Silence is Consent

If you don't speak up you accept what is happening. This site was born out of the mainstream media's inability to cover the news. I am just an American cititzen trying to spread the word in the era of FCC consolidation, post 9/11 Patriot Act hysteria, hackable voting machines and war without end. I rant and post news items I perceive to be relevant to our current situation.

All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.
- Thomas Jefferson

Social Security is not broken and therefore does not need to be fixed

So Called Social Security Crisis (SCSSC)

Comments, questions, corrections, rebuttals are always welcome.

Friday, June 06, 2003
 
When I think of the state of the Democratic party these days, I think of a line from the Janis Joplin song Bobby Magee: "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose." I don't understand why the Democratic party stands so silient. In my view, they actually do not have anything left to lose. What could they possibly have left that they haven't lost already? They lost the House, the Senate, the Presidency, the Judiciary and the press (FCC). I'm not sure what is left to lose. The only thing I can figure is that the center/conservative leaning DLC still runs the party and is keeping them quiet. Let's face it, the DLC strategy has lost. They hang their hat on the fact that Clinton/Gore, both from the DLC, were able to win the Presidency for the Democrats for eight years. But they have lost everything else since then and turned the Democratic party into the Republi-crat party.

This past week, there was a rally in D.C. called Take Back America. Most of the Democratic hopefuls were there. The LA Times did "some" reporting on it: Democratic Contenders Offer Competing Visions. I love this Dean line:
Dean has been firing back, and Wednesday he received a roaring ovation for his latest salvo. "Those folks at the DLC are wrong," he said. "The way to get elected in this country is not to be like the Republicans; it's to stand up against them and fight."
Dean seems to be one of the only contenders that will go against the DLC at this point. Kucinich will go against them as well but he pretty much gets ignored by the press. He gets this one paragraph:
Kucinich, in an impassioned speech repeatedly interrupted by standing ovations, called for federally run, single-payer health care and sweeping cuts in defense spending. "We don't need World War III; we need peace for the first time," he said.
Notice how he was impassioned and repeatedly interrupted by standing o's and this is all the mention he gets. When you read the whole article you will notice how it goes into detail on what Kerry and Edwards say and gives very little mention of the rest of the candidates. Just some of the subtle things the press does to help you choose your candidate. Don't forget this was the progressive (aka liberal) Democratic gathering and still most of the press goes to the DLC-leaning candidates. So if you want to vote Democratic and choose the candidate you like the best, you MUST go beyond the accepted media sources.

Great take on WMD's: Why the snipe hunt matters.

Sen. Byrd is at it again. I think he understands the Democrats freedom: "The Perception of Deception: Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction".

Nixon's White House lawyer weighs in on the WMD debate: Missing Weapons Of Mass Destruction: Is Lying About The Reason For War An Impeachable Offense?. Just one excerpt for you:
Krugman is right to suggest a possible comparison to Watergate. In the three decades since Watergate, this is the first potential scandal I have seen that could make Watergate pale by comparison. If the Bush Administration intentionally manipulated or misrepresented intelligence to get Congress to authorize, and the public to support, military action to take control of Iraq, then that would be a monstrous misdeed.
This coming from a former Nixon lawyer. He would know. Of course, this is still a big IF for most people.

This is a beauty about the lying: The Lies We Bought The Unchallenged "Evidence" For War:
Unfortunately, the politicians and their p.r. people know all too well the propaganda dictum related nearly twenty years ago by Peter Teeley, press secretary to then Vice President George H.W. Bush. Teeley was responding to complaints that the elder Bush, during a televised debate, had grossly distorted the words of his and Ronald Reagan’s opponents, the Democratic candidates Walter Mondale and Geraldine Ferraro. As Teeley explained it to The New York Times in October 1984, “You can say anything you want during a debate, and 80 million people hear it.” If “anything” turns out to be false and journalists correct it, “So what. Maybe 200 people read it, or 2,000 or 20,000.”

Krugman's latest, Duped and Betrayed.

0 comments <

0 Comments:

Post a Comment


Powered by Blogger