a stash of wealth that you're now drawing on."

Public broadcasting is supposed to be dedicated to showcasing viewpoints that "would otherwise go unheard" in commercial media. Voices championing inequality are heard loud and clear in the corporate media; public television should be doing something different.

ACTION:
Tell the PBS NewsHour to issue a correction explaining that guest Richard Epstein invoked a false Abraham Lincoln quote to support his pro-inequality argument. And ask the show why it is so eager to feature one-on-one interviews with guests who downplay--if not outright celebrate--economic inequality.

CONTACT:
PBS NewsHour
onlineda2@newshour.org
Phone: 703-998-2150

TAKE ACTION!

ACTION:

Tell the PBS NewsHour to issue a correction explaining that guest Richard Epstein invoked a false Abraham Lincoln quote to support his pro-inequality argument. And ask the show why it is so eager to feature one-on-one interviews with guests who downplay--if not outright celebrate--economic inequality.

CONTACT:
PBS NewsHour
onlineda2@newshour.org
Phone: 703-998-2150


Please post copies of your letters in the comments section on the FAIR Blog



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Tell MSNBC To Sanction Pat Buchanan




Media Matters October 25, 2011

Dear Friend,

MSNBC has a Pat Buchanan problem and it's time they stop ignoring it.

This week Buchanan, a paid MSNBC analyst, has appeared across the media promoting a new book. Here are just a few examples of his conduct during this publicity tour:

  • Buchanan appeared on a "pro-white" radio program, where he attacked America's increasing diversity and warned that the country would face numerous problems when whites become a minority.[1]
  • When pressed by a radio host to explain his warning that test scores will decline "as more and more of the children taking those tests will be African-American and Hispanic," Buchanan refused to disavow the idea that non-whites have inferior genes.[2]
  • Buchanan argued that blacks and whites were more unified during segregation than they are today. [3]

The bigotry on display isn't all that surprising when you consider the book being promoted. Buchanan's thesis is that America is "disintegrating" because "white America is an endangered species."

MSNBC has the power to send a message that it will not tolerate bigotry by its employees, on its airwaves or off.

Tell MSNBC it's time to sanction Buchanan.

In 2009, the Anti-Defamation League called Buchanan an "unrepentant bigot" and noted that he "increasingly demonizes Jews, blacks, and non-white immigrants." The ADL expressed concern over "national media outlets legitimiz[ing] Buchanan's decades-long history of anti-Semitism and bigotry by presenting him as a respectable source of political commentary and ignoring his publicly hateful statements and open affiliations with anti-Semites and racists." [4]

Indeed. And, Buchanan's recent tour has only reinforced the ADL's concerns.

Tell MSNBC it's stop ignoring Buchanan's bigotry and sanctioning him.

MSNBC has a record of holding its employees accountable.

Several years ago, the network dropped the simulcast of Don Imus' radio program citing "a very long list of inappropriate comments." [5]

And Buchanan has a long history of bigoted and inappropriate remarks.

  • During the Nixon administration he reportedly informed the president that "Dr. King is one of the most divisive men in contemporary history." [6]
  • In a 1989 column he implored the GOP to "take a hard look" at former KKK leader David Duke's "portfolio of winning issues." [7]
  • Over the years, he has called gays and lesbians "sodomites" and said they are "literally hell-bent on Satanism and suicide"; called homosexuality a "disorder" that can be handled with therapy; and said that in a "healthy society, it will be contained, segregated, controlled, and stigmatized."[8]

These are just a few among the many examples of Pat Buchanan's bigotry.

Enough is enough. Tell MSNBC it's time to sanction Buchanan.

You can help hold Pat Buchanan accountable by signing a letter to MSNBC's management and by spreading the word about this action.

Your participation matters.

Thanks,

Matt Butler
President and CEO
Media Matters for America

Notes:

1: "Pat Buchanan Appears On "Pro-White" Radio Show Show." Media Matters, 10/13/11

2: "Pat Buchanan Won't Disavow Idea That Minorities Have Inferior Genes." Media Matters, 10/21/11

3: "Pat Buchanan: Blacks Have Lost The American Identity They Had During Segregation." Media Matters, 10/19/11

4: "Patrick Buchanan: Unrepentant Bigot." Anti-Defamation League, 5/21/09

5: "MSNBC drops simulcast of Don Imus show." MSNBC.com, 4/13/07

6: "Pat Buchanan in His Own Words." Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting, 2/26/96

7: "Pat Buchanan in His Own Words." Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting, 2/26/96

8: "Pat Buchanan's History Of Anti-LGBT Bigotry." Media Matters , 10/24/11


© 2011 Media Matters for America
455 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Suite 600, Washington, D.C. 20001


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Obama acknowledges poor relations with Republican Congress

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/190107-dems-increasingly-call-it-a-republican-congress

Since Republicons control the House AND with their obstructionist filibusters in the Senate they do control the Congress and therefore this Congress is a Republicon Congress!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Fox Revives Myth That "America Is A Center-Right Country"


This year, Fox has continued to push the right-wing talking point that "America is a center-right country." In fact, on issue after issue, polls are clear that Americans favor progressive policies.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Obama: Republicans want "dirtier air, dirtier water."

Hannity Attacks Obama For Telling the Truth In Noting Republicans Are Anti-Environment

October 26, 2011 11:09 am ET
http://mediamatters.org/research/201110260009?lid=1183578&rid=64346563

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Economists from across the spectrum have criticized Perry's radical tax plan

"The Most Exciting Tax Plan Since Reagan's": Right-Wing Media Tout Perry's Flat Tax

October 26, 2011 2:01 am ET — 31 Comments

http://mediamatters.org/research/201110260001?lid=1183576&rid=64346563

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Republicons want to exempt 95% of corporations profits from taxation

Key GOP tax-writer releases plan to overhaul corporate system

By Bernie Becker 10/26/11 05:59 PM ET

Rep. Dave Camp unveiled a plan Wednesday that would protect virtually all of a corporation's foreign profits from U.S. taxation

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Republicons running scared

Ryan: Obama stirring class warfare


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

Wednesday, 26 October 2011

{Political_Views} In the Belly of the Murdoch Beast


In the Belly of the Murdoch Beast

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Stossel's Attacks On Public Education Feature Misleading, Out-Of-Context Claims

http://mediamatters.org/research/201110250024?lid=1183453&rid=64323021

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} "Bribes" And "Farce": Fox Rushes To Attack Obama's Mortgage Relief Plan

Fox has rushed to attack President Obama's plan to assist homeowners who are underwater on their mortgages as a "re-election ploy," an offer of "bribes," and "purely a political stunt."

The real question is this: Why is it that when President Obama tries to help the most people - the 99%ers - Faux Snooze and the Republicons call it a bribe - bribing the voters to vote for him.  

However when the Republicons and Faux Snooze say that they want to give HUGE tax breaks to the wealthiest top 1/2 of 1% (after the top 1/2 of 1% gave enormous amounts of money to the Republicon candidates and the Republicon Party) that that is not a pay off.  Why is it not called buying the votes of the top 1/2 of 1% of the voters?

At least under the Administrations' plan it cost the taxpayers a hell of a lot less.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

{Political_Views} Perry Plan Would Grant Big Tax Break to Wealthiest - NYT

Perry Calls His Flat Tax Proposal 'Bold Reform'


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.

Sunday, 23 October 2011

{Political_Views} Have Corporate Media Warmed to Occupy Wall Street?




Having trouble viewing this email? View it on our website: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4420

FAIR

Media Advisory

Have Corporate Media Warmed to Occupy Wall Street?

10/18/11

Media coverage of the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) protests started out exactly as one might expect. There was little coverage at first (FAIR Action Alert, 9/23/11), and as it expanded, much of it consisted of snide dismissals of demonstrators' ignorance, hygiene and so on.

But then something happened. Following incidents of police abuse, including the unprovoked pepper-spraying of several demonstrators on September 24, media coverage began to pick up (FAIR Activism Update, 9/29/11). NPR executive editor Dick Meyer explained that the protests were not covered early on because they "did not involve large numbers of people, prominent people, a great disruption or an especially clear objective." But within a day or so, NPR was covering the protests, as was the rest of the media.

Soon the actions were being treated as front-page, top-of-the-newscast material. Consider this Brian Williams introduction at the top of the October 5 NBC Nightly News:

We begin tonight with what has become by any measure a pretty massive protest movement. While it goes by the official name Occupy Wall Street, it has spread steadily and far beyond Wall Street, and it could well turn out to be the protest of this current era. The lyric from 45 years ago in the Buffalo Springfield song "For What It's Worth" could also describe this current movement right now. Once again, there is something happening here. What it is ain't exactly clear, but it encompasses a lot of things: anger, frustration, disenfranchisement, income disparity, unaccountability and general upheaval and dissatisfaction.

A USA Today editorial (10/12/11) was headlined "Five Good Reasons Why Wall Street Breeds Protesters." A New York Times editorial (10/9/11) took on the "chattering classes" who complained that Occupy Wall Street lacked a clear message or specific proposals: "The message--and the solutions--should be obvious to anyone who has been paying attention since the economy went into a recession that continues to sock the middle class while the rich have recovered and prospered. The problem is that no one in Washington has been listening."

This is not to suggest, of course, that coverage is uniformly positive or respectful. October 15 saw massive demonstrations around the world, which made it onto the front page of the next day's Washington Post--in the form of a lower right-hand corner blurb approximately one column inch long, directing people to page A20 to find news about protests in "more than 900 cities in Europe, Africa and Asia."

Some coverage was absurd. Reuters (10/13/11) published a disgraceful piece attempting to link the protests to billionaire George Soros--a false conspiracy one would expect from talk radio host and former Fox News star Glenn Beck (FAIR Blog, 10/13/11).

Of course, actual Fox personalities were plenty busy. Host Bill O'Reilly quipped (10/14/11), "Do we have all kinds of crackheads down there?" He later added that the Wall Street protest is "dirty and filthy. There's rats running all over. There's dope all over the place. They're having sex outside at night and all of this stuff." Fox Business reporter Charles Gasparino declared (10/17/11): "It's not just protest Wall Street. It's protest Wall Street and it's an embrace of Communism and there is no doubt about it."

"Starbucks-sipping, Levi's-clad, iPhone-clutching protesters denounce corporate America even as they weep for Steve Jobs," Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer explained (10/14/11). Krauthammer maligned the protesters as "indigant indolents saddled with their $50,000 student loans and English degrees" whose policy proposal boils down to "Eat the rich."

In the New York Times (10/17/11), former executive editor Bill Keller devoted a column about the "good news" happening around in the world--none of which has to do with the global movement against inequality: "Bored by the soggy sleep-ins and warmed-over anarchism of Occupy Wall Street?" Keller asks, before cheering Slovakia's position on European Union bailout, which has done more "than the cumulative protests of Occupy Wall Street have done in a month of poster-waving." A column by the Times' David Brooks (10/11/11) dismissed the protesters as "Milquetoast Radicals."

But overall the protests have received significant and sustained media attention. This is surprising, given corporate media's history of marginalizing or belittling progressive protest movements (Extra!, 7-8/00; 7-8/05, 7/11).

So why are things different this time around?

From the very start, activists were criticizing the media for paying little attention to the demonstrations (FAIR Action Alert, 9/23/11). This likely had some impact, as did the persistence of certain media figures--Current TV's Keith Olbermann and MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell among them--in essentially shaming the corporate media into paying more attention.

One of the core complaints--that the media could hardly justify silence on OWS, given their keen interest in any Tea Party activism (Extra! 12/09, 9/10)--probably weighed on the minds of some editors and producers as well.

There is a tendency among elite reporters to view politics as largely a contest between the two major political parties. In that light, OWS could be considered newsworthy as a political opportunity for an embattled Democratic president and his party. As the Tea Party providing a jolt of enthusiasm and energy to the Republican Party, pundits are wondering if OWS will do the same for the other side.

Political reporters, ideology aside, do seem to crave a certain type of balance. As Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank explained (10/11/11), "A revived populist movement could be a crucial counterweight to the Tea Party, restoring some balance to a political system that has tilted heavily to the right."

But media have a hard time understanding a movement that does not appear to want to associate its activism with the political establishment. Much of the early criticism about the movement's lack of a "message" could be interpreted as elite confusion over political activism that does not seek to work the normal levers of power. Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum (10/18/11) argued that the current demonstrations resemble earlier protests against corporate globalization "in their lack of focus, in their inchoate nature, and above all in their refusal to engage with existing democratic institutions."

She added:

Democracy requires institutions, elections, political parties, rules, laws, a judiciary and many unglamorous, time-consuming activities, none of which are nearly as much fun as camping out in front of St. Paul's Cathedral or chanting slogans on the Rue Saint-Martin in Paris.

Applebaum's column concludes by acknowledging that global economic power can undermine democratic institutions--but that protesters should nevertheless work within the existing political order or they "will accelerate that decline." It is a difficult suggestion to square with protesters' concern that the political system is rigged.

Still, the quantity and tone of much of the coverage is surprising. It's unlikely that corporate media, whose general Wall Street boosterism (Extra!, 7-8/02) reflects both their ownership and their dependence on corporate advertising, would suddenly turn against their owners and sponsors.

At the same time, American capitalism is seen by some elites as in a state of crisis, with consumer-led growth hampered by stagnating incomes and the limits of debt-based consumption. While the Tea Party movement proposes lower taxes and deregulation--policies that are likely to exacerbate inequality--there is at least some appetite among the wealthy for redistributive reforms to preserve the health of the profit-making system, as evidenced by billionaire Warren Buffett's calls for raising taxes on high incomes.

While the desire for fundamentally overhauling the economy is likely to be limited among those who have benefited most from its current structure, a widespread protest movement can create pressure to acknowledge the concerns of the economically pressured majority. Even some Republican politicians and presidential contenders have done so.

As the Occupy Wall Street movement spreads, political elites are trying to find ways to adopt some of its message. A Washington Post front-page story (10/15/11), headlined "Obama Looks to Harness Anti-Wall St. Angst," reported that the White House plans to "turn public anger at Wall Street into a central tenet of their reelection strategy."

The Post article acknowledges the inherit difficulty for a White House that drafted an economic team with deep ties to Wall Street to try and run against Wall Street. But it is nonetheless a sign that political and media elites sense that there is something significant happening in the streets--even if they don't know what it is.

The real test of corporate media's willingness to seriously engage the protests and what they acknowledge to be widespread feeling behind them will come as these translate into calls for concrete policy and legislative change.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Political_Views" group.
To post to this group, send email to political_views@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to political_views+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/political_views?hl=en.