It’s Just A Kiss

In a perfect world the photograph of a black man kissing his white wife on television would illicit little if any reaction from those viewing the photograph. However, we do not live in that perfect world and so last night when the producers of MSNBC’s, “Countdown with Keith Oberman” repeatedly cut to shots of the photograph of Justice Clarence Thomas kissing his wife while discussing her lobbying and tea party activities seemed designed to exploit the prejudice and discomfort of a certain segment of the population. It is unfortunate but we live in a world where racial prejudice is still a part of everyday life. If we are truly honest with ourselves that photograph to many is the culmination of their worst fears and nightmares. This is true in a subtle way for many Americans not just the raging bigot.

For those who are unaware of the story last night during the MSNBC show, “Countdown with Keith Oberman”, they did a story on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife Virginia (who happens to be white) establishing a conservative lobbying firm and also her possible attendance and speaking engagement at two upcoming tea party events. During the report they were showing pictures of Justice Thomas and his wife together in a variety of pictures including one of them engaged in a full mouth kiss. During the reporting of this story the show continued to cut back to the photo of Justice Thomas and his wife kissing.

Let me be clear I think that Justice Thomas and Justice Scalia are two of the worst jurist we have had in the history of the Supreme Court. I think that the activities of Justice Thomas’s wife highlighted in the story were worthy of media scrutiny. My concern does not lie in his wife’s activities reported in the story or the implications being drawn from those activities concerning possible conflicts of interest or the hypocrisy of the wife of someone who is paid by tax dollars rallying against taxes. No, my concern is with the show using what I know the producers knew was an inflammatory photograph to help bolster their argument. The show did not merely show the photograph once as part of a montage, but continued to cut back to that particular photograph and stay locked on it.

It is one thing to decry the tactics of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove; it is another to imitate those same tactics. I think it is the willingness of both sides of the political spectrum to use inflammatory images and speech that has allowed our political discourse to devolve into its current state. Was it necessary to continue to show that photograph to the reporting of that story? Remember the uproar concerning the ad that was used against Harold Ford Jr. with the white woman at the end of it winking and saying I’ll see you later or call me. I understand the desire to fight fire with fire, but in the end all you end up with is a bunch of burned up stuff. Are we, the public better served by the use of these tactics?

In my opinion by MSNBC using that photograph in that manner they are perched on a slippery slope that leads from journalism to Fox News. Is scoring short-term political points worth rousing the fears and prejudices of some people’s baser natures? For many years on the right the answer to that question has been a resounding yes, but is this a model we want to emulate? I fail to see the long-term strategy in arousing historical fears, anxieties, and prejudices in developing partnerships and common bonds. My hope is that this was a temporary lack of judgment and not a preview of coming attractions. Come on MSNBC you are better than this, that story has legs without the use of inflammatory pictures and incendiary language. I’d be curious to know if I was the only one who felt this way after the segment. Let me know what you think.

Read more!

Birds of a Feather

The more I am involved in local politics and neighborhood issues the more I am coming to realize that most people tend to seek out those who share their already held beliefs and look for reinforcement versus critical analysis. Have we become a country that is so entrenched in ideology that facts have become nonessential to rational discussion? My fear is that we have become a nation of intellectually lazy people who would rather have their news and facts spoon fed to them by the likes of Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC. It appears that the more technology we incorporate into our society the less many of us read, study, and work to understand the nuisances of different issues. Instead of witnessing accurate and factual discussions we have become spectators to a drunken family brawl, where facts are replaced with family indignation.

To see evidence of this phenomenon one only has to look as far as the popularity of not just “news shows” that encourage cacophony versus discussion but also the daily blurring of the line between entertainment and news. So much of what we call news today is manufactured news designed to sell dog food. Regardless of what you feel about Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and their ilk they sell a lot of dog food. If you are able to garner an audience of 10-20% of 300 million people that makes you a player in this new world of newstainment. Facts are optional and if you misrepresent the truth you can always state that you have been given the ability to read minds and know the hearts of others. Remember, the goal is to sell dog food and once you accept that fact and you still rely on these “news outlets” to provide you with your information then you have gone beyond intellectual slothfulness and have graduated to dim-wittedness.

How many times have we been told by these news insiders that the public option was dead? How many times have we been told that President Obama was not tough enough, not engaged enough, not you “fill in the blank” enough? I am reminded of the news coverage of the past election and how we were led to believe that the election was always in doubt despite huge leads in the polls these pundits continued to tell us how it was too close to call. I wish I could say it is just the wingnuts who perpetrate this fraud on the American public, but all of the networks play this game. They are all in the business to sell dog food. Many people believe that television is about the shows and that the commercials are just the filler, the truth is that the shows are the filler and the commercials are why television was invented and maintained the way that it is. I say all this to say that I think much of our intellectual stupor has been supported by the wealthy and crafted by the media so that our population remains easy to govern and easily deceived.

Even politicians have become well schooled in the art of the sleight of hand. As these health care bills proceed toward passage watch how many of these anonymous small or unpopulated state politicians try to hold sway on the debate in an attempt to elevate their status and take advantage of their 15 minutes of fame.The latest contestant in the health care sweepstakes is Joe Lieberman that stalwart of independence that was all set to become John McCain’s running mate until the demographics proved that the day of two old white guys ruling America had died a fitting and long overdue death. Much has been made by the pundits and the “news outlets” concerning Mr. Lieberman’s intention to side with Republicans to filibuster a health care bill with a public option. Since the election when was the last time any of us have seen Joe Lieberman on primetime anything? He was close to making his “Dancing with the Stars” debut, but like a modern day Lazarus he continues to rise and be the gift that keeps on giving to the Democratic Party. Who among us that is not selling their prescription for Prozac on Craig’s list believes that Joe Lieberman is an Independent? But let no one be fooled, Joe Lieberman needs the Democrats and recognizes like the rest of us that the chances of the Republicans coming out of the wilderness anytime soon is like the proverbial snowball in hell. The Democratic Party and this administration have the keys to the city and will have them for some time to come, so while Connecticut maybe the epicenter for insurance companies, Joe Lieberman has to deliver more than 40 million new customers to the insurance lobby. So despite his proud display of Republican colors not even Lieberman wants to be the one man who blocked healthcare reform in America.

So cheer up folks, there will be healthcare reform this year. Will it be everything that progressives want? Of course not, but what troubles me the most about progressives is that sometimes they are as intellectually as lazy as wingnuts. If you study history and large scale legislation they were all begun with the foundation being laid and each subsequent Democratic majority has added to it to make it what it has become. The social security we have today is not the program created by Roosevelt. What is important here and must be different for real reform to take place is that there must be a solid foundation upon which future Congresses can build. By the time this debate is over there will be a number of no’s that will turn into yeses and more than a few birds whose feathers will change. And don’t forget to keep buying that dog food.

Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education. – Franklin D. Roosevelt
The Disputed Truth

Read more!

Fair and Balanced When Needed

Am I the only person who can remember how the Democrats were decrying the unfair and unbalanced coverage of the Fox News Network? The outcry was so vociferous that few if any Democrats (except Joe Lieberman) would even appear on the network. In another example of how today’s MSM does not report the news but tries to generate the news, the Fox Network has suddenly become Democratic central. The MSM has convinced the Democratic candidates that they now need the network to reach those “bitter” white voters. The campaigns have become so desperate to court the white vote that they have bought into the Fox narrative that they are the only way to reach these voters.

Standing in front of a television camera last week, the chairman of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign, Terry McAuliffe, uttered four words that the Fox News Channel would not soon forget.

“Fair and balanced Fox!,” he exclaimed, noting that the network was the first to project Mrs. Clinton’s Pennsylvania primary win.

Fox executives could not have asked for a more rousing endorsement. The next day it showed up in promotions.[1]

Now, I can accept that in an effort to disseminate the Democratic message one might appear on the network for an interview to present the Democratic plan for America, but for a Democratic campaign chairperson to promote the network as “fair and balanced” is beyond comprehension. Mr. McAuliffe has now provided Fox with the credibility it sorely was lacking among Democratic leaning voters and independents. Instead of Republican hacks and wing-nuts making the pronouncement about Fox, we will now have a leading Democrat in their network promotions. So another fall out from this win at all cost primary campaign will be the elevation of Fox from the conservative echo chamber it has been to a “legitimate source” of news. This same legitimate source which will “swift boat” the Democratic nominee come the fall.

A good example is the “Jeremiah Wright” controversy, no network has used it more to frighten and divide the country than Fox. There has not been a day that you can’t find sound-bite after sound-bite followed by expert commentary depicting this incident as the end of not only Obama’s campaign, but also the end of Western Civilization as we know it. Is anyone foolish enough to believe that these same clips and commentary won’t be out in full force if Senator Obama is the nominee. The problem with espousing the virtues of Fox in May is that it will be difficult in October to return to the truth about their agenda.

The majority of viewers of Fox know what they are getting, these are not voters who will typically support the causes of the Democratic Party. So while the Democratic candidates prostrate themselves before the Fox News audience it will have limited or no effect on the outcome in the fall. The majority of Fox News viewers tend to be older, white, and right of center. These are the viewers who still believe that Saddam Hussein masterminded 9/11, that there are still WMD’s in Iraq; we just haven’t found them yet, and that Iran possesses nuclear weapons.

Mr. Obama’s aides have been more reticent, and some supporters say privately that Fox has been the most aggressive in covering the inflammatory comments by Mr. Wright. Mr. Obama’s own complaints about the sound bite coverage of his former pastor at times seemed directed toward Fox.

Before Mr. Obama’s appearance on “Fox News Sunday,” an unnamed Obama adviser told the Web site Talking Points Memo the campaign was “clear-eyed about Fox’s role in the dissemination and amplification of Republican talking points.”

But neither candidate has criticized Fox in public. “Fox clearly takes on a conservative bent or slant in its coverage,” said one aide, who asked for anonymity to avoid angering other media organizations. On the other hand, “with Fox,” he said, “at least you know what you’re getting.”[2]

Just remember when you dance with the devil, there will be a bill to pay later and it will be a bill I don’t know if the Democrats can pay. This election should have been a cake-walk, a landslide for the Democratic candidate, but as this primary campaign continues to unfold the only candidate getting stronger from it is John McCain, who by the way is a regular on Fox News and has received little if any negative coverage on the network. It is sad to see the Democrats willing to sell their souls for a few thousand votes, what’s next an appearance on the Rush Limbaugh show? The Democratic campaigns have now provided cover for those same reporters and analysts who will be ridiculing them during the summer. I have never thought that providing your enemy with ammunition in which to shoot at you with was a good strategy, but what do I know. I am just some inexperienced and naïve guy pounding away on his computer in his parent’s basement.

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/02/business/media/02fox-1.html?pagewanted=2
[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/02/business/media/02fox-1.html?pagewanted=2

Read more!

Economic Boom Brings Poverty

In what is a growing trend in America, it appears that even when the economy is booming, poverty continues to rise. The latest chapter in the trend is Washington, DC, according to reports the city is experiencing financial prosperity for the higher end wage earners. This however is not trending down towards the workers on the lower end of the spectrum. This condition is being repeated all over the country and other than John Edwards this trend is receiving very little coverage. We are in the process of creating wealth for only the high wage income categories, completely ignoring the low wage categories. How can we continue to justify the escalating wages of high income workers while keeping the low wage workers incomes at levels adjusted for inflation at the same scale of 1960? Why are more people not enjoying the benefits of economic prosperity? Is there a concerted effort to prevent the prosperity from reaching the poor?

The District's poverty rate is the highest in nearly a decade, and the employment rate for African American adults is at a 20-year low, according to a study to be released today.

Although the District's robust economy has spurred job growth, higher salaries, a construction boom and neighborhood revitalization, the city's poorest and least-educated residents have been left behind -- living "on the other side" of the city's "gleaming economy," the D.C. Fiscal Policy Institute says.

The institute's study, titled "D.C.'s Two Economies," also shows that the gap between high-wage and low-wage workers in Washington is at an all-time high, with salaries for the least-paid workers (adjusted for inflation) virtually unchanged in three decades. Income inequality in the District is greater than in every city in the United States other than Atlanta and Tampa, the study says.[1]

The trickledown theory is once again proving to be the rich pissing down the backs of the poor. It seems that our economy is operating in two worlds; there is the high finance world that is booming and then there is the street economy where most poor Americans live and it isn’t doing so good. One could almost say that there is an effort to create the environment to force more and more poor people to turn to crime to survive. This of course would accomplish two goals, it would marginalize the poor by incarcerating them thus making them ineligible for most decent jobs, federal programs, and voting. The other would be to continue to fund the cottage industry that has replaced factory work in rural America with prison work.

By charging and convicting young poor people with a felony, you have sentenced them to a life without opportunity. You have stripped them of their rights to participate in our election system, you have made it next to impossible to participate in any employment higher than janitor or fast-food worker, and you have prevented them from participating in most federal programs. Therefore, you have removed all hope they have for any type of productive life. So, on the one hand you make street crime the only viable option and then you create a system of justice that penalizes the convicted for life. This allows you to claim that the problem is not with the system; it is that the poor are just prone to criminal behavior. If they would only play by the rules, their lives would get better. As if the playing field were actually level and the poor just choose to fail. This may get you on Fox News, but it adds nothing to the dialog of why the rich are getting richer and the poor are being forgotten.

There are many voices black and white that would have us to believe that success is some quantifiable objectives that if you just follow a few simple steps, the American Dream is yours to possess. Of course, along the way they ignore how unattainable that dream looks to a kid looking out of project windows. Are the poor doing things to intensify their downward spiral? Of course they are, but do any of us always do the things that would benefit us? When you remove all hope for a better life, you condemn men to more than just poverty. You condemn them to a state of hopelessness, which is far worse than just being poor. Hopelessness breeds desperation and desperation breeds frustration.

There is a disconnect taking place in America. It involves more than just white from black and vice versa, it is the haves and the have-nots. And if it continues unabated there will not be enough prison space available to contain it. Currently it is fashionable to ignore the needs of the poor, the SChips bill is a prime example. We are blaming the victim for the conditions that cause the disease. This of course helps to ease consciouses as we walk by them in doorways or on the streets. A country like ours must do better or we will reap the whirlwind of indifference and neglect.

[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/23/AR2007102302230.html?hpid=moreheadlines

Read more!

America’s Fox News Arab Style

It appears that freedom American style is not real freedom. To help combat the supposed distorted news that the Arab language media is broadcasting, we have created our own media company directed at the Arab viewers. Al Hurra, is suppose to be our counter to the “terrorist views and anti-American sentiment being broadcast by Al Jazeera and other Middle Eastern press.

It appears that none of the top executives of Al Hurra speak Arabic, so they have no clue if the message being broadcast even meets the stated policy of the station. These executives must rely upon the Arabic speaking employees to police the broadcasts.

“Al Hurra was supposed to follow that tradition. But the station’s executives admitted Wednesday that they could not be completely sure that Al Hurra was doing so, because none of the top executives speak Arabic.

“How do you know that they’re being true to the mission if you don’t know what’s being said?” Mr. Ackerman demanded.”

Needless to say this arrangement has allowed the network to air a 30 minute speech by Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah leader, which is considered a terrorist organization by this government. They also provided extensive coverage to the Holocaust conference held by Iran.

“But Mr. Blaya also contended in an interview on Wednesday that Al Hurra would lose all credibility if it did not give air time to people who disagree with American policy. He said that complaints about air time for Mr. Haniya were unjustified because he legitimately holds the post of Palestinian prime minister.

Mr. Blaya also said it was ironic that the government was seeking to promote American values like democracy and a free press while at the same time trying to censor what is shown in the station.

“That’s the difference between a free media and propaganda,” he said.”[1]

Mr. Blaya raises an interesting question, do we really want to promote freedom of the press or are we merely using our propaganda to offset their perceived propaganda? This is similar the controversy surrounding the funding of the Arts. We want to fund the Arts, so long as they do not offend our sensibilities. We want to promote freedom so long as it is our version of freedom. A free press implies exactly that, a free press. Just because the “free press” in America has been co-opted by this government, does that mean that this is our standard?

Do I want to hear terrorist giving their diatribe on a US sponsored network? No, but at the same time in order for anyone to take this network seriously they must report other viewpoints even if those views run counter to our own. If we do not allow the network to report all of the news, then we are in fact creating an Arab version of Fox, “fair and balanced” propaganda. The answer to lies is not more lies, the answer to darkness is not more darkness; it is the light of the truth. I believe that the truth will stand on its own; it does not need anyone to co-sign for it. I believe that if we provide them with the facts, they will make the correct decision.

The problem with anti-Americanism in the Middle East is not who is delivering the news, it is the policies that we are pursuing. It is the disconnection from what we are saying we stand for and what we are doing that is creating the problems. It doesn’t matter how many stations we have broadcasting how great we are and all of our virtues, if we continue to pursue colonial policies people will continue to resist. Not even Bill O’Reilly and put a good spin on that.

When asked about the reason for the difficulty of the network to counter the anti-American sentiment, one witness argued that it was the policies and not the messenger. Should we be attempting to alter perception or policy?

“But those efforts do little to counter the rising anger among Arabs over the American role in Iraq and the Bush administration’s refusal to shut down the military prison at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba.

“One witness before this subcommittee last week argued that, ‘Quote, “It’s the policy, stupid,” close quote,’ ” acknowledged Representative Mike Pence, Republican of Indiana, although, he added, “I’m not one who believes we should significantly reorder our policy toward the Middle East.”[2]

Ok, so it’s the policies that are driving the negative feelings, but let’s not change the policies. Instead, let’s show them how these policies are benefiting them. The other stations just have it all wrong. It’s like the American media downplaying all the success that is going in Iraq. If this in fact were true then why isn’t Fox reporting on all the successes?

---

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/17/washington/17hurra.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/17/washington/17hurra.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Read more!