Jounalists are a big part of the problem. They are, for the most part, glorified English majors with a high-school civics/govt. understanding of politics. So when they cover the political beat(off), they are looking at legislation and votes, etc. Woodward and Bernstein had to be told to follow the money, yet most journalists have not learned how to do this. They really believe in what they learned in civics/govt. class.
Be true to your school...
They should be covering what interest groups and lobbyists are doing. This is far more critical to the political process. Politicians don't really care about representing you. They know when they have money, they can afford to lie to you and get your vote that way. When I see these people cheering Hillary’s lies, I just cannot believe how insanely stupid they are. Political economists don't even look at voting -- it is irrelevant. Beyond that school of politics, scholars who study political parties and political theory will laugh when you talk about "rocking the vote". This "rock the vote" crap is what rock stars (and people who think they are rock stars) and actors say. They have no qualifications to justify this belief. They are simply operating on an indoctrinated civic duty and the belief that Democrats are still down with the New Deal. They gave that up a LONG time ago. This is similar to the realignment that happened with the Republicans and Democrats in the 60s. Black voters would vote for Republicans because Abe Lincoln was a Republican. Southern conservatives would vote for Dixiecrats (and I think Clinton is a Dixiecrat, and does not even try to disguise it). These parties don’t really stand for anything. Clinton admits that the era of big government is over. They are no longer people who believe in social spending. They are people who favor corporate charity and military expansion. Voting for a Democrat is like a black person voting for a Republican because of Abe Lincoln. There still hasn’t been a realignment because both parties represent the same interests, regardless of what they tell you.
So now I heard on Public Radio (no less) that the Democrat plan is to get the troops back by Sept. 2008 or sooner. This is not what Pelosi said. She said "or around that time". I heard it with my own ears and almost crapped a brick. The "liberal" media that is trying to sell this to the public (to keep the war going for 18-21 months) wants you to believe "or around that time" means sooner. But loopholes in the legislation reveal that it will most likely be later.
A Democrat representative, speaking on behalf of this legislation, said the plan is to bring back some of the troops, and leave a lot of troops in Kuwait, in case the civil war gets worse. So they are not even really ending this. They are just bringing some troops back in the fall of 2008, so you will get excited and vote for them. This is where voting is actually hurting policy... Now the struggle to get your vote is what is keeping the troops in harms way. Ironic, isn’t it?
Tell me this, if we leave now, in one year, in 5 years or in 10 years, do you think the Shiites and Sunnis will ever stop killing each other?
I heard a debate on public radio. They had one person against the war and two people (one from Stanford's Hoover Insitution and another person who trains military strategists for the Navy) who were for the war. Complete gang bang... But this is "liberal" public radio? It is a myth that the media is biased towards the left.
The legislation that the Democrats propose is a funding bill that has some vague mention of a September 2008 deadline for troop withdrawal. There are all sorts of loopholes that allow extensions and this gives $100 billion in funding for the war. Besides this, Bush said he would have the troops back by early 2009. So late 2008 vs. early 2009? These are our choices? 18 months vs. 21 months? And you know they are both lying.
This also shows what the Democrats think of you. They think you are completely retarded. They think you are dumb because you can't tell the difference between a bill that sanctions the war and one that ends it. Remember, the Republicans say they will bring the troops back a few months after the Democrats. With the loopholes and extensions in the Democrats bill, this really is Tweedledum and Tweedledee.
The Democrats also think if they bring the troops home now, you will forget about it, and vote for someone else. They think you are so dumb, the only way you will remember they did it is if the action happens a few months prior to the election.
If you want to really understand how the system works, don't listen to journalists, rock stars, or recording engineers. They are uneducated in these matters. They are not scientists, but are craftspeople. They are involved in a trade or craft, and not a systematic investigation to reveal truth.
Also, news directors control what you see and hear and they report to people who report to the owners -- GE, Viacom, Murdoch, etc.
The phenomenon I see now is that I listen to what the polticians say, and then I notice how the journalists get it wrong. I heard Nancy Pelosi say one thing, and then the news sanitizes it and makes it sound more appealing than what she actually said. Then you never see that clip again. I am trying to find it on YouTube.
Oh and… One more thing I forgot about the Clinton days… Remember “don’t ask don’t tell”? Wasn’t someone saying Democrats favored civil rights? Ok… Go die for us, but don’t come out of the closet.
Clinton was also the guy who said he didn’t inhale… He also said this great one: “That depends on what the definition of the word “is” is”. Clinton is the biggest liar ever. He makes Bush seem somewhat honest, and Bush is a big liar. Now we have to endure Hillary’s lies…
Now Fox is really pushing Clinton. As you all should know Hillary Clinton takes money from Rupert Murdoch and he threw a big fund raising event for her. Even “The Family Guy” had an episode with lies about Clinton -- he reduced the number of people on welfare. Yes, by limiting the time one can be on welfare, he reduced the number of people on welfare. Also the late 90’s economy was doing well due to new technology and the way business cycles occur. This makes the Democrats recent minimum wage hike somewhat cruel. As someone who has worked minimum wage jobs in my earlier years, they will lay off people and make the remainder work even harder. Those people who are without jobs don’t even have much of a safety net. So that minimum wage thing isn’t as compassionate as one would think. It should have been coupled with better unemployment benefits and welfare reform, but it was really more for show than for compassion.
So why would Murdoch, a staunch conservative, support Hillary after he supported Bush for the past two elections?
If you think Democrats stand for something, just wait for the primaries. Hillary will defame Obama, and vice versa. They’re all just trying to get elected. They will say anything to do this and take money from anyone to achieve these ends. They talk liberal during the primaries, and by the time of the election, they talk middle of the road. If you vote for these people, at least have the knowledge that you are a pawn and no politician will act on your behalf just because you voted for them. It is a meaningless and irrational act. Would you go to work if your employer paid you in votes? These reps are not seeking office for the $165k a year. Even the dumb ones could make at least three times that amount in the private sector… Follow the money…
