Mainstream Media

Hypocrisy

Hypocrisy (03/30/2011)

I consider hypocrisy to be the most appalling and disgusting action someone can take. I believe examples abound like politicians campaigning for family values then engaging in affairs, organized religious leaders looking away from rape by their clergy, preachers wrapped in wealth, or global warming followers driving jets and SUVs. Many on the right are struggling with the hypocrisy of the press; their basis of accusations of liberal bias against the mainstream media. Out of fairness, our media has never been held accountable for any reporting, no matter how inaccurate. With the Libyan conflict though it appears a “wink-wink” of approval has been made to the current administration.

In December 2007, Senator Obama said: “[the] president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” Shortly thereafter Senator Obama was supported by Senator Joe Biden who pledged to start impeachment proceedings against President Bush if Iran were attacked without congressional approval. Ironically, we find ourselves with the hypocrisy of our President and Vice President doing exactly what they accused Bush of doing. On March 19, 2011 President Obama stated, “Today we are part of a broad coalition. We are answering the calls of a threatened people. And we are acting in the interests of the United States and the world.”

Hypocritically the question must be raised as to how Obama could make such a statement, and ignore his prior assertions of Presidential authority. Over the last several weeks uprisings have occurred throughout the Middle East, starting with the self-immolation of a fruit stand worker in Tunisia. Each of the middle-eastern governments has turned on its citizens: Tripoli, Yemen, Bahrain, Libya, and of course our oil-rich ally Saudi Arabia. While the President had psychic-like success with his NCAA basketball picks his reason to start a war with a meaningless dictator remains a mystery. Whether or not I agree with Mohammar Qhaddaffi, Libya is a sovereign nation entitled to manage her affairs, or the same principles shall apply to China, Korea, Venezuela, and most of the middle-east. Protected by our media it is easy to see the quick dismissal of the hypocrisy of the situation, as a lover will always look away. “Hypocrisy is a fashionable vice, and all fashionable vices pass for virtue,” – Moliere (1622-1673).

Together We Thrive?

Together We Thrive?
We must remember Rahm Emanuel’s words, “never let a good crisis go to waste” when examining our President’s speech last week. It is amazing the office of the President, for purposes of offering condolences to the families of six murder victims and 14 injured, could exploit the opportunity to start the 2012 Presidential campaign. Can you imagine planning a speech for a country dealing with a heinous massacre and yet giving thought to producing 13,000 Tee-Shirts with the political slogan, “Together we Thrive”? I am concerned so many feel willing to give the political establishment a pass, in fact admire them for tactless, grotesque behavior so obviously filled with self promotion over those they govern. I remain steadfast in my opinion that leader’s rise naturally by supporting and promoting their followers; not seeking the glory of the limelight or by utilizing and politicizing opportunities. What are the odds Congressman Giffords opened her eyes after President Obama’s visit, leaving him to announce it to the country? The news was delivered like a Sunday morning preacher telling his flock what they want to hear and consumed without suspicion regarding this questionable coincidence.

Sadly, the politicization of Tucson was unavoidable, and I am too young to make comparisons to similar assassination attempts like Reagan, Ford, Wallace, King, Kennedy, Malcom X, Truman, Long, Roosevelt F., Roosevelt T., McKinley, or Garfield. The reporting of such events prior to Kennedy was primarily via radio and newspaper, and Kennedy’s assassination brought us the immortalized words of Walter Cronkite, but without opinion and speculation. The common theme in all of these attacks trends as a mentally deranged individual acting independently, seeking attention and lashing out at society. Last week, there was no need for the President’s call to examine the discourse of self-governance, or to repeatedly mention a need to prompt reflection and debate. In short, a single, mentally ill man, Jared Lee Loughner killed six people and the wheels of justice will run him over and serve the appropriate sentence. In the meantime, the reporters and trusted news pundits should be held accountable for inaccurate reporting and we should be disgusted by the President’s abuse of a sad event. We the people should encourage our elected officials to steer clear of the politics and calls for limits on free speech and restrictions on guns; instead understanding there are sick individuals among our 300 million and the actions of one do not represent groups, beliefs, or politics.

January 19, 2011 by admin Mainstream Media Obama Terrorists

wikisuccess……

I have been stunned by the number of times I have asked friends and family about Wikileaks and their opinion last week and they knew nothing. Although Wikileaks was splashed all over the headlines, sadly it appears Cybermonday is far more important to most Americans. Last week the talk show personalities and government officials were quick to offer their condemnations, calling the actions of Wikileaks treasonous and criminal. Anytime the media, government, and the entire political spectrum agree it is worth considering the contrarian position. Personally, I have a strong contradictory opinion in support of Wikileaks and want to make a case for my opinion.

I have watched Wikileaks evolve over the last several years as a safe haven for whistleblower journalism. Julian Assange is an Australian born hacker who ran a software company and is the public persona of Wikileaks. The catalyst for the web site was capturing internet traffic in China, observations and secret emails by the Chinese government several years ago shared by dissidents who required extreme protection for fear of ultimate retaliation by the Chinese. With the protections of Swedish law regarding anonymity to sources of the Press, secure servers around the world, and safe drop boxes for information Wikileaks became the ultimate whistleblower web site. Not only has the site shared government secrets, but individuals have posted corporate details leading to arrests.

In April 2010, after funding and server problems, Assange splashed Wikileaks across the front pages of the news worldwide with the release of secret documents describing U.S. killings of civilians in Iraq in 2007. In July 2010 Wikileaks released the “Afghan War Diaries” and Assange was instantly condemned by both the press and government for recklessly putting troops in harm’s way through the document release. However, the Afghanistan documents brought to light government cover-ups regarding friendly fire and civilian casualties. At the time, I researched this release wondering about the legality and learned of a similar, earth shattering release of government information made by Daniel Ellsberg in 1971, “The Pentagon Papers.” Ellsberg was vindicated by the Supreme Court ruling the Constitution guarantees anonymity, at least in the area of political discourse.
With the release of last week’s documents, now labeled “cablegate”, Assange has become a permanent thorn to the U.S. government. Both sides of the aisle have called his acts treasonous and are seeking his arrest. He is reviled by many and wanted by Interpol, for consensual sex without a condom in Sweden. I argue the headlines are made to discredit Assange and tarnish his public reputation. Sarah Palin has blasted Assange, Clinton accused him of an ‘attack’ on the world, and Senator Lieberman successfully shutdown servers and related Wikileaks documents in the United States.

The documents show embarrassing corruption in the Afghanistan war, orders to spy on delegates to the United Nations by Secretary Clinton, and accusations of mafia like activities by the Russian government. I believe the documents show the true nature of our government, and governments worldwide, an elitist class of buffoons in charge of public policy using their positions of power to promote personal self interests. We all learn in high school we should live our lives as if our actions are to make front page headlines on the New York Times. In this case, with the release of documents dating back 40 years the true opinions and ineptness of our government officials is now public.

Those against the release of Wikileaks argue the documents will result in the loss of life to secretly placed operatives and erode progress of political negotiations, but no one has died as a result of Wikileaks. Cablegate has shed light on African governments stealing billions for personal gain, negotiations by the U.S. with terrorist nations, and acknowledgment of civilian loss of life in our wars. I am shocked the media is not more supportive of Wikileaks and can only assume the embarrassment of being “scooped” by one outside their ranks, similar to Matt Drudge during the Clinton years, has alienated support.

I argue government must be held to the highest standard, one that operates with ultimate transparency. Without the spotlight of transparency the citizens are subject to corruption, theft of public funds in the treasury, disregard of the law, and in some cases death. Assange promises the next release will reveal details of a large bank institution’s handling of the financial crisis. I believe public opinion and the media anchors will offer applause when Wikileaks offers the same insights inside a private corporation and comments similar to those made by our government leaders inside a board room would make the late night talk show monologues rife with jokes, not condemnation. I want my government held accountable and operating with the highest integrity and moral fortitude, I applaud Assange and his courageousness. History will reflect his actions as critical to the safety of citizens worldwide and changing the way government operates.

As I write this column, Saturday December 4th, 2010, the Wikileaks.org web site I visited multiple times earlier in the week is no longer accessible. Internet purists are working on new technologies to bypass government interventions and maintain ultimate freedom of information on the web. I do not live in China, I do not want censorship, and I do not want the tyranny of a government hiding from its own illegal acts.

December 9, 2010 by admin Big Government Civil Rights Controversy Mainstream Media Stupid People

Election Season – Part III

In last week’s column I worked to explore the definitions of the labels so quickly applied to describe various political views: liberal, conservative, and libertarian. Talk radio pundits regularly throw labels around with the intent of degrading the reputation of someone merely by association. This week I want to examine the platforms of the two major parties and the rising Tea Party movement. I believe many people hear the labels and the names of the parties, but do not understand the history, or more importantly the platform. Today candidates are changing, or leaving parties, like grabbing flip-flops for the beach so I must wonder how important are the parties?

Liberalism is the renowned platform of the Democrats, essentially incorporating Progressivism to drive a humanitarian agenda based on intellectual theory and conjecture. The last 80 years have used Keynesian economics to justify government programs as the solution to capitalistic shortfalls. Thus, the Democrats are seen as a champion of the lower class, providing social protections. Democrats evolved from anti-federalist factions in the 1790’s and today represent the single largest political party in the world. The Party once favored states rights and strict adherence to the constitution. Today the Party favors liberalism, social not classical, and has embraced Clinton’s “Third Way” , believing government should play a role in alleviating poverty and social injustice and use a system of progressive taxation to implement policy.

Conservatism is used to describe Republicans, having evolved from Classic Liberalism, originally focusing on individual rights and civil liberties. This pre-1930’s attitude drives a platform allowing the individual to excel but forcing him to deal with the consequences of his own decisions. The Republican Party was founded in 1854 by anti-slavery activists and saw Abraham Lincoln as its first president. By the 1890’s the Party was known for protecting business, primarily through tariffs, the gold standard, and high wages. The Party also opposed the League of Nations. Today, Republicans are defined by social-conservatism, supply-side economics, support for gun ownership, and deregulatory policies.

The newly formed Tea Party is a populist movement in response to Congressional Bills passed in 2009. The Tea Party’s platform is focused on ensuring the constitutionality of every law, fiscal responsibility, limiting federal spending, reducing earmarks and reducing taxes. Although new, the Tea Party has demonstrated its ability to put forth viable, electable candidates and has forced the two traditional parties to defend their positions in political debate.

October 15, 2010 by admin Mainstream Media Stupid People

Obama is Right

Obama is Right

This is probably the most concerning column I have written, not because I agree with the President but because the issue is sensitive, to both sides. Currently, whether to build Park51 (a.k.a. Ground Zero Mosque) is driving passionate public debates. Hesitantly, President Obama voiced his opinion two weeks ago when he said the right to build the project was constitutionally protected. The following day he made further comments stating while constitutionally protected, it may be in bad taste. I must agree with both of his comments. While it may be in bad taste, I do not believe it is a community center designed to protect, or possibly sympathize to Islamic terrorists as has been asserted by some in the media. Ultimately, the court of public opinion will either empower the developers and those funding the project, or send them packing.

I am disturbed by talk radio pundits flummoxing methods. Other than to inflame an ill-informed public there is no other purpose for the front-page debate. The fallacy of the current argument comes from the presumption if terrorists are Muslim then all Muslims are terrorists. I take issue because living in the south, as a white male; I am stereotyped as a racist redneck by the argument racist rednecks are southern white males. Similarly, a German born in the 1920’s is not automatically a Nazi. What has been lost in the argument propelled center stage is the right to build a place of worship, as protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution. The same people who herald the constitution in arguments against healthcare, bailouts, and social programs are quick to stomp the same document when it does not meet their needs.

There are many aspects of the Constitution which may not conveniently fit our desires and likes. However, if we remain consistent in our application, trusting the truths set forth by the founding fathers we will not go wrong. In the case of Park51, it is clear there is no constitutional violation to build. The decision to build is purely local and is governed by the zoning laws, planning commissions, and local electorate. Does it feel good to support building the project? No, but the more important issue at hand is support of the Constitution in the face of our enemies, asserting what separates our country from those who attack us in the name of God.

September 12, 2010 by admin Civil Rights Controversy Freedom Mainstream Media Muslim Terrorists

Gender Bias

Last week I encountered a woman I previously knew; a very attractive successful vice president of a national company. Ironically, her reputation is one of being a “total b—ch”. This prompted me to wonder why people feel intimidated by successful women whereas I have always been attracted to and admired successful intelligent women. Personally, my wife LeeAnn is beautiful, has worked as a financial controller for a Ross Perot company with numerous people reporting to her, and is now attaining her CPA. Similarly, my girlfriend prior to LeeAnn turned heads and is vice president of a national healthcare company. But yet, both are denigrated by people who do not know them. Having two daughters I feel hypersensitive to this issue as I encourage and push them to achieve more, challenging them academically. However, their friends, and even some family, fail to support and push them.

Sadly, it appears many Americans regard successful, attractive women as enemies; often denigrated with the “b” or “c” words. A woman relegated to part-time work or a stereotypical female job finds herself held in higher regard, but it seems these women are the first to insult those who have found success. Among males, the opposite is true. A tough, good looking guy rising to a top-management position, becoming a politician or powerful lawyer is admired.

Examples of tough women at leadership levels abound from Pelosi and Palin, Secretary of State Clinton, Germany’s Merkel, England’s former Thatcher, and even our own local Suzanne Kosmas and Dorothy Hukill. These are the women I use as role models for my daughters, the ladies who have proven with hard work and determination, regardless of gender, they can rise and chase dreams. Unfortunately, more Americans uphold Lohan, Spears, and Snooki. It appears there is more regard for pop stars void of opinion and intellect, lacking morals, values, and ethics, but high on scandal, promiscuity, and even criminal activity. Successful women find themselves mocked and maligned, like Sarah Palin. What woman serves as a better role model than Palin, who spoke out locally, rose through the ranks and became governor, and the second female vice presidential candidate in American history? It’s easy to disparage people we don’t know, calling them trailer trash, a b—ch, or reference lipstick on a pig. If dislike is driven by disagreement over issues, then debate, but don’t make it personal

August 25, 2010 by admin General Rant Mainstream Media

Carbon Copy America

My wife and I came down off the mountain this weekend and visited “civilization” to engage in the most popular sport in America: leisure shopping. Visiting the Mall of Georgia is like visiting Altamonte Mall. The similarities start with traffic lights, waiting to make turns, localized strip malls with a variety of specialty stores, car dealers using balloons to lure naïve consumers, and franchised eateries overfeeding overweight patrons. My first inclination is to shop locally, like I did in New Smyrna at Coronado Hardware or eating at the Dolphin View, but lacking choices I was forced to head to the Mall.

My intent here is not to complain about the Mall, but to comment on willfulness to trade perceived success for lost identity. I have previously written about the “good old days”, circa 2006 during the boom, and also commented on the loss of small towns in my column, “Taking Back Roads.” At the end of our shopping expedition on Saturday my wife, LeeAnn, said, “we could be anywhere in America. Looking around the stores and architecture are no different here or in Altamonte Springs, Ft. Worth, or Minneapolis.” Her observation was spot on; we chose the economic path that brought our destruction and it started in the early 1990’s. Thinking back to the 1970s and 1980s, appliance and electronics stores were locally owned; Home Depot, Lowes, and Best Buy did not exist except in their original markets. Wal-Mart was a regional Arkansas chain, not a megastore found in every town in America. Even the Mall’s department stores appeared quirky to the out-of-state traveler as they represented decades old local businesses like Burdines, Daytons, Wanamakers, and Gimbels. And of course, the out parcels of Linens and Things, Old Navy, and Michaels did not exist.

In the 1990’s with easy access to money, a rapidly rising stock market, low barriers to brokerage services and do-it-yourself investment attitudes the economic boom erased our identity. Local architecture and business acquiesced to national franchises and bland buildings void of character delivering mass-produced Chinese merchandise meant to symbolize success to anonymous strangers. On a local level builders nationalized and did the same, trading character for mass production of McMansions with bathrooms larger than the prior generation’s living rooms. New Smyrna Beach and Cleveland, Georgia lag behind, but yet both claim progress by advancing box stores and abandoning local business heritage. Just push “Copy”, America has lost her character.

August 18, 2010 by admin Economic Development Great Recession Mainstream Media Peak Oil Stupid People

The View

It is amazing how two people can look at the same consideration and see two distinct things. Even a single feature can look different depending on the direction from which it is approached. I live next to a 3,200 foot mountain peak, Mt. Yonah, and admire its beauty every time I drive home. If I approach Mt. Yonah from the Northwest I see a gently rising tree covered mountain, rising majestically to the sky. However, approaching from the Southeast, to go home, the same mountain rises ominously with nearly vertical granite faces, stripped of any foliage and impossible to climb. Although this same peak is visible from miles around, the view and approach would change your perspective about climbing to the summit.

Politics, societal problems, and even relationships anecdotally reflect my mountain. Depending on the point of view taken to attack issues, problems can appear gradually solvable or insurmountable. For example, the oil spill in the Gulf can be viewed as an environmental tragedy or an engineering challenge. Chelsea Clinton’s wedding last weekend was hyped as the wedding of the century, but to the residents of Rhinebeck, New York it was a media frenzy and security nightmare. What has been lost in American debate today is the understanding that debate accommodates differing views; one is not necessarily right or wrong. I learned several years ago feelings cannot be argued, only facts. However, if you watch the news closely, and monitor political debate, arguments center on emotions, feelings, and perceptions, not facts.

Last week a federal judge issued an injunction against Arizona’s controversial immigration bill. This is a hot-button issue with differing views on how to solve a problem. I would argue what is missing is the discussion of the issue at hand. For example, Obama promised immigration reform, but after 19 months in office nothing has transpired leaving Arizona to deal with the issue and thus pushing a bill designed to move the issue to the spotlight. Armed with what I know, I could not possibly consider living in a border state due to the violence, costs, and breakdown in social order. However, I believe we should embrace people risking their lives to come to our country. What matters now is how we view the problem and work together to solve it; effective debate starts with understanding the view.

August 8, 2010 by admin Controversy Mainstream Media

Sheep

Sheep

This past weekend was the Superbowl, a time honored tradition of getting together with friends, watching the game, cheering for fantastic football plays and watching commercials at halftime. I scoff at this as a continued hilarious process of entertaining the sheep, or the “sheeple” if you prefer. Sadly, I assert more people know the names of the quarterbacks of each team and not the names of their two Senators. Most people will know which team won the game, but cannot name which party has a majority in Congress. Lastly, the commercials will be recounted with detailed attention, but the average person cannot describe the details of the largest federal budget passed in history this last week.

I find myself an outcast because I don’t watch the Superbowl, or follow professional football obsessively. I admit I don’t follow any professional sports religiously, although I may know names, teams, or who leads a league at times. And of course, if I were invited to a game or race, I would joyfully attend. Preparing this week’s column I had realized I had no idea who was playing, and did not care. I realized a long time ago I had no interest in watching millionaires who made no contribution to society run around on a field or court. When the players make the news it is usually due to beating their wife or girlfriend, an affair, drugs, or shooting. But yet, our society idolizes these players that have near superhuman strength.

With President Obama’s populist push against the CEOs and executives of major corporations I must wonder why sports and Hollywood celebrities are exempt. The American people readily hand their money over to large entertainment corporations that provide obscene riches to a very few in an environment where nepotism is more likely to drive success than any type of skill. On the other hand, a successful businessman who risked his home, personal family life, and employed others is now demonized if he rises to a successful level. No one questioned the use of private aircraft and limousines by Paris Hilton, but the automotive executives that employ hundreds of thousands and whose company’s stock is owned by the masses were chastised by Congress for wisely using their time to travel via an efficient means. Ironically, Nancy Pelosi travels every week via private aircraft from Washington, D.C. to California at taxpayer expense but that is not questioned.

President Obama has made it clear that to succeed in America by hard work, rising through the ranks, managing people, and running billion dollar corporations is bad. However, it is acceptable to sign a hundred million dollar contract to play games for a few years, and even get paid if hurt. Or, like Conan O’Brien to get $30 million to peacefully leave a contract at NBC. As much as his populist agenda is being promoted, it scares me to think about a lottery society where success is measured by luck rather than a society that favors hard work, risk, and rewards success. Life is not fair, everyone is not a winner, but America has led the world by everyone having the opportunity to succeed regardless of gender, race, or economics. The Romans distracted the people with entertainment, ran lotteries, and controlled the people to take taxes, and control the people. Governments know when the people are entertained they will turn their backs on the important issues and trust others to care for them, just like sheep. Sadly, it seems like the American people have become sheep who do not care. Now, I must ask, “Who won the game?”

February 19, 2010 by admin Depression Great Recession Mainstream Media Obama Stupid People

Taking a Break

One thing about living in Florida is how easy it is to fall victim to the sensationalism of hurricane reporting by local television stations. We crave wanting to know where Anna, Bill, Claudette and any of our other alphabetical list of storms is headed. It is nearly impossible to escape this invasion of news as the ticker or radar picture instantly showing location, intensity, and projected path of destruction is always on once the storm has been announced. This information invades our lives through print, computers, radio, television, and even local conversation.

I would argue that our lives in general have become much the same way regarding all news. In ancient times (before the 1980s), there were three networks, a public TV station, and changing channels necessitated getting off the couch so our exposure to the news was much more limited. Sure, an AM radio station typically played hourly updates, but our news was only available in the morning, at noon, or on the major networks in the evening. Paul Harvey was the extent of opinion and we recognized him as an entertainer. At night, Johnny Carson poked fun at events of the day, but the monologue was respectful and limited. Now, even local television stations now run two hours of “news” in the evening. Ironically, most of the news is not news though, but polling data reports, conjecture, and opinions.

You’re reading this paper, this page of the paper, and this article. Most likely, like me you enjoy the news and keeping up with information. Recently I realized though, like hurricane news, the political and economic information I enjoy is changing at a slower pace than I desire. I found myself wanting more, craving more and starving for the latest news tidbit to radically change the political landscape. Each day I regularly visit web sites to read newspapers and review news sources. Fortunately, I cancelled cable television over a year ago and am no longer bombarded by the pontificates on different networks sharing their opinions, not reporting news.

Recently, I realized I was feeling a level of anxiety. Nothing bad, nothing in particular caused me anxiety. But instead, like the ongoing threat of a hurricane offshore that will more than likely miss central Florida, I felt the same anxiety watching the news and waiting, anticipating, and starving for the next story detailing some miniscule change in the health care debate or the current economic environment. Thus, I decided to take a break.

This past Sunday I told my wife that my goal for the week was to avoid the “news”. No web sites, no talk radio, no seeking of information that I had no control over and could not impact. However, out of fairness, if I encountered news I would absorb it. So far my experience has been refreshing, like a vacation. I realized I could break my addiction and habit to seeking and looking for news. The next time a hurricane is coming I suggest you try it. A once a day check of conditions is more than adequate. The same holds true for most your exposure to talk radio, cable news, or evening network news. Once a day, read the paper or watch the news. Minute by minute; remember you are subjecting yourself to opinion and conjecture. It’s not worth your time.

November 1, 2009 by admin Mainstream Media