Archive for category censorship
This was the last thing I wanted to wake up and read this morning. It looks like a lot of young people in New York, who would most likely be voting for Bernie Sanders, have missed the boat, due to restrictive laws on voting registration.
I just happened upon this “Democracy Now” segment that was taped the day after the Utah caucuses caught the nation by surprise and gave Sanders an overwhelming victory here. I don’t think the extent of the failure in the Arizona election had been looked at yet. It’s great to see my favorite Utah politician standing up for my favorite national politician and stating Sanders’s obvious advantages over Hillary:
Of course Sanders went on to a long string of solid wins after Utah and Idaho, showing a strong momentum if there ever was one. Polls in Utah showed that even Republicans trust Sanders more then the current front runner in their party and, like Rocky says, he’s a shoe-in over Hillary against any Republican now running for the general election slot.
Anderson, of the “Justice Party”, is upset about a blatant hit piece on Sanders in “The Washington Post”, derived from a poorly conducted and carved up interview from a rag called the “New York Daily News”. He’s made a list of questions a tough journalist could ask Hillary. It’s obvious this won’t happen at “The [Bezos] Post”; a publication which recently did 16 negative articles on Sanders in 16 hours.
He ‘s been dead since 1997, but he’s even funnier then Donald Trump. His campaign started in 1968, and is still going on as far as I’m concerned. He has got to be a part of the reason “The Smothers Brothers” popular show was cancelled by Nixon. And, yes, It was canceled by Nixon, not CBS.
I was thinking we needed some actual political humor, instead of racism.
Can somebody tell me how the public is being served on our airwaves? I thought there were laws about this sort of thing.
The CEO at CBS, Les Moonvez, had this to say about that television station’s coverage of the 2016 race, at a UBS investment bank seminar:
…we have the superbowl and we have a year of political advertising that looks like it’s shaping up to be pretty phenomenal, you know, we love having all 16 Republican candidates throwing crap at each other, it’s great! The more they spend the better it is for us and uh… GO DONALD! Keep gettin’ out there and, you know, this is fun. Let them spend money on us and we love having them in there and we’re looking forward to a very exciting political year in 2016.
But let’s not let ABC or all the other outlets off the hook for downright bad coverage of the election, and the debates which haven’t included even one question about climate change from the moderators.
The real story of this election season, is how a self described “democratic socialist” has become the favorite of the American public. Bernie Sanders would easily win a contest with Donald Trump if the election were held today, but except for a couple of debates, he doesn’t exist on the public airwaves:
From Media Matters:
So in terms of stand-alone campaign stories this year, it’s been 234 minutes for Trump, compared to 10 minutes for Sanders. And at ABC World News Tonight, it’s been 81 minutes for Trump and less than one minute for Sanders.
NPR reported 20 seconds for Sanders on ABC World News.
Let “the invisible hand of the market” pick your president.
Show us the first Democratic Debate in the 2016 presidential election.
Maybe you really ARE “the Clinton news network”. I used to laugh at that designation because you guys attacked Bill Clinton with the same voracity that every other lame “news” network did during the Bill Clinton impeachment nonsense.
Hillary Clinton did pretty well in the debate. She was strong, attractive, defiant, unflappable, funny, human and all the rest. So why are you so averse to giving everybody in America, no matter their internet speed, the ability to see what happened instead of the chopped up pieces you present on your crappy internet website? Could it have something to do with “capitalism”?
I went to the union center in Salt Lake City, because I was afraid my internet connection was going to hang, but it was doubtful that the internet connection there was going to work in time there either.
I woke up early the next day to see if you had a full debate video and was unable to find one, so I went to YouTube and found one – in three parts – that was taken down a couple of hours later. There is a new one on YouTube that is in sixteen or more parts. Are you going to take this one down too, or possibly give the American people the right to see American political debates on your own domain?
I present number one of…
UPDATE: I have found an actual FULL version of the debate in one segment. The previous 17 part presentation is no longer needed. I still think CNN has enough help to offer the debate on their own website though.
A short rant about losing one of our most important freedoms, and about the only thing you can do to keep it. Good luck.
After all these years of Americans fighting for “internet neutrality”, against the corporations who want control of the internet, and finally winning an important ruling by the FCC recently, the corporations got the house of “representatives” to sneak language into a funding bill that would stop the FCC’s ability to carry out it’s own ruling.
This bipartisan effort brought Americans from every political party together in staggering numbers in a common cause to protect our freedom to be heard and participate in the course of our lives. The internet provides the most exciting innovative possibilities imaginable, by allowing everybody – not just corporations – the unfettered ability to create new ideas for our future and even our survival.
Our collective congress doesn’t seem to care if our country has an open internet as long as they secure a campaign donation, or maybe they’re just tired of not being able to control it more to their liking. There hasn’t been a peep about this from the congress or our media. I’m sure ABC, NBC, CBS, print media and the politicians liked it a lot better when they had complete control over public discourse before the internet. I don’t share that sentiment.
DO THIS! It’s designed to be super fast and super easy. It even dials the phone for you! Can’t possibly take more then a couple of minutes and it might even be therapeutic. No excuses for you, Bubba!
Well, all I can do is speculate, since they won’t tell us why he’s being indicted.
As usual, I had NPR on this morning when I heard that the former speaker of the house, Dennis Hastert, had been indicted for undisclosed reasons. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of secret, public indictments before. Have you?
The indictment did not specify the nature of the misconduct. A spokeswoman for the federal prosecutor in Northern Illinois declined to offer further detail about the alleged wrongdoing by the former speaker.
Hastert who was brought in as speaker of the house to replace Bob Livingston who had replaced Newt Gringrich a couple of weeks earlier, when it became known that both men, who had been attacking Bill Clinton during the hyper-media frenzy about his famous extramarital affair, were exposed for having more serious adultery. The kindly looking Hastert was billed as, sort of, a Jimmy Carter like moralistic figure that was going to bring dignity and moderation back to the mess on capitol hill.
Even though the media won’t, I think I can give you some background on what is actually happening here and why this is much more serious then most of us who haven’t been to my favorite website, BradBlog.com. know.
Here’s a paragraph from a story posted there in 2008:
It appears that these arrangements aren’t the typical ‘Revolving Door’ retirement packages, but rather specific quid pro quo deals. People like Hastert and Grossman and the others quite literally sell out their government while in office on the specific promise that they will be rewarded when they leave.
To make a long story really short: the indictment that must not be known is most likely about Dennis Hastert being bribed by Turkey while in office, and taking a lobbying job there after leaving office. If you want the long version, it’s unfolding in the real American news media at BradBlog right now: HERE.
Pertinent video primer from 2008:
UPDATE: What, they couldn’t let this out this morning? Is this a cover story cooked up to make this go away? Couldn’t happen in America.
UPDATE: Although this sixty minutes story doesn’t cover Sybil Edmonds’s allegations against Hastert in the previous video, it’s obvious she has credibility.
If you’re reading this, you know you support “Net Neutrality” and wouldn’t want OneUtah to have any more problems then it’s got now or had in the past.
The internet is abuzz with news that the Chairman of the FCC seems to be hearing Americans of ALL persuasions concerning our desire not to give away the promise of the internet, to be a forum for everybody and not just another movie, advertising or propaganda channel.
I don’t wish to cast any negative aspersions on the good chairman, but he DID used to be a lobbyist for the opposition to a free internet. Now isn’t the time to be pacified into thinking we’ve won.
You might not be a fan of Daily KOS, and I’ve had my issues with that blog myself, but they have provided a simple page which provides you with a way to easily make your comment to the FCC. I am happy that it doesn’t provide the text of your comment, which would most likely not get read and possibly get discarded automatically by the recipient.
For all it’s worth, here’s mine:
I consider “net neutrality” to be the biggest issue today. The invention of the internet has allowed knowledge and ideas to flow in ways that were unimaginable to anyone just a few years ago. If the largest corporations are allowed to control this powerful tool, it will become just another advertising platform for wealth creation and people will lose interest. Personally, it would devastate my trust in what America used to stand for and lessen my interest in democracy itself.
I was nice, no?