Obama’s Recovery: Partners or Predators?

Is the President playing “Go Fish” or Chess?

Teaching neo-cons that there can more on the table besides a “carrot or a stick.” 86

Americans listened, considered and agreed with the propositions for national recovery presented in the Obama campaign. If there were any confusion, we may now conclude it arose from the painstaking media grooming of its implied image of the depth and severity of the economic looting done under the cover of the Bush autocracy. Over the decades of “conservative” administrations such as Reagan or the senior Bush, we have grown passively accepting of a routine corruption which had been presented as an "acceptable" and entirely "American," neo-con "leadership" principle.

It has gone even further than that.

We have accepted these gradually growing insults piece meal (Remember the frog who jumps from the boiling water, but remains, comfortably, in the slowly warming, tepid pan?” Yum. Boiled frog.) Americans have slowly and patiently been convinced that a great number of reactionary, neo-con principles are American values or, even, make sense.. For example, in the past couple of weeks from this writing, an “American flag” ship was “piratized” off the coast of Somalia. Its legitimate and honorable “mission” there was the delivery of urgently needed humanitarian supplies to our national friends in Kenya.

But wait.

The reason that ship was flying an American flag -- it had been temporarily renamed after the State of Alabama -- was thanks to a UN ruling. For some reason, the goods of our well intentioned altruism had to be purchased in the US at a price eight times higher than the same commodities could be purchased in the region. For some reason, those commodities had to be transported in an “American flag” ship which plied the waters of the Middle East at eight times the cost of a local alternative.

For some reason? For what reason? The neo-cons have successfully imposed their idea that any good act should begin with a good profit.

The same things happen everywhere. The Indians were persuaded to quit producing generic AIDS drugs, making the Bush Altruism Initiative of aiding African states with that disease one which purchased only “full priced,” first line, American made pharmaceuticals for the effort. Coupled with the irrational neo-con -- and now, Papal -- condemnation of prophylactic supply, promotion and use, the pharmaceutical model of “altruistic” profitability was realized, lubricated and firmly saddled astride vacuous, failed premises of abstinence and other convenient, recent appliances of the prevailing mythology.

These points are presented as example of our amazing, well developed idea that men cannot do good for any reason if it excludes profit. The possibility of assistance, altruism or even cooperation must always be offered in conjunction with an appealing, “oh, by the way,” kind of suddenly and innocently discovered profit.

With this brief account of fundamental neo-con psychology, let us move on the matter of the stimulus and its unwilling participants -- partners and predators.

Why are these participants unwilling and why are these participants, well, even participants in the first place?

First, who are they? The list can easily be extracted from the tedious, frustrating denizens of the current news cycle. There were bankers who got money to make loans and then didn’t make loans. There were health care HMO’s who received an invitation to change their ways, then didn’t change their ways. There were car company executives who were told to rationally reorganize themselves who then proposed “changes” which guaranteed the continuation of their same ruthlessly destructive past policies. There were pharmaceutical companies who were told to release their legislatively protected extortion-strangle-hold on the medical franchise. There were Wall Street “hedge hogs,” oil speculators and investment bankers who were told that they had to “take a hit” on their inflated, imaginary profit and loss statements, who, instead, scrambled around to move their imaginary “profits” off shore so they could pay all of their attention to the looting of the stimulus money (“stay the course,” “cut the taxes,” “make me whole,” et cetera).

All of them were train wreck remnants of the “If anything good is going to happen, it is going to happen to me!” greed ideology of the past. Their obsession of the moment is an arrogant example of their hubris, that is, their absolute rejection of the new “change” and “cooperate” theme of the Obama administration -- and the electorate which created it. Naturally, the first step for these brain dead felons was to purchase some Senators, which they did. By the way, some of our Senators are simply too frightened or honorable to enlist in this outrage. It seems that the real bargains in the Senate are the bourbon drenched neo-con bigots -- hillbillies with an ill advised continuing allegiance to the previous regime of Bush protected avarice.

All these folks seriously believe that what is happening to us right now is nothing more than a current model of what has happened to us in the past. Although this may be more exciting than usual to these “geniuses of capitalism” who are managing the pharmaceutical, banking, health care and other no bid contracting interests, they remain convinced that Obama’s efforts to rescue our economy present nothing new, that is, simply more of the same opportunities which have served their historical extraction practices in the past. They expect and intend to emerge from this “difficulty of the masses” with even fatter pockets and the “ownership deeds” to even more Senators.

Did we ever imagine what feelings a vampire might experience after he sucked the blood from the last living human? In this case, he would convince himself that his last victim was actually not the last living human and fly off gleefully in search of his next prey.

Obama’s proffered gambit was simple enough. “Stop exploiting our economy. It cannot survive any more of your pretend version of free marketism. All of you parasites have done unacceptably well for yourselves at the expense of everyone else, and now, the 'everyone else' is staggering along, near death, as you contemplate your schemes to extract even more from the ambulance staff which has come to rescue them.”

He has asked the bankers to take his bail out money and change their ways, take a few risks for the good of the country (for them, country = their personal finances). Instead, they have been shopping to purchase each other in the hour of peril while sitting on their bulging coffers of bail out money. He has asked the health care moguls to reconfigure their extortion to include the interest of those in the electorate who might need a doctor. Instead, those same moguls have redirected all their discretionary profits to an ad campaign to wreck his Presidency.

Obama has asked the executives of GM and Chrysler to “bleed a little” and reconfigure their business plans to something remotely rational. Instead, they have collapsed to their road weary, inflammatory “swan song” of blaming the unions for everything. He has asked the Senators to, provocatively to them, think of the good of the country instead of their “astonishingly beneficent campaign contributions.” Instead, they -- along with their neo-con progeny in the House -- have marched lockstep in a dismal phalanx of denial and greed all the while hoping in their wet dreams for Obama's failure and destruction.

Does all this describe a foolish failure of a pollyanna in the White House? Has the new President continued to “walk into the props” of a superior neo-con meat grinder whose sole claim to fame is more experience at cynicism?

Maybe not.

Who is ready to characterize Obama’s rather formidable capacity for effective political strategy based on such a short sighted view of his leadership path as it has emerged thus far? If you have this inclination, perhaps you should consider lowering your voice for a few months. If you think his embarrassing rejection at the hands of the so-called House Republicans signifies evidence of a lethal miscalculation in his political tactics, perhaps you should wait for the next act in this play.

Still, it seems that every ambitiously honorable attempt by this White House has ended poorly, that is, all the entreaties “across the aisle” have resulted in another of his restorative plans being dragged behind the truck of guffawing and boisterously emboldened, medievalist Republicans and other corporate schemers. The “Fox Conclusion?” The President is, aside from being a socialist, fascist, traitor, Muslim, gun controlling, international relations appeasing, abortion financing, gay black man, a ninny. The Foxites believe that they have prevailed. The tea baggers think that their frenzied message, whatever it was, is compelling, that is, has gained traction. The bankers think that they will be vindicated in the future, elevated by their tenacious grip on their publicly financed “McDuck Money Bins” and their complete refusal to participate in the resurrection of the economy or the country, now in a mortal, death grip peril. The AIG boys assume that tax payers won’t remember paying the cash for the outrage of their bonuses.

On the other hand, we can create this model in another frame entirely.

Obama entered his position of power with ambitions to reconfigure the economy (and a long list of other things, too) in a way that would redirect some of America’s prosperity back to those who have patiently provided the resources which support it. He knew, even before his inauguration, that those who had developed a criminal “nutrition” requirement of vast tax money in their pockets would react violently to retain their previous parasitic advantages.

They have. Just listen to them. Today, their lies could be baled like hay at harvest time.

Perhaps President Obama, not really stranded and bewildered on a side track after the neo-cons so arrogantly humiliated his efforts at reconciliation, is actually right on target. These practiced criminals have invested very heavily in their program of promoting themselves as honest “partners” in the rescue effort while disguising their more factual qualities as looters and criminals, that is, “predators,” hiding in wait to loot the life blood from the stimulus money.

Money we have paid and allocated to trying to restore the damage of their past looting.

Obama could have swung the massive hammer of electoral outrage in the first few minutes of his administration in a sweeping correction -- think of it as chasing the money lenders from the temple if that analogy is not too messianic. However, if he had taken this approach, the validity of his plan would have been supported only be his claims of its necessity. In the minds of Americans there would have remained the question: “Are these wounded victims of his really this criminal? Do they really place the prosperity and safety of our country in such a low position of importance compared to their continued wealth extraction?”

No. Obama has let these “bottom feeders,” perhaps emboldened by the likes of Carl Rove, Joe the Plumber, Sara Palin, AIG, Wall Street, Newt Gringrich and other “tea-bagger-wanna-be’s” -- well, you are familiar enough with the pathetic denizens of this long list, emerge into the light. He has allowed them to “show their true colors,” their traitorous lack of commitment to the national survival driven by a narcotic, decades long habit of successful greed.

If we were describing a “trial” of this past behavior of his now screaming critics, what we have seen so far would be the “discovery phase.” The character of these criminals had to be exposed, finally revealed to their victims, in this case the American tax paying electorate. Obama has presented the evidence we lacked before, and that evidence seems quite capable of penetrating the thrall of the controlled media’s past efforts to keep us hypnotized.

No one believes he has cock roaches until they reveal themselves in the light.

Remain calm and hopeful. All this had to happen first. The crimes had to be exposed and defined. Our national situation is, most likely, going to collapse to a truly desperate state as 2009 proceeds. We taxpayers and voters will be confronted with Obama’s compelling evidence as he ultimately makes his case for change. That will bring us to our trial’s “sentencing phase.”

To think that the foundering mess we see at this moment is a truly representative preview of that probably means that we are slowly loosing our collective hope. If any of us has decided to take that path, take it without me.

For the "media view" of the economic recovery plan,

http://cbs5.com/campaign08/obama.economic.recovery.2.904768.html

and a background look at some of the criticism of the recovery plan:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/white_house/jan-june09/obama_03-24.html
http://www.newsmax.com/us/GOP alternative budget/2009/03/27/196690.html
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/obama/2009/02/05/president-barack-obama-fires-back-at-critics-of-economic-stimulus-plan.html

and finally, our traditional "Wiki" explanation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009


MeanMesa visitors who are not well acquainted with the economic recovery plan can find a wide variety of information available in the Google entry for this topic. As Americans we are spending an immense amount of our tax money in this effort to resuscitate our "critically ill" country now that the Bush parasites have been sent back to Texas. Its our money, our President and our future. Who could remain uninterested at a time like this?

“How Far Must the Dow Plunge Before Confidence Is Restored?

Spending too much time "ducking" the old things? Spending not enough time dreaming about the new things?

These days hold only cold comfort for the timid.

The newspaper headline titling this post betrays what may be an unexamined paradox. The sensation of "confidence" is an allegedly rational one which may be insinuated by past history, but probably not the past history being cited in the discussions of this moment. Likewise, the "restore" idea is visiting every area of pain in the present economy. There are the dreamy desires of those who would like the declining value (market price?) of their real estate "restored" to the figures of a year or two ago. There are those who feel that economic recovery implies that the stocks they purchased in the past might be "restored" not only to their previous trading values, but also in their vivacity and mobility with respect to potential profits or losses demarcated in the "numbers and the systems of the past."

Folks who are entertaining this expectation for the "recovery" are not founding their ideas on circumstances which enjoy much of a chance to materialize in reality.

The less lofty have ambitions for a stable floor to the decline where, although the numerical "prices" of monetary assets would be defined by lower numerical values, the relative values would become, once more, as promising as they had been before. Perhaps even the wage earners are gradually becoming adjusted to the idea that their "restored" wages, although not bearing the same figures as on the old paychecks, might have a "restored" purchasing power or offer an investment opportunity equivalent to the ones on those old stubs.

The economic pedestrian has only a slightly more realistic view of the possibilities at hand. He, at least, has the common sense necessary to envision an economic solution which is not the "restoration" of his previous conditions, but something of a hybrid, located between full "recovery" or "restoration" and some intermediate state where his comfort level is comparable to what it was before.

Likewise, the critics and cynics (uh, that would be the hillbillies, Senate bigots and other free market criminals) seize on the predictable, codependent opportunity of establishing that true "recovery" or "restoration" can be nothing less than a sterile return to the artificial successes previously derived from the avarice of the recent past. They would, foolishly, like to establish that vision as the only possible outcome which might legitimatize Obama's desperate efforts ideologically. The public opinion attraction to that insistent approach is waning rapidly, most likely, as was the tragic case with "confidence," another victim of “common sense” on the main street.

My advice? Quit dreaming of the past. Quit trying to measure the possibilities and challenges of the near future by the currency of the past. All those “restorations” require more than a duplicated economic flow of factors and equations. Frankly, they all depend on more than a resurgence of familiar numbers on the Wall Street trading boards. They also, in a way as subtle as the “elephant in the living room,” also depend upon the resurrection of all sorts of imaginary asset values, labor rates, real estate ambitions and even international trade relations. There is no part of the economic stimulus plan which can re-materialize these old, opium dreams. They cannot be “restored,” because they were never material in the first place.

We can join the wailing of the Wall Streeters and the bankers and the quiet, arrogant ultra-rich with their effected accents if we like, but all the old deceptions of this crowd have evaporated just as concretely as the sale price of the duplex next door. All the illicit advantages they promoted as “sharp business practices” for the last dozen decades have been exposed now. Worse, their dreams of the precise value of such deceptions have also been smashed. They sold them to us once, and that worked out well for them. But now, those balloons have popped -- perhaps largely in the very faces of these “pretend Captains of Industry.”

No one can still reasonably hope that those “balloons” of theirs can be “restored.” Further, citizens of both the United States and the rest of the world where their extractive schemes have reached, seem to have a new, much more informed style of awareness of exactly what had been done before. The hordes of what had previously been “easy marks” have now entered a period of renewed understanding of what the responsibility of “self-interest” actually means. An understanding which excludes the necessity of supporting these parasites in the style and luxury of the past.

Obama gets this. One wonders how many familiars of the old White House have appeared once again with “offers he can’t refuse.” One wonders what was on their deflated faces when he did, in fact, refuse.

Without the hordes of the sleeping, the mistaken certainties of the past are beginning to rot on the vine. Mistaken certainties? The sanctity of the free market as the ultimate director of the economy. The acceptability of the well (and not so well) disguised, noncompetitive subterfuge, whether a no bid contract for billions or some doo-dad added to a House bill at the last minute making new profits an automatic reality for some crony.

But wait. No matter how refreshing it might be, a modern correction of these sorts of things amounts to little more than a tweeking to the system. Such a development might turn out to be the final result of this economic melt-down, but there are others -- developments which can hardly be defined as a “tweeking.” In any event, it looks constantly less likely to be a mere “restoration.”

The economy is not experiencing a little difficulty, it is evaporating before our very eyes. We have heard fifteen thousand reasons why this is happening, but what seems the most logical conclusion at this point is that no one has either any complete or rational explanation of precisely why this is happening or how far down it will go. All the old reasons are approaching a region of logical discontinuity far too similar to what might be encountered on a classic Riemann Equation’s first surface. We have probably left explanations or their possible comfort somewhere behind us.

The classical parameters which used to drive everything have ceased functioning. What was successful “tweeking” in the past system no longer produces any effect at all.

So, where does it go?

It “goes” through the discontinuity, and we go with it. The hilarious threats of creeping Socialism or nationalization or Fascism or vacant promises of capitalism or free marketism or a “restored” hegemony are all now parked in the "used car lot" history of the past, in our memories, in our dreams. That old currency fills the entire stage, constructs all the sets and writes all the play. We can make no new play which requires parts other than those old familiar ones. Our imagination has beached itself on the remnants of our fears.

The choices for the face of the future system will not be variations of the faces of the past. What has begun as an economic aberration has become an ideological meat grinder, and its product may well arrive without so much as a reasoned hint or even a wild speculation from the past.

The “new thing” approaches.

It won’t be all bad, either, but these last few months before its arrival will be terrifying -- especially for those who were able to prosper in the false world of the false values of the past. Still, we must prepare ourselves for a new system. It arrives just as the widower's new wife. The recipes and the bedroom, although quite satisfying, can never "restore" what has passed before. We have no firm ideas about what the new system will require of us or what new opportunities it may present, of course, but we do know one thing. We prepare ourselves by watching for its arrival with hope, not dread.

Adjusting our ideas of “necessity” and “comfort” might help a little. Experimenting with values which have evolved beyond imposed scarcity and insatiable greed and impossible security is probably a good idea, even if such a discipline hasn’t ever been reasonable in the past. We must clear our road weary slate of ancient false priorities, thrash out the cobwebs and steel ourselves for a new day.

As humans, we are now stranded with the frightening necessity of charting our way forward. We find the press of events has cast us not as survivors, but as designers.

The “new thing” approaches.

Astounding Republican Cosmic Physics Breakthrough!

Has the monied class devised a plan to actually remove money from this universe? 79

We’re talking “big picture” here. One day the stock market is sitting at 13,000, or so (DJA). A month or two later, it is parked solidly at around 8,000. So far, for most of us, we’re only talking numbers.

The first term, 13,000, implied that -- somehow -- the stock that people, retirement accounts, pensions and the like, owned, was worth a certain number of dollars. Granted, those of us watching television really didn’t know much more than that. The second term, 8,000, implied about the same thing, except by then the stock being owned by all these folks was only worth about two thirds of what it was, apparently, worth when the number was 13,000. Experts say that this difference in dollars is around $7 trillion.

All of that suggests that the old people (DJA = 13,000 = "old people") had less money, and that someone new (DJA = 8,000 = "new people") had more money. $7 trillion dollars worth of "new" money for the "new people." After all, even those of us who watch television know that money doesn't simply "vanish into thin air!"

Hold on for a minute. There are a couple of rather “sketchy” presumptions floating around by this time that need to be added to the mix. Presumptions floating around very suspiciously and very conveniently. In fact, floating alarmingly close to the impossible "vanish into thin air" idea.

The first suspicious and convenient presumption is that this stock market “value collapse” just “happened.” Yup. There were plenty of “reasons” floated, but as time went along and the number got worse, even they seemed to change. The first “reasons,” we were told, were actually caused by complicated things done by the next, unanticipated “reasons.” Suddenly, we were shocked -- again -- when we were told that the second bunch of “reasons” weren’t the “actual reasons” at all! The second bunch was, shockingly, caused by a third bunch of “reasons.” And so on.

As to the “just happened” part, we were told that all this, well, “just happened.” Like a sudden thunderstorm in the afternoon of a day that started out clear. You know. “Just happened.”

The second suspicious and convenient presumption is that all the “lost” money is, well, simply “lost.” That means that no one has it. It is lost, and, of course, it cannot never be “found.” “Lost” actually means more than stolen or misplaced. “Lost” means totally, eternally, inexplicably gone.

Hence, the physics breakthrough.

The Republicans and their ultra-intellectual friends (cronies) have successfully discovered new physics which made it possible for them to transport the “lost” money out of this universe!

Probably to “another universe” where no U.S. taxes are collected and where there is no extradition treaty. You know, “another universe” like Halliburton's new home or some place like that! Some other universe that is, well, shall we say, "off shore."

A recap:

Just like the unexpected "thunderstorm" in the afternoon of a day with a clear morning, the “reasons” that the stock market “value collapse” “just happened” is because the “lost” money just "vanished into thin air" when it was sent to “another universe” which is "off shore" where it can never be "found" and where there are no U.S. taxes collected and no extradition agreements.

That’s pretty darned easy for a physics lesson, isn’t it?

For a fairly orthodox review of the economic crisis, three links are suggested. This first is Alan Greenspan's interesting chat from mid 2008:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/edbdbcf6-f360-11dc-b6bc-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1
the second is George Soros' explanation about how to save the world, January 2009:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/49b1654a-ed60-11dd-bd60-0000779fd2ac.html
and the third is a little background on Soros. He is a businessman who actually got ready for what "just happened" without any "warning:"
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/9553cce2-eb65-11dd-8838-0000779fd2ac.html

What will replace the “media?”

A study in over reaction? Sure, unless you like be lied to. 75

All kinds of things are showing up in the light of day. Stinky old secrets that were paying good wages only a few months ago seem to be shamelessly, well, exposing themselves in public places. These media giants, once the envy of the world, have become trailer trash so obnoxious that not even their truth masters can get the lip stick back on them.

Staggering about with vague credentialism from the the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the “Big Five” media corporations have, probably, terminally “soiled” themselves. The news manipulation so brazenly crafted by these opportunistic corporations is now growing more damagingly obvious every day. The dark creatures who had guided and protected these deceit peddlers have, judiciously, withdrawn from the new light. Like comatose patients awaking after a long sleep, even the most credulous viewers are growing suspicious of a massive public deception. Suspicious, and a little embarrassed.

By “credulous” we mean “automatic.” Automatic viewers are those who spend no time with alternate sources of news and are unaware of the tide of voices warning the public about what’s gone on. For years these stalwart media fans could be counted on to fill the roster of the millions of users these media conglomerates exploited so profitably. Regardless of the clear disconnection between even the reporting offered to viewers on one day and contradictory reporting on the same story a few days later, these automatic viewers had been artfully coaxed into, well, habits.

That habit was to park the car, pour a drink and relax with the news, then discuss it as if it were fact the next day at the water cooler. The factual nature of what had been reported as fact was reinforced by others in the conversation who had seen an almost remarkably similar story on another network. In the absence of any reporting done outside the editorial control of these media monsters, things meshed. Stories supported each other. There might have been an occasional debate about what appeared to be the substance of these stories, but never a debate about the credibility of them.

After all, every newsworthy network always agreed on all the newsworthy facts.

Precisely what media monsters do we mean?

Easy. CNN (AOL Time Warner), NBC (General Electric), Fox (News Corp.), CBS (Viacom) and ABC (Walt Disney). Of course there are many more, but these are the specific corporations presently enjoying the great masses of viewers, followers, acceptors, addicts, subjects, you know, believers. This handful of companies represents only the mountain tops. For example, CBS owns 37 television broadcasters, 47 radio broadcasters and more than 20 publishing houses. Between all of these organizations we see a dismal presence in every major media market in the country.

Major media market? Of course. That’s where they were convinced the treasure rested.

The treasure? Narcotized addicts, lockstep volunteers for their toxic hypnosis. Why, the zombies could vote, send their sons to any war made necessary, and, most important, elect without question.

So what’s the crime? Think about it. Some years ago we received First Amendment reporting that Sadam Hussein had poison gas, bacteriological weapons and delivery systems. Think about it. You received that reporting, didn’t you? Try to remember.

It was, of course, false. We could care about its source, but for right now, let’s consider whether or not broadcasting known falsehoods is consistent with First Amendment protected Freedom of Speech. By the way, that broadcast propagates itself through airwaves owned by the recipients of the lies.

That would be us. We’ve been gang raped.

Keep thinking. Was there a retraction? Was there a correction? Was there more later? Any in depth reporting as to the exact story of how this got broadcast to us? Who benefitted? Why it was done? Keep thinking. Try to remember.

What about 911? Keep thinking. Who knows if there was a conspiracy -- probably no one in my acquaintance knows. Who is interested in whether or not there was a conspiracy? Just about everyone I know. Try to remember. What news organization spent so much as a second on this story after its fabrication had delivered the public opinion to start the war? Was there a retraction? A clarification? An explanation? Were there any questions asked and answered? Try to remember. Did we get our First Amendment Free Speech’s money worth from the free press broadcasting over our air waves? Try to remember.

Was there some innocent reason we’ve never seen coffins returning from Iraq? Was it just an oversight? Perhaps, never -- never once -- newsworthy? Try to remember. Try to understand. Never newsworthy?

Is it a coincidence that every neo-con knuckle dragger on Fox came up with the identical talking points day after day? Maybe it was simply a sign of very thoughtful selection of newsworthy topics. Maybe some blogger left his group address enabled. Try to understand.

Was Reverend Wright so newsworthy that his ranting somehow deserved millions or billions of dollars worth of free press news treatment? Did so many Americans worry whether or not Obama was a Muslim that the question had to be resurrected day after day? Did a same or similar calamity befall all the candidates equally? Try to remember. Was there a retraction? A correction? An explanation? Think about it.

Let’s pause for a moment. All these companies has every right to maintain and promote an editorial policy and make editorial comments, all well protected by the free press clause in the First Amendment. Because they are profiting from their control of our air waves, it might not be out of line for us to require them to identify these editorial comments of theirs in a way which would prevent them from being promoted as news or fact. That would be something like “public interest.”

Further, can we countenance outright incompetence in this news reporting process? Sure. Everyone can make a mistake. But what else might we expect? A correction? Try to remember. Were there corrections? Even more important, would corrections have had anything to do with “public interest?” Does accuracy have any place in the First Amendment’s protection of a free press? Even when the lie is covered with American blood and treasure? You know, accuracy? Fact?

The worst transgression of all, and exactly the one which should push all these parasites out of business and into the dustbin of neo-con failures is the 5% lie, the innuendo, the uncorrected minor mistake. Now we will see that what these giants have been reporting to us, every word and utterance of it, has been carefully toxified by their ownership to produce just the “automatic” reception they wanted. The reception they needed. To keep their vampire scheme well oiled.

This contamination is not manifest in flaming, outrageous lies. It is carefully presented with omissions. Ever hear a story about why Al Quaeda wanted to hurt us? Wait. The “they hate our freedom” thing is no more than odorous rubbish. Not newsworthy? Doesn’t exist? Try to remember.

How about stories explaining why the Palestinians are attacking Israel? Try to remember. Are they just crazy or is there actually some kind of reason? We wouldn’t know. Why would anyone want that one sided war to happen? Is it First Amendment Free Speech? Is it “fair and balanced?” Is the reporting we get complete? Try to remember. Maybe there just isn’t any reason that’s newsworthy? Try to remember. Take a moment. Do you really understand anything about what’s happening in Gaza? Does anything in the story we got make sense?

This posting gives examples which are present in our immediate thoughts. There are thousands more. Just when our democracy was in the most threatened moment in its history, our view went blank. The pablum oozing from our television screens was an insidious, yeah, you got it, conspiracy. Everything we received from our First Amendment Free Press, everything being broadcast over the public airwaves in the “public interest,” had been tilted just enough.

Now they've already started in on our new President.

As an informed public, we have no idea what is going on. Somebody thought that was a good preparation for selling us all sorts of stupid, destructive half truth. They delivered their media torpedo of deception and lies. We bought it. When the main players began the looting, the manipulation, the fear mongering and the lies, they assumed that we were entirely prepared to do our part.

Our part? To believe.

Pissed? Try to remember. They are counting on you to not be able to remember. They tell you that your memory fades in a few days. In fact, they tell you that over and over -- sort of like “they hate our freedom” and “cut and run” and “appeasers” and “stay the course.”

God. What were we thinking?

Anyone else in favor of dumping this “free press” of ours before it destroys us? Oh my. What could replace it?

How about a free press?

An educated electorate needs to know what’s happening in the world. You know. What’s really happening. Both sides. Bad news. Questions. Answers.

Yeah, that stuff.

For an interesting self-test concerning media objectivity (you own view...), try:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=121

and an interesting, short visit to Al Gore's book:
http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/biblio?inkey=2-9781594201226-2

Dwell Time Tells the Secret?

McCain Campaign slurs against Barack Obama
Big Money, Big Lies and Pretending Really, Really Hard


“Dwell time” was a term which arose in the famous Reagan Strategic Defense Initiative. That program introduced all sorts of interesting language. Aside from several rather glaring weaknesses (1. It didn’t work. The machines it created never functioned. 2. It was expensive, generating about $5,000,000,000,000 -- five trillion -- in national debt. This year, we will pay about $300,000,000,000 -- three hundred billion -- in interest on that debt from decades back.) the program did manage to fool the Soviets, playing a central part in ending the Cold War. (Extreme "good on it" for that!)

So, “dwell time?” That described how long our pretend Star Wars laser would have to “dwell” on a Soviet SS-18 ICBM to destroy it in its “boost phase.” We pretended that this pretend laser was so powerful that the required “dwell time” would be basically zero seconds. Happily, the other side bought our story. The President was an actor, after all.

The McCain Campaign has copied some of this old Cold War strategy. Now under the direction of a new, more aggressive and even cheaper campaign manager, it is pretending that one of its slurs can destroy the Obama Campaign while still in its “boost phase.” The dream of the McCain Campaign is that, sooner or later, if it just keeps trying, one of these slurs will connect, delivering its toxin with sufficient “dwell time” to wreck Obama’s bid for the Presidency.

Of course there is, for the McCain Campaign, a down side. So far none of these slurs has really actually connected very well at all. Yes, each one of them, if it had gained any traction, could have really have dented the Obama image. Unhappily for the McCain Campaign, however, none has. Also unhappily, the more times this is tried, and consequently, the more times it fails, the less anyone is inclined to consider that, maybe, the pretend slurs are actually true. The McCain slur inventory is losing credibility so fast that fewer and fewer people are pretending to believe it. Faster than a used car lot can fill up with SUV's!

Oh yes, the most stalwart, crusty old evangelical neo-cons still pretend they believe it. For them, their version of mindless neo-con patriotic duty easily trumps any messy facts that they may have been unable to avoid. After all, that is what is meant by “the base.” In an unthinking way, these old fogies somehow still expect everyone to believe that their pretend lasers are actually very, very powerful and effective. The hired guns and the talking heads of the major media they have bought and paid for may be trying to prop them up a little, but now, even those are getting pretty road weary.

Most of the junk we built for the Strategic Defense Initiative is now rusting away silently in some Defense Department land fill. The tragic remnants of McCain’s ridiculous and ineffective slur campaign is officially in the garbage truck on its way to join it there.

So keep an eye on all of these inflammatory McCain slurs about Barack Obama. If you are wondering whether or not something so outrageous might be true, just relax and watch for a little while. They will, as is inevitable for most lies, simply drift into nothingness in a few days as they, once again, fail to get any traction.

If you are still suspicious that you are being tricked by the Muslim black boy with the crazy Baptist preacher and the Islamic terrorist wife, ask yourself why the McCain Campaign didn't commit itself to a "full court press" since it obviously claimed that it had something of value started.

No problem. Since facts mean nothing to the McCainite neo-cons, they should just grab whatever they can use, keep saying it over and over and pretend that it's working. After all, Ronald Reagan proved that building a pretend zero dwell time intercontinental missile killing laser isn't exactly rocket science.

Dancing with the "T" Word: Treason?

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.