The Battle for PBS

Dude- You “tuck a valentine” into your tax return? Seriously? That is beyond queer.

Are you still taking a cut of those videos you made with taxpayer support? Does NOW still employ your family members?

More importantly, how can I get a deal like that? Get the taxpayers to support me and then I get to personally profit and get my kids employed. That is just the greatest!

By the way, giving a speech and reading your own “fan mail” is a little, well, bizzare. Who else would do that?

Take it easy Bill. You’re retired now. - Middle of Road

MOR-

Get a clue.  He is using the valentine as an analogy for his love for is country, doing the right and kind thing even when it isn’t at a convenient time, such as tax day.

Thank God above for faithful journalists like Bill Moyer.  It’s men and women like him that have exposed the wrongdoings of the powerful for decades, and our country is better for it.

I,for one, am pleased to see him back “in the ring”.  With a lying criminal for a president, we can use more Bill Moyers.

I own my own business and do receive contracts from the government and, yes, my kids work for me.  Since when is that a crime?  Senators and Presidents do it all the time.  Get a clue, MOR, you just sound like a GOP soundbite.

Middle,

Am unclear as to what your point is.  Do you disagree with Moyers re: responsible journalism?  Or is it that the fact he accepts money from a public institution like PBS mitigates his claims of systemic abuse by politicians, indeed is hypocritical?  From where comes your contempt?  Please explain.

Middle of the Road: where life becomes roadkill.  Why bother to provide answer-free verbiage to the benefit of nobody?  Now THAT is bizarre.

Thank You Bill.  Glad to see you are still fighting the good fight.  You speak so to the point.  It is refreshing.

To MOR, there are a lot of jobs which the taxpayers subsidize:  Public educators, policemen, firemen, postal workers, bureaucrats, elected officials and so on.  But you are right, how dare they try and make a living by doing something they feel benefits society.  The nerve! We need to get rid of these greedy individuals. 

If I were you I would be more concerned about the tax breaks and handouts given to big corporations than I would be about Moyers supposed nepotism (you never got a job through a friend or family member? you never helped a friend of family member get a job? you don’t know anybody who has done this?). 

I understand you don’t like that your tax dollars go to pay for NOW.  But don’t they fund a lot more expensive and less useful things than a program which provides information it is hard to find other places?  Haven’t we pumped billions, possibly trillions, of dollars into a missle defense system which is still no closer to working than it was 20 years ago?  Doesn’t the government support a lot of propaganda campaigns which many of its citizens disagree with (abstince only, anti-drug, etc.)?  Doesn’t our government get us into wars that the public initially rejects?  Yet despite all this your problem is not that they spend money on any of these things, but that they give money to a group of people to let us know that some of these fucked up things are going on.  A drop in the bucket compared to SDI for example.

Middle Of Road Or Not?

Middle of the Road sounds like he’s in the middle of the road to fascism.  BTW, MOTR, the way to get a gig like Bill Moyers’ is first to have some talent, second some personality, and three perserverence. 

Three strikes, you’re out MOTR.

Middle of the Road sounds just like any other disgruntled right wing nut who lashes out at anything having to do with intelligent discourse.  Just one more example of the fallacy of “intelligent design” that they so fervently believe in, MOR sounds more like he/she was designed by the Rove Bush camp.

what

“I put it on to remind myself that not every patriot thinks we should do to the people of Baghdad what Bin Laden did to us.”

Now that’s fundamental bias I support! Bill you are one of the most amazing personalities of my lifetime because you speak the truth.

I think you and Jon Stewart need to accept the fact that you’re destined for one another. Get Walter and Dan together and give them hell!

Dear In These Times,

Thank you for printing the article by Bill Moyers. I cannot speak eloquently myself, and am grateful to you for doing this on my behalf. I am encouraged to see so much truth in print....and to see a healthy use of the free speech that is our American right. I yearn for the day when we can all work side by side in peace....toward common goals. It is so unfortunate that there is still a need for journalistic muckraking. But necessary it is. The older I get the more clear it becomes that what is gained by people working out of self interest is definately not always in the interest of the average person. Thank you for speaking out...loudly and clearly about the difficult things that would be easier to ignore. I myself have been in a room with elephants while people pretend they aren’t there. It is aggrevating, frightening, maddening. Hopefully your high profile attention (Bill, and In These Times) on these issues will bring about a change for good. Well, one can hope.

MOTR just wanted to say ‘queer’.As if that negates what Bill Moyer said.

Just another example of the sound byte generation.

Bill Moyers is an American treasure. “We the People” deserve to know the truth, and not many would let us know it. Certainly not many would ruffle the feathers of the “powers that be” to let us know it. As for MOR, we have to respect his or her oppions, but thank God we don’t have to agree with them, at least not yet. If the government has it’s way, we might not be able to continue to enjoy that freedom. Also, MOR don’t kid yourself, the current administration has removed the Middle Of the Road. Now your either on the Right, or on the Left. Middle of the Road really is just “road kill”.

I respect MOR’s right to express his/hers opinion,I’m not required to respect his/hers opinion.

Now that NOW is in the past, there is no reasonable source of straight info on the tube at all. I have fond hopes that the good Mr. Moyers finds a way to return to my front room before I totally reject TV as a medium. I believe that even folks like MOR realize the truth of Moyers’ statements even though they hate to admit it. Sooner or later, the embarrassment of having to defend the governments’ actions will triumph and this insanity will cease. Meanwhile, courage and patience are necessary for survival.

Try and digest what you’re projecting MOR… you may want to have a bucket handy. http://createmaintain.com

Thank you, Bill Moyers. It’s a shame you’re not 30 years younger… The U.S. needs you. Normal citizens who want to be informed, not lied to, need you.

“Objectivity is not satisfied by two opposing people offering competing opinions, leaving the viewer to split the difference.”

Exactly! News coverage has become less a way of informing people of the events and controversies of the day, more a seesaw of opinionating rivalries where the main idea is to attract mass support for one’s own “unbiased” agenda or that of one’s sponsors. Even the charge of bias itself has become less a criticism of fallacious argumentation or incomplete reporting, more an insistence that readers and viewers adopt the bias of the one making the charge.

Why contribute to anyone’s effort to become informed when it’s so much easier to get them to endlessly opinionate? After all, if you can get people to sit in their barcalounger and nod at the TV, saying, “Hey, that guy makes a good point, I agree with him,” they’ll watch your show more. Gotta get that market share, ya know.

A pity the emphasis isn’t upon the viewer saying from his easychair, “Hey, I really learned something about that issue that I didn’t know before.”

What the hell use is a bunch of uninformed opinions, anyway? Other than to motivate mass-action on behalf of one’s “unbiased” agenda.

Would news organizations still help their networks turn a profit if they pushed well-phrased and comprehensive information rather than the choosing of ideological sides? Call me an optimist, but I say they would.

Journalistic influences that encourage snap opinions and that emphasize being “on the right side” of an issue, or that promote the holding of “the popular viewpoint”, as opposed to gaining enough information to actually understand complex modern issues, do nothing to benefit the reader/viewer. Nor do they contribute to the improvement of national culture or intelligence level. It would please me never to see an opinion poll on a news broadcast ever again. And I’d rather converse with a well-informed opponent than a simplistic-minded ally any day. More interesting, and would contribute to my own understanding of the complexities better.

- Bill Moyers
- Jon Stewart
- Dan Rather
- Walter Cronkite

This would pull people away from ANY other program.

What do you say Bill?

BTW FWIW IMHO: PBS was sold out by 1980 anyway.

Shubert--

What’s wrong with Jon Stewart? He’s better than any of the other “anchors” appearing on those corporate-owned and operated networks. Funny--Viacom lets him get away with what he does ‘cause the kids--such as me--are watching. lol

Btw--loved your kick a$$ speech, Bill Moyers. Loved NOW when it was a FULL HOUR. The Brancaccio version is WAY TOO SHORT.

SUPPORT INDIE MEDIA. INSTEAD OF BLOWING YOUR SPENDING CA$H AT THE “BIG BOX” STORES, USE IT TO KEEP REAL HUMAN JOURNALISTS REPORTING!

Bill Moyers in my opinion is a disingenuous paranoid propagandist.  As with all the other liberals posing as journalists that have abandoned their closets due to the events of the last four years, it’s easy looking back to understand what motivated them to cover stories and do documentaries the way they did.  They had an agenda.  Fine, as long as you disclose it.  Hiding behind the cloak of “unaffected, unbiased professional journalist” in order to highlight, kill or simply frame stories to suit your ideology is less than ethical—for people on either side of the aisle. 

Bill Moyers the hypocrite is forever criticizing others for lack of disclosure, but seldom practices what he preaches:

http://tinyurl.com/782w7

Bill Moyers the “journalist” carelessly passed on a wholly made up quote by a former cabinet official and unashamedly misrepresented his entire philosophy.

He took a Senator’s remarks, snipped them, and made believe he was talking about one thing when he was actually talking about something entirely unrelated.

He accused a huge segment of society of something they would likely be flabbergasted to learn about themselves, with scant evidence.

http://tinyurl.com/8hv6q

I’ve come not to believe much of what Moyers says, and not to get suckered in by the false image he projects as a “gentle sweater-wearing seeker of truth”.

Natalie is a classic Machiavellian-conservative.  She accuses her enemies of the crimes for which she is most guilty.

Paranoid, propagandist hypocricy is the conservative stock in trade, Natalie.  And you are what we elder folk call an “all day sucker.”

Either that or you are just a paid whore.

I am very concerned over the direction in which our country is going.  The very thing that makes us who we are, Free Speech, is being destroyed in a sneak attack by this administration and his “handlers”.  Bush is a puppet, empty-headed as any you will encounter. For those of you who voted for him, are you sure your man won?  Or, did his handlers just do a bang-up job of “handling” the election manchines?  Mr. Moyer, please address election fraud.  If it is not made clear to the American public that election fraud is a strong possibility, the next Presidential election is “in their bag”.

What ever happened to a separation of church and state in this country?  How has every political debate become a theological debate?  Didn’t Thomas Jefferson say, “I cannot give up my guidance to the magistrates, because he knows no more the way to heaven than I do,& is less concerned to direct me right than I am to go right.”?  Our founding fathers knew the importance of the separation of church and state to the point that it had been written in the Bill of Rights. Jefferson went on to say, “In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty.  He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection of his own.”. 
As Americans, we should be outraged whenever religion is brought up in political context because it is a direct conflict to our system of government on a fundamental level. Instead this co-mingling of such a huge conflict of interest has become flavor-of-the-day.  This isn’t “America” anymore.  We live in a time akin to the 1500’s when the popes ran the show and sold indulgences to the peasants.  These indulgences were a ruse, fabricated by the church for the sole purpose of raising money.  If anyone on the Christian right would actually pick up a history book, instead of the Bible, you just might start to conclude that we are in at the start of reliving a very dark time in history, where logic stops and fanaticism starts.  If the End of Times is realized in our lifetime, what do you think the wealthy fundamentalist Christian politicians will have to say for themselves when Jesus returns?  Didn’t He say that a camel will have an easier time passing through the eye of a needle than a wealthy man will have passing through the pearly gates?

Mr. Moyers, please come back to us. We need you in this time of tribulation.

Moyers is an overrated blowhard. He was LBJ’s
hatchet job against Goldwater in 64 and later
against Robert Kennedy. Many of us have tired
of his sanctimonious, smug condescension.
His softball interviews with Noam Chomsky and
other tired old leftists.
Liberalism’s time is up, they either get a new
paradigm or forget it.

Spare me your haughty psychoanalysis and your low brow insults, Lefty.  I suspect you’re the one projecting here.  Simply tell us why we should rely on Bill Moyers as an information source when he gets so much wrong.  Or why we should take anyone seriously for that matter, on either side of the aisle, after it becomes clear the reason for their error prone conclusions is blinding partisan hatred.

Paging Dan Rather.
Paging Lefty.

Sincere, honest presentation of life in America, not only seen through the eyes of the powerful elite is an obviously threatening paradigm for all conservatives. 

Bill Moyers is a shining example of the “people’s journalist”, not afraid of the conservative windbags that blow at him constantly.

As usual, Natalie and Jack Barnes are on another planet when it comes to anything that doesn’t agree with their neocon mind set.  Bravo to those in the above posts who thank Mr. Moyers for his reality-based journalism far more eloquently than the drivel spewed by few troll detractors, ludicrously huffing and puffing in vain.  Your protestations only serve to assure us of our very correct assessment of Mr. Moyer.

We are witnessing the death of objectivity in our
own time. When will we realize that the United
States is leading the charge to oblivion?

Hey Jack,
Liberalism’s time is up?  What do you think Jesus would say about that?

Natalie

You say you can’t trust Moyers.  But can we trust you and the Weekly Standard (the paper you link to as evidence of Moyers incompetence), a paper owned by a man intent on destroying both the BBC and public broadcasting in the US (Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp).  You are so fucking transparent.  Go to NewsMaxx or somewhere you belong.

Well said, Proud Vet.  As a participant in the SE Asia conflict in ‘68/’69, I’ve seen lots of political, social, economic, and environmental changes, good and bad, in the years (decades!) since.  I’ve never witnessed such a marked change toward rule by the aristocracy as I’ve witnessed under the current neoconservative political machine.  And, as you’ve pointed out, history has shown that this type of rule is always accompanied by involving religion to either frighten or manipulate the masses.  We are definitely under the rule of an oligarchy with a puppet monarch propped up by its leaders.  In my opinion, we will very soon progress into circumstances directly comparable to the pre-Revolutionary War times of rule by England’s oligarchy-cum-monarchy that used religion so effectively to achieve its goals.

Religion is to guide us according to our individual interpretations, not to force our will on others.  Neocons hypocritically claim to promote individual freedoms as our Founders intended for our country, but, instead, said neocons promote force, overt or covert, to limit freedoms.  These are the same people who joyfully claim they’ve finally begun to institute free markets when no such thing exists in America or anywhere else; there aren’t even “relatively” free markets in existence.  What hypocrisy.  Neocons do not believe in liberty, freedom, or the Constitution but proclaim they do and they do so as “loudly” as possible hoping that the volume will convince more of the populace that they uphold the values of our Founders.  And by using religion as a whip, much as they do by using “un-American” to describe those who disagree with them, they control a very large segment of the population.

But the neocons are losing their grip.  Much as they try, they will not be able to control communications, the secret in any era to achieving totalitarian rule without opposition.  If the neocons truly believed in freedom of speech and an unfettered press, they would be defending Moyers’ rights to his opinions.  We are all now able to see and read on a daily basis the neocon misuse of the airwaves and so their hypocrisy is ever more apparent.  And the American people are finally beginning to recognize the neocon misuse of religion as a weapon.

I find it hard to believe there are so many ostriches out there who would rather bury their heads in the sand rather than consider the extent to which the American public is being shorn like a herd of sheep for the benefit of a select few. The cronyism of the current administration is so much worse than any small nepotism on Mr. Moyers’ part that it hardly bears mention. Who else speaks up on our behalf and tries to tell the truth?

Barnes

A softball interview is much more than any network has even thought of giving Chomsky.  They have effectively kept him off all the major networks for years despite the fact that he speaks for a lot of people in this country.  The far right can be heard all over the television.  The far left can’t (and most of chomsky’s views are not as far from the mainstream as you think).  So when Moyers has an interview with him isn’t it understandable, especially given Moyers demeanor, that he would go easy on him?  Besides, is berating your guest as has become the custom these days the only way to get information out of someone?  Are you so caught up in this angry Bill O’reilly rhetoric that you know no other way of communicating? Can you only understand the world in regards to conflict?  If so I feel sorry for you. 

What exactly did you want him to throw hardballs at him for anyway? The man is a professor, not a war criminal.  Did you want him to play hardball with Joseph Campbell in the Power of Myth documentary? Are you mad at Chomsky for Criticizing the US?  If so than you have never actually read or listened to him.  If you want to live in a country where you can’t criticize the government than move to North Korea.  That seems to be what you are celebrating when you say liberalism’s time is up.

Hurrah for you 1nonservilepeasant. A true patriot is not one who follows blindly.
Like the homophobes who are so unsure of their own sexual identity that they beat up gays to prove their “manhood” to themselves, the religious fanatics in this country must beat up, literally or figuratively, any dissenters in order to quell their own doubts. It seems a true Christian would simply live his or her own life according to personal belief and just feel sorry for those who feel differently rather than try to destroy them, which seems more and more to be their wont. The funny thing is that those politicians who flaunt their religion most conspicuously seem to be those whose personal morals and political ethics are most in question. I think it was St. Matthew who advised against making a public display of one’s religion.

Please, Bill, do come back to the anchor chair. You know very well that, here in Texas, a person might get a badly-skewed view of the world, if it weren’t for people like you, telling the truth. Get where I can see you all the time, and hear your voice, even if it’s a voice in the wilderness, out here in West Texas!

<Jack Barnes wrote:  Liberalism’s time is up, they either get a new
paradigm or forget it.>

Liberalism’s time has not yet arrived, but it’s right around the corner.  And liberalism has new meaning.  If you’re not up on the new paradigm, you’re a little behind the times.  By the way, Conservatism as was practiced by the good old traditional Republicans, is dead and its new paradigm is defined by neo-liberalism practiced by neoconservatives.  How do you like them apples, Jack.

The new Revolution’s a-comin’.

1nonservilepeasant you have helped restore my faith in the future.  I sincerely thank you.

<jules timerman wrote:  We are witnessing the death of objectivity in our
own time. When will we realize that the United States is leading the charge to oblivion?>

I must respectfully disagree with your first sentence.  We are witnessing the birth of objectivity.  In this thread there are communications occurring between people with possibly diametric viewpoints.  How better to convert from subjectivity to objectivity than to study the views of others?  Communication is the key.

The US “is leading the charge to oblivion,” I must sadly agree.  However, we will change the direction of our country by—how else—communication.  Learning about our fallacies will help us create new strategy and tactics.  Lack of communication can cause oblivion, not the practice of it.

I agree, Proud Vet.  No matter what the trolls say, I feel it coming.  Make sure to go online and sign the following link:

http://www.johnconyers.com/

Sign Congressman Conyers’ letter demanding an explanation of the “Downing Street Memo” from President Bush.  He also has initiated the call for a House investigation of Bush and Cheney on the grounds of high crimes and lying to Congress.  The optimal result is impeachment for both.

Oh, the times, they are a’changin’!

Bill,

I gotta hand it to you.I admire you more the more of you I read.

You did make a big mistake when you thought you change the status quo with intelligent and incisive reporting.News and entertainment are now commutative.Sixty minutes is only barely tolerated.We’re being conditioned not to think,but to react.Like August Krapptauer,we’re becoming people who think with our guts instead of our heads.

Interesting note about the little lapel flags.I remember twenty years ago when only the Lyndon Larouche crowd and John Birchers regularly wore them.Now,you almost have to wear one to avoid scandal.Meanwhile,the little flag-pin CEO is buying another Lamborghini.

I live through the days of the white citizens council in Mississippi. I was an attorney with the Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights, I was followed, my phone was tapped, I was arrested, etc.

It all follows a grand plan when those in power hunger for more power, more control, and more rhetoric.

Bill keep up the good work.

<Natalie wrote:  . . . Or why we should take anyone seriously for that matter, on either side of the aisle, after it becomes clear the reason for their error prone conclusions is blinding partisan hatred.>

In yesterday’s Hillary-bashing segment, Sean Hannity conveniently omitted the vital information that David Rosen was acquitted May 27th of all charges of campaign finance violations (something yet to come for many neocons).  I’ll be presumptuous here that you are a Hannity-watcher and ask you if this is responsible journalism.  Based on the large audience for Hannity’s drivel, is the network taking advantage for increased profit from shabby journalism “blind[ed] by partisan hatred” in this case?

The daily examples of right-wing pundits selectively disseminating information for “conservative” advantage is overwhelming.  They misrepresent, distort, omit, and outright lie on occasion.  No more hypocrisy.  Please.

I wonder what your analysis will be of the information disseminated by the neo-PBS if the neocons get their way.  Neocon has new meaning:  New Conmen (and –women).

Mr. Moyers:

I hope you will seriously consider seeking a “commentator’s” spot on one or more of the major news shows. I am old enough to remember Eric Sevareid’s opinion pieces and the thought they provoked in the listener/viewer. TV has become much too passive a medium these days.
Secondarily, I would *love* to see you added to The Daily Show’s lineup, which after all is becoming a major source of news and “news” for younger viewers.
In short, I hope you will be successfully tempted out of your “rocking chair” and at least into the “guest’s chair” of as many shows as you can handle comfortably. We need you now more than ever.  <*G*>

Margaret, first time I’ve ever been called a neocon !
Proud Vet, who was Jesus ?
Moyers is another partisan hack, he has every right to his predictable stock left-liberal not
terribly thoughtful opinions but let’s take him
off that pedestal, folks ! Even RFK thought our
Bill a doubledealing, two-faced stinker.

nonservile peasant, the revolution was not the one
Dylan sang about but then your still sleeping
through it.

Oh, yeah, Margaret, let’s trot out those old 60s
losers again ! The times they are a changing all
right but not where you predicted.
How big did you say Kerry was going to win by ?
Everybody go to Alex Cockburn’s Commie Counterpunch website and look at Joshua Frank’s
analysis of Madwoman Pelosi’s speech before
AIPAC last week.
Then tear up your Democratic Party card !
Not a dime’s worth of difference !
And yeah, Conyers resolutions be carryin’ a
whole lot of weight on the Hill..........
What are you Dummycrats smoking ?

<Jack Barnes wrote:  nonservile peasant, the revolution was not the one Dylan sang about but then your still sleeping through it.>

Well, Jack, you’ll have to provide some clarification here.  You speak of a revolution in the past tense, but I speak of one that has not yet occurred but soon will.  But you just go ahead and live in your metaphorical cave and we’ll let you know when it’s all over.

You might want to clarify what “still sleeping through it” means as well; as of now it’s nonsensical.

Come on Jack, you know who Jesus was!  He was the liberal that was nailed to a cross because the ruling class at the time disagreed with his claim that God was benevolent.

JB-

I’ve assumed from your various postings that you were a Libertarian.  But what I’ve come to realize is that most of that crew are really neocons in sheep’s clothing.  You bash anything that doesn’t represent your “peaceful chaos”, which is, rightly, an oxymoron.  When you drone on about how screwed up the Dems are, you turn a blind eye to how much worse the Repubs are at this time in history.  It’s not the Dems that perpertrated voter/election fraud in order to win in ‘04, who blatantly lied about the reasons for Iraq, and, well, the list really just goes on and on.

And we haven’t missed the revolution...it’s just beginning.

p.s.

It took 2 years from the Watergate break-in until the investigation really took shape and forced a humiliated Nixon to resign. Conyers and his team are starting the ball rolling, the rest will happen with gravity and time.  So, better to ask, JB, where do you have your head stuck in rather than what are we “smoking”.  My favorite “stuff” is truth, how about you?

you know, after 7 years living outside the country, living in both europe and now central america (and mexico) it always blows my mind when i watch the right attack the left...it is so much like the kid who farts in class and accuses the little boy sitting next to him that it would be funny if the truth were not lost because of it...all i can say is...bill moyers has done an amazing job supporting and finding the truth...and does it ever cross your mind, followers of the right, that maybe you are too afraid to think that maybe...just maybe...there is another story out there, closer to the truth...are you capable of facing the fact that your government does not care about you or yours if it gets in the way of there power...are you strong enough to find out what is really going on...are you capable of leaving the story you have been telling yourself behind...because my question is...what does bill moyers gain from his point of view? what does he get? money, power, all those things you find important? no
doesnt the reaction of your government to his stories make you wonder why they act that way, considering he does stories on protecting human rights, over-reaching government power and the cover ups of those who control this country? guess not...but i sure wish it did…

Margaret, neocons and libertarians represent diametrical opposites. Neocons are mostly former
liberal Dems who left the party because they didn’t think it was hawkish enough after the 60s.
Scoop Jackson, Moynihan, Hubert Humphrey are the
turkeys who fathered the Elliott Abrams and William Kristols and Jeaane Kirkpatricks, ad nauseum. They came from your pary, not mine !
If you read Pelosi’s wacko speech to AIPAC, she
positioned herself to the RIGHT of Bush on the
Middle East and that’s just crazy. I think the
Repugs are absolute bums too. But I don’t share
your naivete about the Dems.
Proud Vet, dude, lay off that grass, ok ?
Jesus was a mythical character, I mean a Jewish
carpenter born of Virgin Birth who was the son of
God ? You actually believe that stuff ?
Nonservile peasant, well, according to all the
Dems here the revolution began with Reagan and
W is just intensifying it, I take that to mean ongoing. The one you speak of went up in LSD
dreams 35 years ago.
Time to wake up, pal.

On line five of my last posting, I left out the “t” in party.
Margaret, I don’t smoke. Truth is great but you
libs can only take it in small doses.
After all the Bush scandals I’d say the Watergate
analogy looks lame. Don’t be Generals fighting the
last war.
Colby, please rewrite your thoughts in a coherent
structure and I’ll respond.

<Jack Barnes wrote:  . . . What are you Dummycrats smoking ?>

I sincerely hope, and I cannot overstate how important this is, that there are a lot more “out there” like you, Jack.  Our tasks will go so much easier and our goals achieved so much quicker with people such as you.  You make it crystal clear how a republic can become tyrannical because of its tendency to attract power mongers who will claim a mandate with a 51% majority, and how such a majority is willing to jam down the throats their policies no matter how opposite they are to the remaining 49%.  You demonstrate the lack of creativity that inhibits the search for solutions that benefit the most Americans.  You are content to make certain that those who are in agreement with you benefit and that the rest either fall in lockstep or—what Jack?

One of the biggest dangers of a republic is that it can be taken over by the few and shut out the many.  To accomplish this requires inattentiveness by the masses.  It is the “Dummycrats” fault that this happened, but we have learned our lessons well.  And the anti-neocons will prevail in taking us back to where we should be and will then improve upon it until we achieve what our Founders intended.  We will achieve a republic governed by, for, and of the People.

Our Founders did not intend for the Federal government to act as pseudo-oligarchs/monarchs; they intended for individuals to find solutions that did not divide America but brought the people liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  Diametrically opposed camps consisting of tens of millions of people will not accomplish these goals.  It takes creativity and the willingness to expend the energy to find the right solutions.  You have not yet shown any such notion.  Please continue to aid our cause by spouting the neocon drivel (and, please, take this with the sarcasm with which it was intended).

It’s okay, Proud Vet, I know Jesus very well.  JB just can’t deal with the truth, so ignore him.

JB, I keep hearing this diametrically opposed crap, but it’s not what I see in action.  Libertarians want absolute free market in which there are little to no regulations, and the workers (though contrary to what Libertarians say about their concern for individual and property rights) become the drones for the corporations (who would have melded together with government).  It’s just like a double-bind message in the psychological sense, it only hurts the one pulled both ways by asymmetrical powers. 

Finally, me and the hundreds of thousands who bombarded the Sinclair Broadcasting Group prior to the election when they wanted to further smear Kerry on the night before the election were absolutely successful in stopping that broadcast by contacting corporations and telling them we’d boycott if they sponsored it.  Kerry didn’t lose anyway, if you check your stats, JB.  Love those electronic fraud, oops, I mean voting machines.

Lastly, please sign the letter to the House of Representatives to begin an investigation into the illegal acts of this administration.  Impeachment is the absolute goal, and it can be achieved if we work relentlessly--just like in Watergate, just like in the Civil Rights movement.  Please go on, sign and forward to everyone you know.

http://capwiz.com/pdamerica/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=7655491

Hey Jack,
Why are you accusing everyone with a different belief than yours to be drug abusers?  Kind of infantile, don’t you think?

I seem to have
problems with my keyboard. 
I tell other people they are incoherent, but I am so
pent up that I can’t
stop hitting the return key. Good thing I don’t have to
use a typewriter anymore.  Imagine how much
paper I would waste.  Anyway, writing
like this helps distract people from
the fact that I can’t outline a thought longer
than a soundbite. Maybe I should stop asking
others what they are smoking and instead
take my adderall for once.

Jack, Neoconservatives are defined much differently now just as Democrats, Republicans, liberals, and conservatives no longer fit traditional definitions.  Neocons are Hobbesians; get a clue.

You offend me by your contention that my religion is mythical and false.  I don’t know what your ideology is, but it certainly isn’t Libertarian if you think it’s acceptable to attack another’s religious beliefs.  I’ve been studying Libertarianism for a few years and have gotten to know many of them quite well.  None of them would attack another’s religion.  And none of them would attempt to force their will on others.  Libertarian philosophy contains some very good ideas, ideas I believe should appeal to both traditional Democrats and traditional Republicans.  Of course, there are also some off-the-wall ideas as other ideologies contain.  Studying this ideology has given me the wonderful opportunity to read the writings of Dr. Ron Paul (R-TX) who is one of the most honorable and intelligent people I’ve ever read about.  However, none of my studies of Libertarianism and participation in their online forums has introduced me to anyone with your propensity to lambast the ideas of others and to attempt to sway opinions by deriding theirs—except in numerous neocon forums in which people promoting ideas not in agreement with the Bushistas are attacked as un-American subversives.

I’ll let the discussion of the upcoming Revolution go; after a couple of attempts you still don’t get it.  Your participation in it will be passive and inconsequential.

<Jack Barnes wrote:  Colby, please rewrite your thoughts in a coherent structure and I’ll respond.>

Of course, colby’s is one of the most coherent, thought-provoking, and insightful posts that I’ve read in quite some time.  Jack, this request of yours for more coherency is a dramatic example that it is you who is sleepy.  In fact, after reading colby’s post again, I believe that if you consider it incoherent, you may be just short of comatose.

That we still put so much effort into coming up with clever reactions to the profound questions of our time shows how much we need thoughtful research and analysis of today’s happenings. It’s hard to think and talk at the same time.

In honor of Bill Moyers’ courageous search for truth, I dedicate space for silence. Let’s think about what this controversy means for public-sponsored media and how we might find solutions.

Thank you.

With all due respect, silence and sitting around thinking don’t accomplish shit.  It’s way past time to scream at the top of our lungs, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not gonna take it any more!”

Personally, I’d rather see Moyers getting out the vote than garnering market share for any broadcast network - such would be doing the most good if heroics are truly what is called for at this stage of the game (battle). And indeed, the battle for PBS has already been lost as I see it.

I can remember great PBS programming that once inspired a generation of young Americans, and particularly highlighted by those productions initiated at WGBH, Boston. Whereas today, programmers are reluctant to fund or present any material that might possibly offend the extreme right conservatives: There’s been a noticeable “dumbing down” factor operating at PBS and elsewhere because of meddling conservative minority views gone wild.

Damned if you do though, Bill, for sure. But then again, damned if you don’t. I just wish I didn’t have to cast my vote every election for the lesser of two evils because the proverbial bull is starting to pile up so high anymore, a body needs wings just to stay above it all.

With apologies, my hymn’s to the silence.

I miss Bill on PBS!  All of us who think that the attack on PBS is wrong, should donate whatever we can afford. After that, write a letter to the editor of your local paper explaining what is happening and why it is so wrong!

The most telling part of the speech was at the beginning when Moyers compared himself to Jesus Christ. Sheesh.

Bill was the reason to watch PBS.  I lost my reason.  Thank you so much for the intelectual point of view, for the truth and witt.

Enjoyed so much your performance.  You are conscience of humanity.

Jack Barnes,

I oddly agree with you.  The ‘revolution’ probably isn’t going to be like the one Leary envisioned.  Who alive during the prosperous 60’s could have possibly forseen the dismantling of the social structure, the plummeting of education, the loss of manufacturing and agriculture, the reliance on technology, the thinning of resources and capital, the shrinking of the middle class, the rapid mutation of environment, and the astouding evolutionary adaptability of the Asian world? 

However, after re-reading your posts, I cannot find any attempt on part to impart wisdom to our fellow posters, only contempt; so I would like to help you.  It seems as if you genuinely care about your country, but are frustrated with other ideas you feel lack weight.  I sympathize. 

Therefore, I would like to give you an introduction to the wonderful world of LSD.  It acts as a catalyst, stimulating the pineal gland (the Hindu “3rd eye”, which calcifies after adolescence) to secrete, allowing for new neural pathways to be formed, just like when you were pre-pubescent, and every day was fresh and beautiful.  It is true that some mistake their imaginative projections as real, but you will find that the pyschic realm is trickier when your mind’s eye is paying attention to sense data normally ignored.  Our brain takes in 400 billion units of sense data every second, yet we process only 2000! 

I hope you experiment, as it may lead to realize your waking life has been largely illusory.  It may give you more compassion when debating with others, realizing the mental barriers they may inhabit, and will change the way you argue - not to judge and criticize, but to work for mutual advantage, for the survival of all. 

Happy hunting!

This is the most telling part of the speech for Scott:

“I should remind them, however, that one of our boys pulled it off some 2,000 years ago — after the Pharisees, Sadducees and Caesar’s surrogates thought they had shut him up for good. Of course I won’t be expecting that kind of miracle, but I should put my detractors on notice: They might just compel me out of the rocking chair and back into the anchor chair.”

I hate to trouble you Scott, but which part is most “telling” to you and what does it “tell you”?  If it’s too much for you to explain, why don’t you just save the tripe and STFU?!

Dear Bill Moyers,
Please wear your seatbelt, eat 5-7 servings of veggies and fruits, exercise for at least 1/2 hour, and take your vitamins each day.
We need you, your intelligence, your compassionate voice.
fm
PS watch your back…

I watch PBS programs on a regular basis and they do have a leftist slant. I take most of what they say with a grain of salt. My wife and I are both succesful college graduates and haved paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes over our working lives. I get the sense we are the enemy of the people because of this. If my tax dollars go to support PBS and NPR why do they deride those with conservative values? I was a Democrat most of my life but no more. Will Frontline ever do a piece on the corruption at the UN? Will the Nightly News do a piece on the twenty thousand infant rapes that occur in South Africa every year? Would these public corporations ever tell the American people of the extreme leftist groups that now support Democratic Party canidates? I continue to watch PBS and listen to NPR to inform myself of how extremism has turned the once moral Democratic Party into a group of grasping socialist.

Nonservile, my apologies but my reading comprehension is limited to human languages,
mainly english. The only decipherable part
of your whatever-it-is concerns libertarianism.
Ayn Rand, though she totally disavowed the label,
was the intellectual godfather of this philosophy
and she was extremely polemical. She believed
in being the first to give a solid kick to the
balls. You must be hanging around the sissy pants
libertarians of the Brandenroid variety if you
consider me too rough. I really do not need your
advice as to what neocons are, I have been following these Israel First traitors for 35 years
now and they have largely destroyed the conservative movement. Ron Paul would be an
atheist if he was as intelligent as you proclaim.
Yes, we Objectivists do attack the ignorant superstition known as religion.
Now go home and wash your panties.

Richard Gonzales,

Actually, a study done in 2003 showed that a slightly higher number of conservative issues were covered on NPR than liberal.  It is a myth that NPR is liberal, just as it is a myth that the MSM is liberal.  Sorry you switched to the Dark Side, Anakin.

Margaret, so Kerry WON the election !
Bush actually stole the four million vote difference ?
Damn ! Does it get warm under all the tinfoil ?
Matt H., before you give up on reasoning, thinking and logic, why not give it a try ?
Rocco, have you been feeding nonservile great gobs of LSD ?

Who did the study ? NPR is mostly BORING centrist
doubletalk.

Jack,

You’re an Objectivist!  Now I’m able to comprehend how you got to the stage you’re in.  It’s a shame that you fell into this poorly constructed methodology that will achieve nothing but destruction.  You don’t claim neocon status, but, by adhering to Objectivist precepts, you are dead center in the middle of neocon economic policy.  It won’t work unless it’s developed properly and the neocons know this.  That’s why it’s been set up to benefit only a small portion of the populous and to use the rest of us for modern slave labor.  It will fail.

Someday, true free markets will be established, but first the best of a variety of philosophies will have to be milked to produce a new system.  The new system will permit creativity and hard work to reward all people who are willing to participate.  There will be no politicized tax system in which only certain very small groups can make progress.  It will take some time, but it will happen.

In the meantime, encase your copy of Atlas Shrugged in glass and worship it.  Keep the glass clean with your panties—but check them out first to make sure they’re not soiled!

I’d have to look it up.  I read it in my local (large metro) newspaper and clipped it out, but have since discarded it.  Besides, even you admit the trend to be “centrist”.

It just cracks me up that Richard complains about money spent on free public broadcasting, but I don’t hear one mention of the BILLIONS spent on an illegal, illogical and unwinnable war in Iraq.  Please, Richard, get your priorities in order.

Richard,

Somewhere, somehow, we should get the news, just the news.  It would be great if we could depend on PBS to do it.  I think this is what we should all fight for.  The mainstream commercial visual media is going to provide whatever slant coincides with the political majority.  Like Dylan sang, we “don’t need a Weatherman to tell which way the wind blows.” The Internet is the only place to be sure one can find enough variety with which to use critical thought processes properly in decision making.  I think I get more news about the rest of the world by getting daily e-mail newsletters from the Independent and the Times in the UK than I get from US news sources.

I hope you’ll reconsider your opinion of the Democratic Party.  I vote almost strictly Democrat these days because I am so strongly anti-neocon.  I’ve heard this claim about Socialists many times in the past, but I’ve never met any or participated in any discussions in any forums with any and I’m 57 years old.  By this time in history, most everyone clearly sees that neither Socialism nor Fascism will work.  Any far-left- or far-right-wingers supporting Democrat or Republican causes will be small in number.  The Democratic Party is changing dramatically for the better, in my humble opinion.

Jesus Christ, nonservile, is stealing my punchlines the best you can do ?
You’d give an aspirin a headache !
Can’t make heads or tails of what you’re
blabbering about.
Margaret, agree with you about the war.
But if it was happening under BillyBalls
you’d be supporting it.

<rocco wrote: . . . to work for mutual advantage, for the survival of all.>

I like the Secessionist idea that, if we can’t find a way to get 8 or 9 out of 10 people to agree to do something, then forget about it; back to the drawing board.  Maximum creativity and effort would have to be expended to come up with such agreeable solutions.  And what could possibly be wrong with that?  If our Federal government did only what we instructed it to do, it would have plenty of time for creativity in finding solutions that worked for almost everyone.  By applying that method, the citizens of America should be able to come up with solutions to suit almost everyone for supporting and programming PBS.

<Jack Barnes wrote: . . . is stealing my punchlines the best you can do?>

Your reference to panties is not your punch line; I’ve read it dozens of times in forum discussions over the years.  However, I do apologize to the other posters for using it as it is truly infantile.

<Jack Barnes wrote:  Can’t make heads or tails of what you’re blabbering about.>

That’s quite obvious, Jack.  It’s okay, though.  Just don’t let it get you down.

Don’t flatter yourself, servile !
But you do give one a bad headache..........
Now eat your lunch while they have the restraints
off.

On Chomsky, just read your posting.
Had 20 years of correspondence with him,
reviewed two of his books favorably for Left
publications and read all his work.
He is an unmitigated liar on issues ranging
from Cambodia to the two-state nonsolution in
Palestine to the nonexistent genocides he
incorrectly predicted for Afghanistan and Clinton’s killing of one person in Sudan factory.
He is an apologist for Communist state terror,
see the statement of his contemptible and treasonous visit to North Vietnam in 1970.
Read The Anti-Chomsky Reader by Horowitz and
Collier and go to frontpage.com and download
What Chomsky Really Wants. I’m not a neocon
and normally don’t agree with Horowitz but he
has nailed Chomsky at least 50% accurately.
Chomsky regularly gets softball interviews over
the Pacific Radio Network too.
Can go into many more details if you wish.
He’s an overrated, overindulged, deeply intellectually dishonest piece of crap who’s
anti-American to the core and he’s a super-statist, NOT an anarchist of any sort.

Above remarks on Chomsky were addressed to disseminator,just read his posting.
Another Chomsky cultist. PHEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWW !

What “who” instructed FedGov to do ?
Nonservile, are you incapable of writing a coherent sentence ?????
Government as Washington said is not reason, not
eloquence but FORCE, a dangerous servant and a
fearful master.
Shut down PBS and its neocon Pentagon cheerleading
programming now ! They do not need a penny, let them get it all from the corporate ADM whores who fund them now.

Yo, Jack.  Take a time out, man.  I think the problem you’re having is that you cannot comprehend coherent sentences.

One good point, though; shut down PBS.

How about a start over and support it with voluntary funding from individuals.  The funds allocated through a board elected by contributors, but contributors get only one vote no matter how much the contribution; prevents buying influence.  All votes require 90% for passage; stirs creative thinking and discussion.  Same with programming.

Got any suggestions, Jack, or just complaints and rants?

Also, I agree with Washington.  It’s just that it can’t be changed overnight.  Chaos at this stage will be lethal; changes need time but we need to give the changes priority to shorten the time.  It’s very similar to alternative fuels; there always seems to be an excuse not to give it priority.  Now, here we are 30+ years later and alternative fuels are still not mainstream.  The same with major governmental changes; it’s just too big a job, apparently.  It’s time to change priorities now or we’ll being looking decades down the road at the same situation.

I would NOT have supported going into Iraq under any president with the prewar intelligence we had. At least history will remember Clinton well, as the joke of his “impeachment” will fade away as the partisan maneuver that it was. Bush will be remembered for incompetent fool he is.

Margaret, we agree the GOP impeachment was a joke
but most leftists I know hated Clinton, NAFTA
for starters which has destroyed US industry
and much of agriculture, welfare deform which
ended New Deal guarantee of safety net for the
poorest, 60 new capital crimes under monstrous
anti-crime bill in 94 which also limited habeas
corpus, sanctions on Iraq which killed millions
and which Madwoman Allbright tried to justify,
bombings of Iraq, etc. Lying campaign with Blair
on war on Yugoslavia and so forth.
He was not the worst but not great either.
We agree on Bush, I hated both Bushes.
Nonservile, agree pretty much with most of your
comments. We may have different definitions
of sentence coherency but your last posting
was easier to take in. Thanks.

1nonservilepeasant wrote:
“One good point, though; shut down PBS.”

Well, there goes the neighborhood.

<Tim Christopher wrote:  And indeed, the battle for PBS has already been lost as I see it.>

and:

<"One good point, though; shut down PBS.”
Well, there goes the neighborhood.>

Tim, unless I misunderstand the situation, PBS’s problems are from interference by both politicians and corporations.  Politicians are there because tax dollars are used and corporations are there for advertising.  Then, of course, politicians want to influence programming and corporations go which way the wind blows and want to influence programming (now they think more “conservatives” are watching).  Is there a way to change the scenario?  I’m not smart enough to have found the answer other than to start over and keep politicians and corporate influence out.  If corporations want to give voluntarily for minor mention in programming, fine, except that they should have only one vote just as I would as a miniscule contributor.  If tax dollars aren’t used, then politicians won’t be involved, except as individual contributors if they so choose.

I’m hoping that people will begin making suggestions now that we’ve discussed many issues not related to PBS, and we’ve all possibly gotten enough stuff off our chests.  I want a PBS, I believe it’s vitally important to all Americans, but how do we start the process?

Although I do think Chomsky is correct on a lot of issues, I disagree with him on many others, so I am by no means a Chomsky cultist.  However, I don’t agree with you that he is anti-american or a soviet apologist.  Anything I have read by him has made a point of showing how both powers operated in a similar manner; the Soviet Union keeping an iron fist on third world countries (primarily eastern europe) and the united states doing the same (primarily in latin america) all while doing their best to keep their citizens unaware.  The reason, in my opinion (obviously), he gets called unamerican is because as a citizen of the US he has been most vocal in criticizing his own country, because he probably feels if he can influence it more than one he is not a citizen of. 

Also, if he has told so many lies.  Give me one good one.  When I say good one I mean like if you would have told me he lied about atrocities in El Salvador for example, or something to that effect.  I am not talking about some detail that he exagerated, or something that doesn’t really detract from his argument. 

I think you agree with many of the people who post on this site which is why I find your confrontational attitude baffling.  It is not becoming of someone who is probably twice my age.  It makes you come off as immature and bruitish (ala Bill O’Reilly or any other pundit for that matter).  It creates enemies where you may have found allies.  It does not help people converse and exchange ideas.  It only enrages them towards each other.  If we can only relate to each other in terms of opposition and arguing than we should all just stop talking now, because it will profit us nothing.

Actually there are too many examples to give,
which is why I referred to sources which document
this. But just to give a couple; after 9-11 based
on one report he had read in the NY Times he predicted a silent genocide in Afghanistan because
Bush’s intervention was going to allow the Afghanis to starve to death, he tried to backtrack
when it didn’t happen and claimed he was only quoting the Times but in fact he kept repeating
this claim for months and months, I saw one video
of him at Harvard in early 2002 repeating this
same story even though it had been discredited
and other stories in the same paper contradicted
that story shortly after it appeared. He never mentions those other stories and keeps repeating
this utterly false claim and is not enough of a
man or a scholar to admit he was dead wrong.
If Bush hadn’t intervened there very well might
have been a not so silent genocide because the
Taliban nuts were expelling all the foreign aid
workers from the country.
Then on Clinton’s unfortunate bombing of a factory
in the Sudan which killed ONE person, Chomsky is
still carrying on that the death toll from the
factory being hit likely exceeded 9-11 ! And he
quotes Human Rights Watch Africa, they totally
disavowed his claim and said emphatically no such
thing had happened. He still uses them as a source
for this ! Chomsky never cops to ANYTHING and his
criticisms of the Soviet Union were always very
quick pro forma takes till he could get back to
his favorite subject of the US as Nazi Germany.
Chomsky still hasn’t retracted his Cambodian
Holocaust Denial even though he was proven dead
wrong on this. He’s the world’s most arrogant
ass and should be depants & have his ass whipped
publicly. I could go and on and on, just take
a look at my own correspondence with him and how
evasive he was when cornered in a misstatement.
No he is anti-American and anti-capitalist to the
core.
His take that America entered the Vietnam to keep
down the threat of Ho Chi Minh’s good example
is just sheer ahistorical lunacy ! Ho ran a total
police state and like all Communist command economies his was in the toilet. But then Noam
has never had any use for economics which he
regards as pro-capitalist and biased.
Noam totally downplayed the massive VC terror in
Vietnam, the Sandinista brutality against the
Miskuito Indians, the many atrocities committed
by the FSLN in El Salvador and so on.
Chomsky’s grovelling visit to the Stalinist
dictatorship in North Vietnam in 1970 is quite
indicative of his real pro-Communist apologetics.
As far as my demeanor here goes, I really do not
pay attention to bursts of selective indignation.
I have basically reacted to several people here, so just to condemn the reaction and ignore the provocation is not helpful.

On the Sudan bombing and his preposterous claim
that thousands or more might have been killed
due to disruption of pharmaceutical supplies,
his only other “source” was the leftist former
Ambassador to Sudan from Germany, Werner Daum,
who “estimated” that it was possible that thousands had died but had never studied the
matter or done any research !
Not an untypical Chomsky “sourcing.”

<Jack Barnes wrote:  I have basically reacted to several people here, so just to condemn the reaction and ignore the provocation is not helpful.>

Now that your rants are over, for now anyway, I’m enjoying your discourse; now it’s a learning experience for me, and learning is what I crave.

I’ll pass on Chomsky though.  I know it’s wrong to hold grudges, but, even though I eventually learned that the Vietnam conflict was wrong for a lot of reasons, I was in the SE Asia theater in ‘68/’69, and I believe that anyone who will downplay those particular enemies either lacks accurate knowledge of the situations or chooses to ignore the realities.

I am having difficulty determining your opinion.  Are you saying that you condone the atrocities committed by the US?  If so than you are no better than Chomsky condoning Ho Chi Minh because he holds a similar ideology.  If not than what problem do you have with Chomsky for pointing them out?  I am sure you agree with some of his views just as you agree with some of Horowitz’s views despite other misgivings you have about him.  Yet you seem to give Horowitz the benefit of the doubt.  Why not Chomsky? 

Perhaps you and Horowitz both share a blind love for capitalism.  As Chomsky holds a blind love for anything not capitalism. 

But honestly, I am not even that big a Chomsky fan.  I just found it annoying how you would think that Moyers would go on the attack against Chomsky.  The man only gets coverage in the left wing press, so for Moyers to go on the attack with a lot of the things you just mentioned seemed absurd.  Especially considering a lot of them seem like nitpicking (so he can’t predict the future in afghanistan), or opinion based (would all those lefties watching PBS really care if he is “unamerican” because he concentrated on american backed atrocities in El Salvador for example as opposed to those in retaliation against those atrocities). 

Also, I agree with you on his sourcing.  I don’t know any other author who cites their own work as much as Chomsky.

Jack has had little to say of Moyers’ softball interview with Lew Rockwell.
Come on Jack, let’s hear more of your deconstruction of the Civil War, slavery, and the rest of your coded white supremacist jargon.
Objectivism and state’s rights--music to the ears of the Klan, Christian Identity Movement, Aryan Nation, and the Golden Knights.  Your arguments fill their pages.  For them Lew is an icon.  You are onboard, too, spewing the same vitriol.

I was never a supporter of the US going into
a war in Indochina but unlike Chomsky I condemn
the atrocities committed on all sides.
He only condemns American ones. He says those are
the ones he can do something about but that reasoning is specious. Surely he condemned the
Nazi atrocities even though he couldn’t do zip
about them.
I wasn’t nitpicking as regards Afghanistan.
When someone makes an accusation that the US
Government is perpetrating a silent genocide
when that accusation has no basis in fact needs
to be called on the carpet. Ergo with his totally
irresponsible accusations on Clinton’s killing
of one person, probably in error, over what they
thought was an Al Queda chemical facility in the Sudan. Chomsky in an exchange with Christopher
Hitchens in The Nation actually had the gall to
compare that to Bin Laden’s intentional mass murders on 9-11 ! These are not minor errors and a person who does not own up to them is a scoundrel at the very least.
With all due respect to your valid point about the larger electronic media blackout on Chomsky,
there’s no reason Moyers couldn’t have asked
a few tough questions mixed in with the fawning
ones. The problem is that the media on the left
which does interview Chomsky all the time is as
bad as the blackout media in terms of integrity.
They kiss his overinflated ego and it is literally
nauseating to listen to. Or watch but mostly I
catch these worshipful interviews on the FM radio.
I don’t have too much use for the neocons and Horowitz. I do not think of our current system
as particularly capitalistic but more of a state
military fueled mixed economy closer to a fascist
form of socialism or statism. Actually there Chomsky sort of agrees with me. That’s a whole
huge subject in itself !
I gave Chomsky the benefit of the doubt for too
many years. On Horowitz you have to read and check
out everything he writes very carefully but if, say, 40% of his anti-Chomsky book is correct, which I think is the case, it’s simply a devastating indictment.
On atrocities one other point, I do not buy Chomsky’s assertion that all leftist atrocities
are simply “retaliation” for US ones. These
left groups and states are very capable of initiating their own atrocities.
Glad we see eye to eye on Chomsky’s sources,
such as they are (quite often himself !).
Thanks for your comments.

For the record, I’ve never advocated for the shutting down of PBS. I’m a Buddhist, not a bloody nihilist.

Besides those claiming public broadcasting in violation for Liberal bias, some will argue that the electronic environment in which PBS was created has changed so dramatically over the years with the advent of cable and other alternative media, that the need for public broadcasting no longer exists. But if that were true, then why do Americans continue to tune in and support their local stations with individual contributions of hard earned pay? And before throwing the baby out with the bath water, maybe you owe it to yourself and your community a closer examination of the facts, the bipartisan values that went into the creation of public broadcasting, and the great success it has achieved.
[url="http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/052105D.shtml"
]http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/052105D.shtml[/url]

What I was lamenting earlier in this column, was the steady erosion of the creative spirit over the years by continued attacks from right-wing barbarians. This interference has limited production of the more “cutting edge” creative aspects that once thrived on PBS as I mentioned earlier, and resulted in the break-up of the WGBH relationship. These restraints, along with a current administration advocating further polarization of the venue can only lead to it’s eventual demise, in my estimation, and the battle therefore already lost. The only question now is whether it will survive the current onslaught of the neo-condom long enough for a shift in the political tide to manifest itself and perhaps restore PBS’s true creative potential necessary for continued growth and development.
[url="http://www.pbs.org/"
]http://www.pbs.org/[/url]

Was never aware of Moyers interview with Lew Rockwell.
Should tell you that Lew and I are not chums.
I agree with much stuff on his site and have
had many disagreements over the years, and
frankly, Lew is no more tolerant of a real
disagreement than a leftist butthole like the
person who wrote the above screed.
Objectivism has very little in common with the
Klan or Christian Identity (!) or Aryan Nation.
Nor have I ever posted on any site mentioned above including objectivist ones. Never heard of Golden Knights (?). But I’m sure “toth” is into golden showers.

“Objectivity” is defined by the Republicans as the straight and narrow road between truth (eg Bill Moyers) and falsehood (eg Fox channel or Weekly Standard). Anyone attempting to follow this road would have to be delusional or insane, since such a road does not exist in reality.

Positions you stake out and regularly advance are echoed constantly within the white supremacist movement.  How is one to distinguish the difference between you and they? You, as they, behave as a thug, constantly resorting to rudeness and badgering.  Evidence of such abounds all over these boards. 
If your ideas are to be considered here, is it not fair to place them within the context of your general thinking?
Once again, please treat us to another of your discourses on the Civil War, slavery, state’s rights, and the South.

Toth,

I, too, have noticed that many Libertarians who post on this site often espouse views that are seemingly quite rascist.

Thug accurately describes you, “toth” or whatever
your name is today. You have a total inability
to present a reasoned argument so you are forced
to use ad hominem attacks. Your description of
my philosophy bears no relation to same.
I have hardly ever commented on the southern issues that you bring up except to reiterate my
opposition to slavery, Jim Crow laws, civil
rights laws that attempt to regulate nongovernmental conduct and my advocacy of the
supremacy of individual rights, not any sort
of governmental rights, state, local or federal.
I agree that Lincoln was a racist and vicious
fascist dictator and that his war was unnecessary.
See Professor Thomas DiLorenzo’s The Real Lincoln.
But I really haven’t discussed this at length
except to recommend the DiLorenzo book.
Margaret, I’ve noticed many liberals like yourself
are anti-Arab racists in the extreme and often
anti-Asian racists, Pelosi being a great example.
Go to antiwar.com and see Justin Raimondo’s great
piece on her today.

“Toth” recently attacked Barnes using another alias, it was the same lew rockwell nonsense
as if he were responsible for everything that
rockwell wrote. Previously “toth” has used aliases
stan, merlin, little dogchick and other monikers.
He’s a governmental troll..............
Suggest posters and readers ignore him, he is a
zero.

Thank you Barnes, the ever classic,” forced to use ad hominem attacks” just won me the office pool!

“Office pool,” another affirmative action hire, eh ?

Christy,

You are totally off the mark on Merlin.  He has nothing to do with Toth.  Jack Barnes is the one who assumes lots of aliases--Lin Biao, J. Craig, etc.

Funny, JB, for an “anti-Asian” person that I would be going for 6 months to Thailand this October to help out over there.  Kind of an odd thing for someone to leave a life of luxury to go live in minimalist conditions to help people I am so prejudiced against.  Interesting logic, Jack.

Also, I have found your posts to often be extremely anti-Semitic (Jewish).  I have frequently posted that the problem there is the responsibility of both sides.

You are best when you just share info and not slanted and slighting perceptions, Jack.

Margaret, by anti-Asian I meant primarily anti-Chinese in light of your exchanges with Lin Biao.
You should get your facts straight, I have never
posted as Lin Biao nor J. Craig and I can’t even
recall posts of the latter.
The only “anti-semitism” I’ve posted here has been
criticism of Israel’s fascist and racist policies.
You have far more anti-semitic in terms of being
anti-Arab, so I think people in glass houses....
you know the verse. I have never read a word of
criticism of Israeli State policies by you, so you do understand my skepticism as to your proclaimed evenhandedness ?
You’re retiring in Thailand ? You can live well
over there on a western income. I was thinking
of Malaysia myself.
Stay out of police state Singapore !

Maybe we have different Merlins in mind, Margaret.
I do know “toth” has posted here on the ITT board
under several different aliases.

Left out the word “been” between “you” and “have”
in line 7 of my response to Margaret.
Sorry about that.

Accepting that ours is government of the people, by the people, and for the people, then it is true, I am a government troll.  Pity my humble efforts do not qualify me for even the slightest form of remuneration, let alone any pension or retirement plan. Nevertheless, so long as you and your ilk will be proselytizing your Libertarian dogma, I too, shall be around.
Hope you didn’t mind the paraphrasing the words of--- how does Jack put it?...the “racist and vicious fascist dictator” Lincoln.
The both of you continue to make my case in point.
Regards,
Toth
...and let’s not forget that it is our government, so let’s not allow the Libertarians to take our power away!

You are still incorrect about my feeling toward Arabs, JB.  The only point that could be taken that way is that I do believe in the Biblical ownership of the land.  That being said, Israel must back off their aggression and treat the Palestinians like people, not animals.  Likewise, the Palestinians can’t ask for the whole cake and give nothing in return.  I heard their foreign minister last week and he basically said they wouldn’t disarm until every provision was met by Israel.  Now wait a minute...they need to meet their requirements as well.  That is not fascism, JB, that is fair.

I don’t know that I’ll retire in Thailand.  My husband and kids may not go along with that.  I would have nothing against it, in fact, I probably would prefer to if things don’t change for the better here within the next five years.  But, as a Christian, I am called to help the poor and disenfranchised. 

Toth, I would agree with you that Libertarianism is really a far greater danger to our country than even terrorism.  Republicans are so thick that they don’t even realize that many, many of Bush’s appointees back the Libertarian views of absolute free market without regulations, the loss of power to the working man (though they claim the opposite)and the destruction of democracy.

Toth, you’re absolutely entitled to your views.
On government, I agree with George Washington,
that Government is not reason, not eloquence but
like fire, a fearful servant and a dangerous
master. Government is fundamentally based on force
and fraud so it’s best to limit it if we can’t
abolish it. I’m leery of private police agencies
and a competition in force so that may be the
one area I’d agree with you.
See For A New Libery by Murray N. Rothbard for the
anarcho-capitalistic view or philosophy.
I grew around DC and I never felt I was the government anymore than I thought I was drafting
myself or voluntarily paying the extortion known
as taxes. And it doesn’t matter which party
is in power. Nor do I think the government is
responsible for my welfare or that they should
force you to take care of me. Or vice-versa.
We are not a democracy but a constit