"The action I am taking is no more than a radical measure to hasten the explosion of truth and justice. I have but one passion: to enlighten those who have been kept in the dark, in the name of humanity which has suffered so much and is entitled to happiness. My fiery protest is simply the cry of my very soul. Let them dare, then, to bring me before a court of law and let the enquiry take place in broad daylight!" - Emile Zola, J'accuse! (1898) -

Friday, August 22, 2008

Free Speech | Impeach, Pelosi Implode | Russia Explode | and Bush Manure Loads.

ROSEN: Fairness Doctrine unrealistic (Here Is The Conservative View That You Can’t Do…So…Forget It And We'll Just Have It Our Way!)

By Mike Rosen Rocky Mountain News


'47% Favor Government Mandated Political Balance on Radio, TV," proclaimed the headline on the Web site of Rasmussen Reports. This was the result of a national poll of 1,000 likely voters conducted by Rasmussen on Aug. 13. The actual question read: "Should the government require all radio and television stations to offer equal amounts of conservative and liberal political commentary?"

I'm not sure which is stupider - the question or the response. If respondents fully understood the question and its ramifications - which I greatly doubt - one thing we could conclude is that 47 percent of the American public is daft. Can anyone imagine how such a policy could possibly be administered? Not even the wise King Solomon would be capable of impartially monitoring, evaluating and brokering the daily outpouring of broadcast content on this basis. And it would certainly be beyond the ability of a politically appointed panel of Federal Communications Commission judges.

Practically speaking, who would define what's "conservative" and what's "liberal?" Even conservatives and liberals don't agree on that. And how could you justify limiting the categorization of opinions, ideas and philosophy to just "liberal" and "conservative?" It's not as if there are only two sides to every issue or argument.

There are countless sides that would have to be presented: liberals, conservatives, progressives, neo-conservatives, paleo-conservatives, libertarians, fascists, communists (with equal time to their various factions: Leninists, Trotskyites, Stalinists and Maoists), anarchists, greens, men, women, gays, transgendered, etc. Bring up a religious issue, and you'd have to include Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Confucians, Scientologists, Zoroastrians, Wiccans, agnostics, deists, atheists, you name it. Where would it end?

That's the easy answer. It would end with the elimination of opinion-oriented talk radio, which is really what this is all about. Left-wing Democrats in Congress, like Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kucinich, aren't content with the liberal domination of network television, higher and lower education, major newspapers, news magazines, the arts and Hollywood. They abhor the success and influence of conservative, radio talk-show hosts. So they've threatened to resurrect the Fairness Doctrine, eliminated in 1987 during the Reagan administration. (Ironically, if the Fairness Doctrine were "fairly" applied to CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS and NPR, all of those networks would have to fire legions of liberals and launch an affirmative action program to recruit conservatives.)

Yes, the left would lose radio's Air America but hardly anyone listens to that anyway. In exchange, liberals hope to be rid of Rush Limbaugh and company. The assumption is radio station management, confronted with an impossible balancing act and the prospect of endless litigation, would simply eliminate controversial programming. This would also eliminate the kind of interesting and compelling talk radio that attracts audiences. And that would, in turn, eliminate much of AM radio. Most successful music programming has long ago shifted to the FM band. In its stead, talk radio has been the salvation of the AM band. Eliminate talk radio, and the market value of AM stations and their FCC licenses would drop like a rock.

Oh, don't worry about me. I'd find work. Talk shows would still be popular. They'd just shift to satellite or the Internet - unless politicians tried to regulate content there, too. Absurd, you say? FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell recently expressed concern that the restoration of the Fairness Doctrine could include the Internet as well.

When originally devised, the Fairness Doctrine sought to promote political balance during the infancy of over-the-air broadcast media when there were a limited number of radio and television stations. In the modern world of telecommunications, the number of outlets is infinite. There's no danger, today, that a cabal of broadcasters could dictate public opinion. The very notion of government regulation of political content in broadcasting is an anachronism.

Well This Says It Very Simply


August 21, 2008

Pelosi pilloried, garden party for Israeli art and artists


Pelosi Pilloried at American Jewish University Lecture

Rather than praise, which one might expect from a roomful of women and the ceiling-smashing Nancy Pelosi, insults were hurled toward the stage.

"Traitor!" screamed one woman.

"Liar!" shouted another.

One man's high-volume, breakneck rampage got him physically removed from the room. His diatribe, though nearly indecipherable, left Pelosi stone-faced but shaken.

Pelosi, on a break from her post as the first female Speaker of the House, landed at American Jewish University (AJU) on Aug. 11 to promote her new book, "Know Your Power: A Message to America's Daughters" (Doubleay). Faced with an acrimonious audience, one of Congress's most outspoken critics of the Bush administration was lambasted for opposing impeachment proceedings against the president.

During a 90-minute Q-and-A with AJU President Robert Wexler, Pelosi discussed her childhood, her unexpected rise to power and the need for more women in government in front of an audience of nearly 400 people.

When Wexler pressed her on a question about Congress's dismally low 9 percent approval rating, Pelosi defended herself and her colleagues. This prompted an irate audience member to accuse Pelosi of shirking her constitutional responsibilities by not impeaching Bush for the deceptive reasoning that led to the Iraq War.

"I have complete comfort with the frustration," she said. "I'm from the streets."

(Shit! She has no idea of what “In-The-Streets Folks Are All About”. If She did she’d be in Cheney’s Bunker. (Ed.))

But when several others rose from their seats in protest, Pelosi became defensive.

"I take an oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Don't tell me I don't do that," she snapped. "Why don't you go picket the Republicans in Congress that will not allow us to have a vote on the war?"

What a Crock! (Ed.)

It's puzzling that L.A. liberals were charmed by the likes of Karl Rove, who appeared at a similar event in February, but were hostile to Pelosi, who was visibly deflated by the time the crowd quieted down.

"What else do you have for me?" she asked a bereft Wexler, who didn't follow up on the impeachment issue.

Despite her book's message of empowerment to America's women, Pelosi was pelted as if she were a HARLOT.

Just Reminding You Of The Problem!

McCain May Win Election....Thanks to Nancy Pelosi
OpEdNews, PA - 11 hours ago
The second major BLUNDER, next to the invasion of Iraq, is Nancy Pelosi's refusal to hold the Bush administration accountable for their treasonous policy ...

2008 Election Forecast: Wild West Showdown in Colorado

Obama Needs a Blockbuster

Free Speech TV videos - http://community.freespeech.org/video

Impeach Pelosi Too! | By skinnychef | download this clip! read more.

Conventions: A Short History | From the anti-Mason party convention in 1831 to the Democratic and Republican conventions of 2004, CQ Politics presents a short history of the biggest party in politics.

Tensions High as NATO Suspends Formal Contacts with Russia Over Georgia Conflict

Tensions are high between the United States and Russia over the ongoing conflict in Georgia. On Wednesday, soon after NATO foreign ministers decided to cut formal ties with Russia until it withdrew all its troops from Georgia, President Bush vowed to continue to support Georgia. We speak with William Hartung, director of the Arms and Security Initiative at the New America Foundation.

Real Video Stream

Real Audio Stream

MP3 Download



Bush to Putin, “Get out now!” Putin to Bush, “Nyet!” By Mike Whitney

The Puppet Masters Behind Georgia President Saakashvili

A newer world order by Lee Sustar

OSCE observers knew about Georgia’s attack + Jewish Quarter targeted in Georgian offensive

Americans play Monopoly, Russians chess

Apr├ęs la deluge — wracking up the fear quotient By William Bowles

Beat The Dead Horse Or Putin’s Revenge By Gaither Stewart


Bill Moyers Journal: Is an imperial presidency destroying what America stands for? (must-see)

Tomgram: Andrew Bacevich, The Lessons of Endless War

There May Be Many Mushroom Clouds In Our Future By Paul Craig Roberts

Will American Insouciance Destroy the World? By Paul Craig Roberts

Was 9/11 an Inside Job? by Mark H. Gaffney

Ron Suskind: Bush Admin forging documents that led to war (Part 1)

The Economy Sucks and or Collapse

Libertarians and Socialists as Workers Must Unite by Lo

Nader: Taking Impeachment Off the Table + Corporate Tax Cheats

Ralph Nader Posts & Videos

End Post….See I'm Being Fair!