May 21 2008
Outsourcing the Media where They Belong
I second Juanita’s condemnation of the Media, MoF0, and mini-Goebbels. With no palpable victory in sight, the pompousness and condescension of MoF0 even hinting Victory, is sheer offense. The willingness of the International Association of Media Hos and Prostitutes for Obama (IAMHPO) to pimp this lanky two-bit experience-less, judgment less, Black Nationalist Chicago Thug, outweighs any insult an American-Hating dictator can extend to our great Land. No amount of excoriation from abroad can approximate the Cap Busted on our People by our own Networks and News!
Some Americans’ remained unconvinced by the Invention and Fabrication of Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction. Some thought the Media would just make one mistake, one teeny winnie mistake which dragged us into a Quagmire in Mesopotamia, and no more mistakes from now on! From now on, all squeaky Mr. Clean.
Naive! Maddeningly saddeningly tragically naive. With all its shortcomings, a Public Broadcasting System, or a BBC, would surely be a thousand times better than the Hegemonic Bourgeois Corporate Coverage we are getting here. The present American Media Apparatus belongs in Maoist China, not in a Modern Democracy! We gotta do something about it brothers and sisters, and the sooner, the better.
Our chance, presently, is to stand tall by our candidate, and see that she secure the nomination. We need to stand tall by Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton, until that August 26 or 27 when she is crowned the Democratic Queen, and we can begin demanding and agitating for change in the American Media Lying System.
Either rein-in the Television and Newspaper Demagoguery and Lies, or outsource them all to China where they belong! The Chinese will do it all better, cheaper, and with less pretense! Americans will save money, learn a language, expand our knowledge of the world- and no more Paris Hiltons and Donald Trumps, just Gong Li or Zhou Zhengyi.
Presently, we put the Chinese to shame with skillfully misleading framing that allows us to steal the vote from 2.4 million American voters. I How envious they must be. Our costs are high, and we may as well outsource this Shit to stave off inflation! The Chinese, will rejoice in such pertinent “technology-transfer.”
Nothing against the People’s Republic - just my country’s Media, who set a bad example.
18 responses so far
[…] in the Media where They Belong Swamp Pirate wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptOur chance, presently, is to stand […]
Can you tell me who did your layout? I’ve been looking for one kind of like yours. Thank you.
[…] Continue Reading […]
Well said. Glad you are affirming our stand instead of falling in the bo MSM soup. Don’t know if you got this yet? Please help outreach to Super Delegates - even a brief note - to support those remaining to endorse Hillary Clinton.
Rare Super D email list here:
LemireDahlman@rangeweb.net stephanie_schriock@tester.senate.gov montanaflyfish@yahoo.com joycebrayboy@gmail.com judgebutterfield@aol.com jcouncil@co.cumberland.nc.us jmeek@ncdp.org geri_gaginis@conrad.senate.gov elizabeth_gore@dorgan.senate.gov christy_beach@dorgan.senate.gov dhannaher@hannahers.com maxsonlaw@minot.com reneepf@btinet.net strauss_david@msn.com mwake@medicine.nodak.edu achelpohl@usa.net katfahey@cox.net franklamere@msn.com melanie_rogge@bennelson.senate.gov dostergard@neb.rr.com vimapo@aol.com martha.fullerclark@leg.state.nh.us dnorcross@snjaflcio.org danaredd999@yahoo.com crs@ntuaft.com fharris@unm.edu teresa_benitez@hotmail.com steven@stevenhorsford.com kittyspraggins@aol.com egoubeaux@woh.rr.com m.mallory@att.net lanamclin@aol.com nsonnyn@aol.com tekicatt@aol.com rwhitten@whittenburragelaw.com mzlivability@yahoo.com jen@defazioforcongress.org info@jasonaltmire.com ccampbell215@msn.com
james_brown@casey.senate.gov sara_mabry@casey.senate.gov chafinlawfirm@charter.net pmurphy@murphy06.com celita_a_de_r@hotmail.com gcobbhun@BellSouth.net waringsh@bellsouth.net carol@fowlercommunications.com jackbillion@sio.midco.net drey_samuelson@johnson.senate.gov sonja_dean@johnson.senate.gov mnemec@sullybuttes.net stroschein@nrctv.com rep.loisdeberry@legislature.state.tn.us BrooksViceChair@aol.com ydavis2455@aol.com olga@pgog.net al@aledwards.com chris@chetedwards.com denise_johnson@ibew.org bjenellhamlett@mail.house.gov moses.mercado@ogilvygr.com senfronia.thompson@publicans.com wholland@utdemocrats.org crbenjamin1019@yahoo.com jbevans@coatchworksfarm.com icarleton@vtdemocrats.org kevin_mcdonald@leahy.senate.gov chuckr@gmavt.net patnotter@gmail.com cewaliser@hotmail.com wisgov@gov.state.wi.us mary_irvine@feingold.senate.gov will_sebern@feingold.senate.gov steve@kagen4congress.com ellisshir@sbcglobal.net raejason@yahoo.com lissa7453@yahoo.com wineke10@charter.net beth_provenzano@rockefeller.senate.gov kerry_ates@rockefeller.senate.gov pjorgensen@jorgensenassociates.com jmillin@cheyenneeyeclinic.com constance@cborde.com liv.gibbons@gmail.com boleary1@bloomberg.net
[…] Swamp Pirate wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptOur chance, presently, is to stand tall by our candidate, and see that she secure the nomination. We need to stand tall by Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton, until that August 26 or 27 when she is crowned the Democratic Queen, … […]
{just Gong Li or Zhou Zhengyi.}
That would be lovely.
I am thrilled to see an article of such substance and with such compelling evidence. Good work!
Jamal: Thats excellent. Somehow we must get rid of our news media. The quicker the better. They are nothing but liars. I cannot imagine they can face themselves in the mirror each morning let alone spew the lies and distortions they do each and every day. The party elite have conspired with the Republican owned media to deny Hillary Clinton the nomination. George Soros, Rupert Murdoch et al need to be taken down. Anderson Cooper, Tim Russert, Matthews and on and on. Lets get rid of these liars once and for all.
Jamal: I just wrote the following to each of the super delegates, I am not good at writing I will admit but I think at least I did what needed to be done. I apologize for leaving your site off on the portion where I said where I get my news, I was in the heat of passion when I was writing.
“Dear Sir/Madam: I know you are busy but I implore you to read my email. I wish to tell you that I support Hillary Clinton for President. I could never support Obama on any ticket in any way. Since the mass news media does not even pretend to tell the truth and play fair with these two candidates, I will tell you I get my news from Savage Politics and No Quarter among others. I do not read Newsweek or Time anymore nor most newspapers. I was lied to about George Bush in 2000 and we all remember what the media did to Al Gore and ultimately the Supreme Court. The democratic party elite including Howard Dean and Donna Brazille, Nancy Pelosi and others have decided that Obama will be put in no matter what. There is no need to say that they are unpledged, it is clear who they support. They have engineered everything they can to accomplish that purpose. Hillary Clinton is the best candidate for our country and the democratic voters know it. Those who have backed Obama even after learning some things about him that have come to light in recent months (the news media of course is holding most of what they know back until he wins the nomination) still threw their support behind Obama. Money cannot buy our votes and it should not have been the reason or promises of favorable outcomes in the congress or senate for any delegate to throw their support behind Obama. Even if a delegate dislikes Hillary Clinton, that is no excuse for throwing support behind Obama. I am an American citizen first and then a party loyalist. However, if my party chooses to allow the sexism and hatred toward Hillary Clinton and make themselves a party to it, I can no longer stay with the democratic party since it is no longer the party of the people. It will become the party of the elite and extreme left. The party has been disloyal to Hillary Clinton and her husband and previous President, Bill Clinton by allowing things to be said and written about them that are simply untrue and stacking this election against her. I have seen very few democrats come out and defend them in the media or otherwise. I beg you to vote for Hillary Clinton. I am not sure who investigates people before they become U.S. senators, however, how did they miss so much about Obama that they still invited him to become a U.S. senator? I feel he is dangerous to our country, I don’t like his views or his associations and friends. I believe he is completely unqualified to even be in elected office as a U.S. senator let alone our next President of the United States. I do not believe this man is even able to pass a security clearance. Hope and change is a great speech but you can read everything that Hillary Clinton has specifically laid out for this country. Her knowledge and experience is what we should be looking at, not his great speeches. By the way, the 75,000 people who showed up in Oregon were not for him, it was a free concert already planned, so the news media spinned that lie as well. It would be sad for us to lose this election when we have such a capable person who deserves to become our next President and is being left by the wayside because of some unknown hatred within our party elite. If we must have another republican then so be it but I will leave the party I have loved for so long and never return. Obama’s campaign friend is now, I understand, running to take over at the DNC, I believe his name is Tewes. Please don’t let this happen to our party, please vote for Hillary Clinton and not subject this party to the destruction that awaits by voting for Obama.”
[…] Read the rest of this great post here […]
I find it unbelievable that the groups most attracted to Obama, the young and the ‘educated elite’ allow themselves to be manipulated by the media. They who proclaim themselves above the beer drinking couch potato inbreds of the lower classes have been scammed by the oldest marketing tricks in the book. The Germans were studying this stuff a hundred years before the Nazis–read their philosophy on auditory and visual stimuli and its effects on group psychology and the “popular mind.” And all of these Obama people, with all of their college degrees, mesmerized by this Harvard idiot who claims he just “didn’t know” what his pastor was saying for 20 years(but he’s ‘brilliant” according to Oprah)didn’t “use the right word’ when describing the uneducated “bitter, religious gun clingers” and then called his real estate deal with Rezko a ‘boneheaded mistake.” The corporate sugar daddies have bought and paid for this guy, he’s their puppet.
Exactly, Jamal! You and your team make my day–every day.
Nominate Hillary, and expose these media folks for who they are, which sure ain’t journalists.
“Curtain Time for Obama” final part, is on the blogs today. Looks like corrupt Chicago, Cook County, Capital Springfield and the not so great state of IL, with BO in the middle of it all, will be national news very soon. Thank goodness for WE THE PEOPLE.
Rock on, America!
Speaking of media….
Here’s a fun read. Apparently Obama has more of a temper then McCain. Does anyone recall a time when John McCain had to be physically restrained on the floor of the Senate?
In State Legislature Altercation, Obama ‘Had To Be Physically Restrained.’
“…Soon, the two men were shouting at each other on the senate floor. They took their disagreement into a nearby room, and a witness said that Obama had to be physically restrained…”
“UPDATE: Mendell in a later interview: “According to people I interviewed who were there, they said Obama was ready to throw some punches.”
http://tinyurl.com/4z6mmg
JP, good for you for writing the SD!! I thought your letter was very good. I especially liked this part:
“The democratic party elite including Howard Dean and Donna Brazille, Nancy Pelosi and others have decided that Obama will be put in no matter what. There is no need to say that they are unpledged, it is clear who they support. They have engineered everything they can to accomplish that purpose.”
I think it’s important to let these politicians know that we got their number! They think they’re so sneaky, don’t they? They’re such idiots!!
Hey, if you get any snotty replies back from the gods up above, tell them they can kiss Ijane’s ass
Sorry but here’s another interesting read…More Greg Craig (who names their kid that?). You know, Obama could never run a country.
ABC News
http://tinyurl.com/6cecxc
“Greg Craig, a senior foreign policy adviser to Obama, is a partner at the big-shot DC law firm Williams & Connolly. There Craig represents Pedro Miguel González.
González is president of the Panamanian Legislature and is also under indictment in the U.S. for murdering U.S. Army Sgt. Zak Hernández in 1992.”
“The murder indictment, combined with Mr. González’s leadership position, is hindering bilateral relations and causing a new U.S.-Panama free trade accord to stall in the Senate, where Mr. Obama holds office,”
For his part, Obama told a Wisconsin labor coalition that he would vote against the Panama Free Trade Agreement specifically because of González’s indictment.
“Until that situation is resolved, we cannot support any trade agreement with Panama,” Obama wrote.
Craig also represents Carlos Sánchez-Berzaín, the Bolivian Defense Minister who has been accused in a federal lawsuit of “crimes against humanity”
Dear IJane: Thanks for the good thoughts. I haven’t heard from any of them yet and probably wont. However today on Uppity I read an article written by Andrew Stephan that was absolutely outstanding, here it is:
“History, I suspect, will look back on the past six months as an example of America going through one of its collectively deranged episodes - rather like Prohibition from 1920-33, or McCarthyism some 30 years later. This time it is gloating, unshackled sexism of the ugliest kind. It has been shamelessly peddled by the US media, which - sooner rather than later, I fear - will have to account for their sins. The chief victim has been Senator Hillary Clinton, but the ramifications could be hugely harmful for America and the world.
I am no particular fan of Clinton. Nor, I think, would friends and colleagues accuse me of being racist. But it is quite inconceivable that any leading male presidential candidate would be treated with such hatred and scorn as Clinton has been. What other senator and serious White House contender would be likened by National Public Radio’s political editor, Ken Rudin, to the demoniac, knife-wielding stalker played by Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction? Or described as “a fucking whore” by Randi Rhodes, one of the foremost personalities of the supposedly liberal Air America? Would Carl Bernstein (of Woodward and Bernstein fame) ever publicly declare his disgust about a male candidate’s “thick ankles”? Could anybody have envisaged that a website set up specifically to oppose any other candidate would be called Citizens United Not Timid? (We do not need an acronym for that.)
I will come to the reasons why I fear such unabashed misogyny in the US media could lead, ironically, to dreadful racial unrest. “All men are created equal,” Thomas Jefferson famously proclaimed in 1776. That equality, though, was not extended to women, who did not even get the vote until 1920, two years after (some) British women. The US still has less gender equality in politics than Britain, too. Just 16 of America’s 100 US senators are women and the ratio in the House (71 out of 435) is much the same. It is nonetheless pointless to argue whether sexism or racism is the greater evil: America has a peculiarly wicked record of racist subjugation, which has resulted in its racism being driven deep underground. It festers there, ready to explode again in some unpredictable way.
To compensate meantime, I suspect, sexism has been allowed to take its place as a form of discrimination that is now openly acceptable. “How do we beat the bitch?” a woman asked Senator John McCain, this year’s Republican presidential nominee, at a Republican rally last November. To his shame, McCain did not rebuke the questioner but joined in the laughter. Had his supporter asked “How do we beat the nigger?” and McCain reacted in the same way, however, his presidential hopes would deservedly have gone up in smoke. “Iron my shirt,” is considered amusing heckling of Clinton. “Shine my shoes,” rightly, would be hideously unacceptable if yelled at Obama.
Evidence to the contrary notwithstanding, American men like to delude themselves that they are the most macho in the world. It is simply unthinkable, therefore, for most of them to face the prospect of having a woman as their leader. The massed ranks of male pundits gleefully pronounced that Clinton had lost the battle with Obama immediately after the North Carolina and Indiana primaries, despite past precedents that strong second-place candidates (like Ronald Reagan in his first, ultimately unsuccessful campaign in 1976; like Ted Kennedy, Gary Hart, Jesse Jackson and Jerry Brown) continue their campaigns until the end of the primary season and, in most cases, all the way to the party convention.
None of these male candidates had a premature political obituary written in the way that Hillary Clinton’s has been, or was subjected to such righteous outrage over refusing to quiesce and withdraw obediently from what, in this case, has always been a knife-edge race. Nor was any of them anything like as close to his rivals as Clinton now is to Obama.
The media, of course, are just reflecting America’s would-be macho culture. I cannot think of any television network or major newspaper that is not guilty of blatant sexism - the British media, naturally, reflexively follow their American counterparts - but probably the worst offender is the NBC/MSNBC network, which has what one prominent Clinton activist describes as “its nightly horror shows”. Tim Russert, the network’s chief political sage, was dancing on Clinton’s political grave before the votes in North Carolina and Indiana had even been fully counted - let alone those of the six contests to come, the undeclared super-delegates, or the disputed states of Florida and Michigan.
The unashamed sexism of this giant network alone is stupendous. Its superstar commentator Chris Matthews referred to Clinton as a “she-devil”. His colleague Tucker Carlson casually observed that Clinton “feels castrating, overbearing and scary . . . When she comes on television, I involuntarily cross my legs.” This and similar abuse, I need hardly point out, says far more about the men involved than their target.
Knives out
But never before have the US media taken it upon themselves to proclaim the victor before the primary contests are over or the choice of all the super-delegates is known, and the result was that the media’s tidal wave of sexism became self-fulfilling: Americans like to back winners, and polls immediately showed dramatic surges of support for Obama. A few brave souls had foreseen the merciless media campaign: “The press will savage her no matter what,” predicted the Washington Post’s national political correspondent, Dana Milbank, last December. “They really have their knives out for her, there’s no question about it.”
Polling organisations such as Gallup told us months ago that Americans will more readily accept a black male president than a female one, and a more recent CNN/Essence magazine/ Opinion Research poll found last month that 76 per cent think America is ready for a black man as president, but only 63 per cent believe the same of a woman.
“The image of charismatic leadership at the top has been and continues to be a man,” says Ruth Mandel of Rutgers University. “We don’t have an image, we don’t have a historical memory of a woman who has achieved that feat.”
Studies here have repeatedly shown that women are seen as ambitious and capable, or likeable - but rarely both. “Gender stereotypes trump race stereotypes in every social science test,” says Alice Eagley, a psychology professor at Northwestern University. A distinguished academic undertaking a major study of coverage of the 2008 election, Professor Marion Just of Wellesley College - one of the “seven sisters” colleges founded because women were barred from the Ivy Leagues and which, coincidentally, Hillary Clinton herself attended - tells me that what is most striking to her is that the most repeated description of Senator Clinton is “cool and calculating”.
This, she says, would never be said of a male candidate - because any politician making a serious bid for the White House has, by definition, to be cool and calculating. Hillary Clinton, a successful senator for New York who was re-elected for a second term by a wide margin in 2006 - and who has been a political activist since she campaigned against the Vietnam War and served as a lawyer on the congressional staff seeking to impeach President Nixon - has been treated throughout the 2008 campaign as a mere appendage of her husband, never as a heavyweight politician whose career trajectory (as an accomplished lawyer and professional advocate for equality among children, for example) is markedly more impressive than those of the typical middle-aged male senator.
Rarely is she depicted as an intellectually formidable politician in her own right (is that what terrifies oafs like Matthews and Carlson?). Rather, she is the junior member of “Billary”, the derisive nickname coined by the media for herself and her husband. Obama’s opponent is thus not one of the two US senators for New York, but some amorphous creature called “the Clintons”, an aphorism that stands for amorality and sleaze. Open season has been declared on Bill Clinton, who is now reviled by the media every bit as much as Nixon ever was.
Here we come to the crunch. Hillary Clinton (along with her husband) is being universally depicted as a loathsome racist and negative campaigner, not so much because of anything she has said or done, but because the overwhelmingly pro-Obama media - consciously or unconsciously - are following the agenda of Senator Barack Obama and his chief strategist, David Axelrod, to tear to pieces the first serious female US presidential candidate in history.
“What’s particularly saddening,” says Paul Krugman, professor of economics and international affairs at Princeton and a rare dissenting voice from the left as a columnist in the New York Times, “is the way many Obama supporters seem happy with the . . . way pundits and some news organisations treat any action or statement by the Clintons, no matter how innocuous, as proof of evil intent.” Despite widespread reporting to the contrary, Krugman believes that most of the “venom” in the campaign “is coming from supporters of Obama”.
But Obama himself prepared the ground by making the first gratuitous personal attack of the campaign during the televised Congressional Black Caucus Institute debate in South Carolina on 21 January, although virtually every follower of the media coverage now assumes that it was Clinton who started the negative attacks. Following routine political sniping from her about supposedly admiring comments Obama had made about Ronald Reagan, Obama suddenly turned on Clinton and stared intimidatingly at her. “While I was working in the streets,” he scolded her, “. . . you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board of Wal-Mart.” Then, cleverly linking her inextricably in the public consciousness with her husband, he added: “I can’t tell who I’m running against sometimes.”
One of his female staff then distributed a confidential memo to carefully selected journalists which alleged that a vaguely clumsy comment Hillary Clinton had made about Martin Luther King (”Dr King’s dream began to be realised when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964″) and a reference her husband had made in passing to Nelson Mandela (”I’ve been blessed in my life to know some of the greatest figures of the last hundred years . . . but if I had to pick one person whom I know would never blink, who would never turn back, who would make great decisions . . . I would pick Hillary”) were deliberate racial taunts.
Another female staffer, Candice Tolliver - whose job it is to promote Obama to African Americans - then weighed in publicly, claiming that “a cross-section of voters are alarmed at the tenor of some of these statements” and saying: “Folks are beginning to wonder: Is this an isolated situation, or is there something bigger behind all of this?” That was game, set and match: the Clintons were racists, an impression sealed when Bill Clinton later compared Obama’s victory in South Carolina to those of Jesse Jackson in 1984 and 1988 (even though Jackson himself, an Obama supporter, subsequently declared Clinton’s remarks to be entirely inoffensive).
The pincer movement, in fact, could have come straight from a textbook on how to wreck a woman’s presidential election campaign: smear her whole persona first, and then link her with her angry, red-faced husband. The public Obama, characteristically, pronounced himself “unhappy” with the vilification carried out so methodically by his staff, but it worked like magic: Hillary Clinton’s approval ratings among African Americans plummeted from above 80 per cent to barely 7 per cent in a matter of days, and have hovered there since.
I suspect that, as a result, she will never be able entirely to shake off the “racist” tag. “African-American super-delegates [who are supporting Clinton] are being targeted, harassed and threatened,” says one of them, Representative Emanuel Cleaver. “This is the politics of the 1950s.” Obama and Axelrod have achieved their objectives: to belittle Hillary Clinton and to manoeuvre the ever-pliant media into depicting every political criticism she makes against Obama as racist in intent.
The danger is that, in their headlong rush to stop the first major female candidate (aka “Hildebeast” and “Hitlery”) from becoming president, the punditocracy may have landed the Democrats with perhaps the least qualified presidential nominee ever. But that creeping realisation has probably come too late, and many of the Democratic super-delegates now fear there would be widespread outrage and increased racial tension if they thwart the first biracial presidential hopeful in US history.
But will Obama live up to the hype? That, I fear, may not happen: he is a deeply flawed candidate. Rampant sexism may have triumphed only to make way for racism to rear its gruesome head in America yet again. By election day on 4 November, I suspect, the US media and their would-be-macho commentators may have a lot of soul-searching to do.”
JP that was an excellent article! Thank you. I love articles like the one you posted because it really shows what a true leader Senator Clinton is. Has there been any male Presidential contender whose candidacy has been able to withstand this level of negativity from the media or other during a primary? Obama and the media and his politician thugs have thrown everything at her and he still can’t beat her without resorting to stealing the nomination. She’s truly amazing.
“African-American super-delegates [who are supporting Clinton] are being targeted, harassed and threatened,” says one of them, Representative Emanuel Cleaver.”
Hillary Clinton is strong enough to survive Obama and Axelrod’s race-baiting campaign strategy and the white people will get over being called racists, but when the dust settles, how much damage will the African American community have suffered? Obama and his surrogates encouraged African Americans to go after their own. They tore down their public and non public leaders despite having so few to begin with, and terrorized each other to the point people were afraid to even mention Hillary Clinton. There’s got to be a lot of resentment and animosity and feelings of betrayal. Time will tell how badly obama divided the black community.
Tramadol pills pain relief pills overnight shipping free prescription http://MyRxPill.com