Breaking: Keith Olbermann Announces Abrupt Departure From MSNBC; "Countdown" to End

Two years into Obama's presidency and the right wing is in total control of the media.

At the very least Obama should have stopped the dominance of the right wing media, and he should have helped reverse the trend. Instead he kowtowed, he wavered, he hummed and hawed, he kissed ass, and now the right is so firmly entrenched that progressive ideas are minimalized. Peacenik doesn't know why Olberman left MSNBC, but Peacenik suspects it was either a firing or a complete lack of support. The good news will be if Olberman reappears somewhere else with greater viewership. The bad new is that the progressive cause has lost one of its most effective voices and is on the run. Pretty sad when the voice of the left is led by a fuckin comedian....Jon Stewart.

MSNBC announced Friday night that its marquee "Countdown" anchor and talk show host Keith Olbermann was out. The network did not provide a reason for his abrupt departure.

"MSNBC and Keith Olbermann have ended their contract. The last broadcast of "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" will be this evening. MSNBC thanks Keith for his integral role in MSNBC's success and we wish him well in his future endeavors," NBC Universal said in a statement.

MSNBC announced Friday night that its marquee "Countdown" anchor and talk show host Keith Olbermann was out. The network did not provide a reason for his abrupt departure.

"MSNBC and Keith Olbermann have ended their contract. The last broadcast of "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" will be this evening. MSNBC thanks Keith for his integral role in MSNBC's success and we wish him well in his future endeavors," NBC Universal said in a statement.

Read on...

How the Right's Rhetoric Fueled the Actions of Arizona's Mass Murderer

Peacenik has a feeling that the discussion about the attempted assassination of Gabriella Giffords won't have anything to do with the sentiment expressed in the above headline. Peacenik suspects that the media's frame will be that it would be mean to blame right wing rhetoric for inciting the shooter. Peacenik suspects the media will call for a mature bi-partisan response to the shooting. Right wingers are already saying it is McCarthyism to blame right wing rhetoric for the shooting. Expect the media to play along. The march to fascism continues.

It's too soon to say what motivated the man apprehended for the shooting. But the Tea Party culture of political intimidation affirmed his violent impulses.

January 8, 2011 |

Photo Credit: A.M. Stan

It's too soon to say what, exactly, motivated the man apprehended for the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., and 18 others outside a Tucson supermarket on Saturday. All we really know about Jared Lee Loughner, the 22-year-old alleged shooter, is that he is apparently a profoundly disturbed young man whose paranoia involves some indecipherable notions about the U.S. Constitution.

Some say Loughner regards himself as a leftist, others chart him on the right. But the screen shots of his (now deleted) MySpace page and the incomprehensible videos he posted on YouTube -- as well as another video he named a "favorite" that shows a masked, hooded figure burning an American flag to a soundtrack of a chant, "Let the bodies hit the floor" -- seem short on coherent ideology and long on violent impulse.

So to those who would like to attribute Loughner's actions to the Tea Party, I say, hold up; take a breath. But to those on the far right, and to the more mainstream right-wingers who fail to condemn the poisonous claims of the far right, I say, you're hardly off the hook.

Read on...

WikiLeaks US embassy cables: live updates

Peacenik is scanning some of the Wikileaks documents. So far, apparently no significant mention of Canada. What is predictable and disappointing is the reaction of the U.S. mainstream media. They are saying the leaks are irresponsible, dangerous, outrageous, etc., etc. So much for transparency. The link below is to the British Guardian newspaper which is doing a good job providing access to the leaks. And just to illustrate how hopeless the U.S. has become read this pathetic quote from John Kerry: "This is not an academic exercise about freedom of information and it is not akin to the release of the Pentagon Papers, which involved an analysis aimed at saving American lives and exposing government deception. Instead, these sensitive cables contain candid assessments and analysis of ongoing matters and they should remain confidential to protect the ability of the government to conduct lawful business with the private candor that's vital to effective diplomacy." Wanker.

Reaction and updates following the release of more than 250,000 classified US diplomatic cables from WikiLeaks. Tomorrow, revelations about North Korea and the UK.

6.15pm: It is, without a doubt, the biggest leak of secret diplomatic missives in the history of international relations – a total of 251,287 cables from more than 250 US embassies and consulates around the world, many of them frank, a number of them shocking and all of them previously secret.

Over the coming days the Guardian will publish extracts from the cables, obtained by the whistleblowing website Wikileaks, along with its international partners, the New York Times, Le Monde, El País and Der Spiegel.

Even today there's a lot to read through so here's a brief precis of the initial revelations:

• The US is engaged in a spying campaign against the leadership of the United Nations. A directive issued under Hillary Clinton's name last year ordered American diplomats to seek details about both UN communication systems and personal details for top officials.

• Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah has "frequently" urged the US to launch an attack against Iran in order to scupper Tehran's nuclear ambition.

• The US has relentlessly pressured other countries, including close allies such as Italy and France, to distance themselves from Iran and assist American efforts to isolate Tehran
• There's plenty more to come, including "claims of inappropriate behaviour" by a British royal and allegations of links between Russia's government and organised crime.

Read on...

WikiLeaks near release of secret US war documents

Peacenik seems to recall that the Pentagon Papers were credited with changing the public's perception of the Vietnam War. The New York Times published them. Major news. Peacenik thinks the mainstream media's coverage of new WikiLeaks will be minimal. The media has been totally neutered and co-opted. Western mainstream media has become Pravda. And the media doesn't care. And the public doesn't care. Peacenik wonders if anything can light a fire under the anti-war movement. At least the French haven't lost their ability to protest. Of course those protests don't warrant much coverage by the mainstream media either. The U.S. population must watch news reports of French riots uncomprehendingly. Just as they watch news reports of Wall Street corruption, war crimes, unemployment, fraud and violence in the U.S. Uncomprehendingly.

File - The Pentagon is seen in this aerial view in Washington, in this March 27, 2008 file photo. The WikiLeaks website appears close to releasing what the Pentagon fears is the largest cache of secret U.S. documents in history _ hundreds of thousands of intelligence reports compiled after the 2003 invasion of Iraq. In a message posted to its Twitter page on Thursday Oct. 21, 2010, the organization said there was a "major WikiLeaks press conference in Europe coming up." (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, File) (Charles Dharapak - AP)

LONDON -- The WikiLeaks website is poised to release what the Pentagon fears is the largest cache of secret U.S. documents in history - hundreds of thousands of classified intelligence reports since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

U.S. officials said Friday they were racing to contain the damage from the imminent release, while NATO's top official told reporters he feared that lives could be put at risk by the mammoth disclosure.

NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen said any release would create "a very unfortunate situation."

"I can't comment on the details of the exact impact on security, but in general I can tell you that such leaks ... may have a very negative security impact for people involved," he told reporters Friday in Berlin following a meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Read on....

A Response to Controversial 'Time' Cover: What ALSO Happens If We Leave Afghanistan

Greg Mitchell

As I noted early this morning over at my Daybook, Time magazine's cover story this week arrives with a graphic cover image next to the title, "What Happens If We Leave Afghanistan." It shows an Afghan teen named Aisha whose nose and ears had been sliced off by the Taliban.

Inside, editor Rick Stengel explains that he consulted psychologists about what harm could be done to children who might see this disturbing image. But he also defends the aim of the story itself in the following paragraph:

"The much publicized release of classified documents by WikiLeaks has already ratcheted up the debate about the war. Our story and the haunting cover image by the distinguished South African photographer Jodi Bieber are meant to contribute to that debate. We do not run this story or show this image either in support of the U.S. war effort or in opposition to it. We do it to illuminate what is actually happening on the ground. As lawmakers and citizens begin to sort through the information about the war and make up their minds, our job is to provide context and perspective on one of the most difficult foreign policy issues of our time. What you see in these pictures and our story is something that you cannot find in those 91,000 documents: a combination of emotional truth and insight into the way life is lived in that difficult land and the consequences of the important decisions that lie ahead."

Read on...

This Time cover may go down as one of the most manipulative ever. Pure propaganda. Pure warmongering. First the media refuses to publish pictures of the carnage of war caused by the U.S. and their allies, including Canada. Then they put out this. Peacenik will never read another word in Time Magazine. Bring the troops home now.

The Shame of the Fourth Estate

Charles Kaiser

Let me make this utterly clear: What you see on Fox News, what you read on Right Wing websites, is the utter and complete perversion of journalism, and it can have no place in a civilized society. It is words crashed together, never to inform, only to inflame. It is a political guillotine. It is the manipulation of reality to make the racist seem benevolent, and to convict the benevolent as racist—even if her words must be edited, filleted, stripped of all context, rearranged, fabricated, and falsified, to do so.

What you see on Fox News, what you read on Right Wing websites… is a manipulation. Not just of a story, not just on behalf of a political philosophy. Manipulation of a society, its intentional redirection from reality and progress, to a paranoid delusion and the fomenting of hatred of Americans by Americans...The assassins of the Right have been enabled on the Left.

— Keith Olbermann's special comment on the Sherrod debacle

Read on...

Peacenik thinks Keith Olbermann is a great American.

Afghan War Leaks Expose Costly, Deceitful March of Folly

by Ray McGovern

The brutality and fecklessness of the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan have been laid bare in an indisputable way just days before the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on whether to throw $33.5 billion more into the Afghan quagmire, when that money is badly needed at home.

On Sunday, the Web site Wikileaks posted 75,000 reports written mostly by U.S. forces in Afghanistan during a six-year period from January 2004 to December 2009. The authenticity of the material - published under the title "Afghan War Diaries" - is not in doubt.

The New York Times, which received an embargoed version of the documents from Wikileaks, devoted six pages of its Monday editions to several articles on the disclosures, which reveal how the Afghan War slid into its current morass while the Bush administration concentrated U.S. military efforts on Iraq.

Wikileaks also gave advanced copies to the British newspaper, The Guardian, and the German newsmagazine, Der Spiegel, thus guaranteeing that the U.S. Fawning Corporate Media could not ignore these classified cables the way it did five years ago with the "Downing Street Memo," a leaked British document which described how intelligence was "fixed" around President George W. Bush's determination to invade Iraq.

Read on...

What 'Controlling the Media' Really Means

The dysfunctionality of U.S. government and society is a direct consequence of hate radio, talk radio, right wing media, FOX, and all the rest of the wingnuts, and nattering nabobs of negativity. Peacenik never thought Peacenik would quote Spiro Agnew.

Of course the media doesn't want a progressive pushback against the media's rightwing slant. The biggest myth about the mainstream media is that it is liberal. At least the Internet has some progressive media and progressive points of view. Routinely described by the MSM as far left. The MSM is dying. It can't happen soon enough.

by Glenn Greenwald

The same media whining over criticisms of Fox was happy to be bullied and controlled by the Bush administration.



Hypocrisy is far too common a feature of our political culture to comprehensively chronicle, particularly when there is a change of party control and each side starts doing exactly that to which they spent the last several years vociferously objecting; see here for a vivid example of that dynamic, from a new Pew poll released today:

The belief that the press should keep political leaders from doing things that should not be done often depends on who those political leaders are, or more specifically, which party controls the White House. Currently, in the midst of the Obama administration, two-thirds of Republicans (65%) support the so-called "watchdog role" for the press, compared with 55% of Democrats. But last year, while Bush was still in office, only 44% of Republicans felt it was good that press criticism keeps political leaders honest, and Democrats were much more pro watchdog (71% supported press criticism). This partisan pattern has existed since the question was first asked by Pew Research in 1985.

With hypocrisy that pervasive, who could ever hope to take note of all of it? Still, the complaints from America's Right -- and especially former Bush officials -- that the Obama administration is attempting to "control the media," all because the White House criticizes Fox News, is in a class of hypocrisy all by itself. That those petulant complaints are being amplified by a virtually unanimous press corps -- "it's Nixonian!" is their leading group-think cliché -- makes it all the more intolerable.

Read on...

Boston Antiwar Protest Draws from New England Region

This story from the Sunday Boston Globe talks about 40 nationwide anti-war protests. Wow, there were some anti-war protests. Peacenik casually paid attention to the news over the weekend and Peacenik didn't know there were any anti-war protests going on.

So Peacenik scanned some websites this morning. The Washington post had zero weekend or Monday stories about the anti-war protests. The New York Times had zero weekend or Monday stories about the anti-war protests. The Toronto Star had zero weekend or Monday stories about anti-war protests.

But wait. The Sunday LA Times had a story about anti-war protests. A story about a non-stop protest in Oregon that has been going on for eight years. Big Deal.

Were there lots of anti-war protests on the weekend? Were any of them big? Where were they? Peacenik doesn't know. The mainstream media doesn't care.

Demonstrators in the pink in Copley Square

Demonstrators gathered in Boston's Copley Square yesterday to protest the wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq. (David L. Ryan/ Globe Staff)

by Jeannie Nuss
Pink wigged-protesters and hundreds of other demonstrators wielding posters calling for peace converged on Copley Square in an antiwar rally yesterday

The regional gathering in Boston - one of more than 40 nationwide - brought protesters from throughout New England to shout, sing, and march against conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq.

Karyn Savage, a 26-year-old mother of two from central Maine, clutched a magenta poster covered in glitter glue and peace signs that read: "War is Expensive, Peace is Priceless.''

Read on...

MSM Reporting as Propaganda (No one Minds our New Financial Masters)

Peacenik thinks this article is worth reading. It offers an explanation for why the sheeple aren't in the streets protesting.

The sheeple have been trained to not protest. But the sheeple haven't been trained to go hungry, or homeless or hopeless. The protests will come. Too bad they're 30 years too late.

by Yves

I’m of two minds about taking up this theme, since stating what ought to be obvious but is nevertheless unpleasant and inconvenient is apt to get one branded as lunatic fringe.

Access journalism has created what is in many respects a controlled press. And that matters because people are far more suggestible than most of us wants to admit to ourselves.

Let us start with the cheerleading in the media over Wall Street, and in particular, Goldman earnings. Matt Taibbi, in “Good News on Wall Street Means… What Exactly?,” tells us why this is so distorted:

It’s literally amazing to me that our press corps hasn’t yet managed to draw a distinction between good news on Wall Street for companies like Goldman, and good news in reality.

I watched carefully the reporting of the Dow breaking 10,000 the other day and not anywhere did I see a major news organization include a paragraph of the “On the other hand, so fucking what?” sort, one that might point out that unemployment is still at a staggering high, foreclosures are racing along at a terrifying clip, and real people are struggling more than ever. In fact the dichotomy between the economic health of ordinary people and the traditional “market indicators” is not merely a non-story, it is a sort of taboo — unmentionable in major news coverage.

Read on...

The media and the warmongering scale

Whats the media saying about Iran today? Is it balanced? Is it fair? Is it true? Does it advance the cause of peace?

Peacenik took a quick spin through a few websites. This is what Peacenik found.

Cripple Iran to save it

This gem is written by none other that Dick Cheney's former national security adviser. The title says it all. And he is serious. No irony intended. And this appears in the Los Angles Times. 10 out of 10 on warmongering scale.

Next Peacenik visited the New York Times.

Some See Iran as Ready for Nuclear Deal

This story rehashes the nuclear story. It does quote intelligence reports saying Iran is working on building a bomb. But at least it mentions a possible deal. This one is only 7 out 10 on the warmongering scale.

The Washington Post has a small story today.

How to Engage Iran

Curious title considering the conclusion is to not shake had with a man with blood on his hands. 8 out of 10 on the warmongering scale.

Last stop the Jerusalem Post.

'Israel may attack Iran after December'

What can you say? 10 out of 10 on the warmongering scale.

So there you have a quick scan of the mainstream media. A good day for warmongerers.

Why Right-Wing Demagogues Are Tying to Peddle Ludicrous Conspiracy Theories

As the U.S. economy goes down the toilet the wingnuts are acting like they are having a nervous breakdown. And the mainstream media continues to give credence to the craziest right wing theories. Lou Dobbs continues to push the birther movement. Kookie Glen Beck makes the cover of Time magazine. Huge swaths of wingnutville believe in death panels. A congressman called Obama an enemy of humanity. And on and on. Death threats against Obama are soaring.

When the economy gets even worse (Saturn shutting down as Peacenik types) what are all the armed, dangerous, angry, unemployed, hungry, rightwingers going to do? Peacenik thinks this is the last chance for the mainstream media. If it has any sense of right from wrong left, it has to start exposing quackery for what it is. But Peacenik thinks the media is too far gone. It is quackery itself.

By Chip Berlet, Indypendent. Posted October 1, 2009.

Even before Obama was sworn in as the 44th President, the internet was seething with lurid theories exposing his alleged subversion and treachery.

Among the many false claims: Obama was a secret Muslim; he was not a native U.S. citizen and his election as president should be overturned; he was a tool of the New World Order in a plot to merge the government of the United States into a North American union with Mexico and Canada.

Within hours of Obama’s inauguration, claims circulated that Obama was not really president because Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts scrambled the words as he administered the oath of office. A few days after the inauguration came a warning that Obama planned to impose martial law and collect all guns.

Read on...

Iran War Drums Begin Beating in Washington

Peacenik must have missed the memo where the world agreed that Iran cannot have nuclear power, and the U.S. and or Israel have the responsibility to prevent Iran from having nuclear power. In fact Peacenik seems to recall the U.S. unilaterally disavowing the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

But the warmongers want their war and the fearmongering media is only too happy to play along. The U.S. has circled Iran. The U.S. has shown a willingness and desire to wage war. If you were Iran what would you do?

by Daniel Luban and Jim Lobe



WASHINGTON - As nuclear negotiations between Iran and the West continue to move slowly, U.S. President Barack Obama is coming under growing pressure from what appears to be a concerted lobbying and media campaign urging him to act more aggressively to stop Iran's nuclear program.

Obama has given Tehran an end-of-September deadline to respond substantively to his offer of diplomatic engagement. But already hawks in the U.S. – backed by hardline pro-Israel organizations – have pressed him to quickly impose "crippling" economic sanctions against Tehran, and some are arguing that he should make preparations for a military attack on Iranian nuclear facilities.

The pressure campaign kicked off in earnest this week. On Thursday, hundreds of leaders and activists from the U.S. Jewish community descended on Washington to lobby for harsher sanctions, while widely-publicised media reports suggested that Iran is already nearing the verge of a nuclear capability.

Read on...

Meet the Press's Idea of a 'Debate'

Here are two examples of why the mainstream media is broken. Could there be a more slanted, tired, irrelevant panel ever. Neo cons all. Peacenik is so tired of all the same pundits shaping policy debates in the U.S. that Peacenik may kick in Peacenik's tv screen. Do pundits have to die to get off Peacenik's tv screen? Do pundits never retire? Ever?

by Glenn Greenwald

On Sunday, Meet the Press hosted a panel discussion to debate two primary issues: (1) foreign policy -- specifically, the war in Afghanistan, and (2) health care. The panel: Rudy Giuliani,Tom Friedman, Harold Ford, Jr., and Tom Brokaw (as Jay Rosen often notes, Meet the Press is doing a fantastic job of fulfilling its pledge to present "fresh voices" in its discussions).

With regard to Afghanistan, there is a major debate currently taking place about whether we should stay in that country. A majority of Americans now opposes the war. But there was not a single participant there who shares that view. All of them believe that it is imperative we remain, and put on their little General hats to exchange deeply Serious analyses of how we need to adjust our strategy and tactics for greater mission success. Of course, all of three of those whose views were known about Iraq -- Friedman, Ford and Giuliani -- were vehement supporters of the invasion. As always, not only does support for that war not produce shame or even impair one's credibility and Seriousness, but the opposite is true: having supported it is a prerequisite for being considered credible and Serious, which is why those are the only people -- still -- from whom we hear when it's time to convene Serious discussions of foreign policy. What an odd filtering standard for The Liberal Media to use.

Read on...

Iran Nuclear 'Threat' Hyped: IAEA's ElBaradei

It will be curious to see how much attention ElBaradei gets in the U.S. mainstream media. Peacenik recalls he didn't get much attention in the runup to the Iraq war. That was when Bush et.al. were warning about mushroom clouds at a time when the Iraqi weapons programs were defunct. Any attention he does get will be derisive.

And of course Obama and his neocon buddies are threatening to play hardball (gasoline sanctions) if Iran doesn't stop their non-existent nuclear program. These guys are going to talk themselves into another war if they don't stop with all the posturing. The way things are going they may as well bring Cheney back into the administration ferchrissakes.

In an interview published on Tuesday, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei, pictured here in 2008, called the threat from Iran "hyped" and that there was no evidence that Tehran will soon have nuclear weapons. (AFP/File/Samuel Kubani)

VIENNA - Iran is not going to produce a nuclear weapon any time soon and the threat posed by its atomic program has been exaggerated, the U.N. nuclear watchdog chief said in a published interview.

The West suspects Iran wants to develop a nuclear weapons capability under the guise of a declared civilian atomic energy program. Tehran rejects the charge, saying its uranium enrichment program is a peaceful way to generate electricity.

Read on...

Obama Has Betrayed the Progressives Who Got Him Elected -- So Now What Do We Do?

Yep, Obama has been a dud so far. The warmongers seem more entrenched then ever. The right wing continues to dominate public discourse. No regulation on Wall Street. Mountain top removal mining continues. No torture prosecutions. And on and on. What happened to "yes we can".

Peacenik doesn't know what to blame it on. Fox news and CNBC and the rest of the mainstream media have certainly been anti-Obama. And the rightwing fringe, the Glen Becks and Lou Dobbs, certainly get more coverage then they warrant. Can Obama re-capture the progressive vibe. He better do it soon, or else the U.S. will embrace another kind of change, the wrong kind. The Sarah Palin kind.

Posted by Allison Kilkenny, True/Slant at 5:40 PM on August 31, 2009.

Total withdrawal dates and single-payer healthcare were never seriously part of the agenda. They were nice, empty promises, made to get elected.

Though he's barely over six months into his first term, President Obama faces a critical time. According to a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll, support for Obama is dropping, and Greg Sargent theorizes this is due to waning support among Democrats and liberals.

Sargent's theory makes sense. Ask any Democrat or Progressive why they voted for Obama, and you're likely to hear a range of grievances extending from he's better than Bush to Nader wasn't on the ballot, but others say things like he said he'd bring the troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan, or he promised healthcare reform.

Read on...

Dampening Debate

punditman says...
As Peacenik muses about Apocalypse 2012, and the end of whatever, Punditman has been pondering more mundane matters, such as the stifling of debate on all the stuff that we still have to deal with before December 21, 2012.

Punditman thinks that on December 22, 2012, there's a good chance we'll still be dealing with stuff like this. It's the kind of thing that drives punditman bonkers. If you think you live in a free society, then read, watch, listen to, or attend a debate. Any debate. Chances are, you will not get the spectrum of opinion that you would hope a truly free society would offer. The panel discussion I refer to is one that took place at the Brookings Institute on August 25 concerning Afghanistan, and it is summarized by author Robert Dreyfuss. The self-described "nonpartisan public policy organization" presented four panelists who were all hawks. None of them questioned the legitimacy of the war. Only how to win it, and how long it would take. That's a friggin' debate?!

A debate is supposed to involve opposing arguments. To quote Michael Palin in Monty Python's Argument Sketch, "An argument is a collective series of statements intended to establish a proposition." Aparently the so-called "liberal" Brookings Institute is not the right room for an argument.

You might find diversity of opinion in some obscure panel discussion in some back water college somewhere or on some internet radio show that has twenty-seven loyal listeners. Or you may find a bunch of people agreeing with themselves there as well.

The point that punditman is trying to make is that when it comes to the big issues of our times, such as war, terrorism, Iran, civil liberties, swine flu or rising beer prices, you are being bamboozled into a type of fascist groupthink by Big Media and Big Experts from Big Institutes.

Sure there are debates-- fake ones that is, where "opposing" viewpoints are presented, but in reality, it's just a bunch of elitists and politicians screaming over top of one another for entertainment value (afterwards, the rivals can be spotted in the pub next to the studio congratulating each other on their performances and caring nothing of rising beer prices).

As Noam Chomsky and others of his ilk have been saying for years, despite the myth of a free and open "marketplace of ideas," the framework for debate within most democracies has always been relatively narrow when it comes to the big issues, compared to the potential. The reasons have to do with profit, advertising revenue, self-censorship and concentratrion of media ownership. Now this may seem counter-intuitive in the internet age, but punditman intuits that despite the abundance of new media, a narrowing of opinion on crucial matters is more evident than ever before.

Observe the following statements:

The war in Afghanistan is a war of necessity and a noble cause.
Terrorists hate us because of our freedom.
Iran is a monolothic Islamofascist state intent on nuking Israel.
Swine flu is a dangerous pandemic that requires everyone to be vaccinated even if we don't have time to safety-test the vaccine.
Beer prices need to rise because...ummm, rising costs or something...

Whether you agree with any or all of these statements or not, ask yourself whether you think the counterpoint to each of these statements gets a fair shake.

DNC Goes All In: Denounces Right Wing Angry Mob [Video]

Remember the extreme right wing conspiracy of Bill Clinton's day. Turns out there was one. And there is one. They same wingnuts who financed Jennifer Jones and Troopergate are financing these mobs trying to disrupt health care town hall meetings. Peacenik never would have believed that John Kerry's military service would become a liability for him. But the swiftboaters succeeded. And now we have goofballs chanting to save their non-existent healthcare from a socializing Obama. By the Way when Lou Dobbs reported this story last night he smirked and suggested it was just people expressing their democratic right. And CNN has refused to carry Media Matters ads attacking Lou Dobbs for his support of the 'birther' fringe. Will mobs shut down health care town hall meetings? Will the media report this as anything other than paid agents of the right wing? Is the health care debate getting turned upside down? Right now it looks to Peacenik like any reasonable healthcare reform is looking most unlikely.


Healthcare town hall protesters

by turneresq

Share this on Twitter - DNC Goes All In: Denounces Right Wing Angry Mob [Video]

Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 08:35:56 PM PDT

Wow. I don't know what to say. This is one of the most hard-hitting ads I've ever seen. It just lays it all out there. No punches pulled. No insuination. Just a full-bore attack. This ad will leave your mouth gaping for sure. It is important to note this is a WebAd, and as such is probably more to get play on cable outlets, than to pay to have it run. Still, given this ad fires with both barrels, it's likely we'll be seeing this on air for the next couple of days.

Read on...

Wake Up America, the Media Treat Far-Right Views as Mainstream

Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly at 9:55 AM on June 4, 2009.

This dynamic produces "a deep and largely unconscious conservative bias in the media's discussion of policy."

E.J. Dionne Jr. has a very interesting column today that notes the media's "tilt to the right."

Yes, you read that correctly: If you doubt that there is a conservative inclination in the media, consider which arguments you hear regularly and which you don't. When Rush Limbaugh sneezes or Newt Gingrich tweets, their views ricochet from the Internet to cable television and into the traditional media. It is remarkable how successful they are in setting what passes for the news agenda.

The power of the Limbaugh-Gingrich axis means that Obama is regularly cast as somewhere on the far left end of a truncated political spectrum. He's the guy who nominates a "racist" to the Supreme Court (though Gingrich retreated from the word yesterday), wants to weaken America's defenses against terrorism and is proposing a massive government takeover of the private economy. [...]

Read on...

You already know this. Peacenik already knows this. But the effect is insidious. After a couple of decades Cokie Roberts or Lou Dobbs spouting their right wing talking points almost seems normal. Peacenik thinks he remembers a time when the mainstream media wasn't this way. But it is a hazy memory. Face it. Many media stars are out and out kooks and worse. The progresssive Internet has turned out to be a pretty effective debunker of right wing talking points. But it doesn't have the reach of the mainstream media.

So maybe the economic collapse of the mainstream corporate media, tv and newspapers, will have a small salubrious effect. Maybe Peacenik should cheer for the NY Times and GE and the Washington Post to go out of business. Maybe the crazy tilt to the right can be moderated. But Peacenik isn't holding Peacenik's breath. Have a good weekend.

One Ricks Makes a Wrong

by Jeff Huber
www.antiwar.com

Thomas E. Ricks, erstwhile journalist and author of The Gamble: General David Petraeus and the American Military Adventure in Iraq, 2006-2008, has become the embodiment of the warmongery’s moral and intellectual duplicity.

Ricks’ most recent 15 minutes of fame involved an appearance at a FireDogLake.com book forum. In reply to a commenter who asked if "more deaths in Iraq are worth it," Ricks said, "I think staying in Iraq is immoral. But I think that leaving Iraq is even more immoral." In a nutshell, Ricks framed the core fallacy in the long-war philosophy: that two wrongs can make a right. This theme dominates Ricks’ work these days. The Gamble and the media blitz that accompanied its debut were dazzling examples of what Voltaire was talking about when he said, “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”

Ricks continues to exalt Gen. David Petraeus, who he has known since Petraeus was a colonel or a light colonel (Ricks says he can’t remember which). Ricks became King David’s chief legend-maker when the Iraq surge began in January 2007. In a radio interview that month on WNYC in New York, Ricks described Petraeus as a "fascinating character" and "just about the best general in the Army." He specifically cited Petraeus’ "very successful first tour" as commander in Mosul after the fall of Baghdad, but he made little mention of the fact that the general tamed the city by handing out guns and bribes, and that months after Petraeus left Mosul the chief of police defected and the place went up for grabs again. (Mosul remains a major trouble spot to this day, and Petraeus is still arming and bribing militants.)

Keep Reading...

punditman says...

Some people will believe anything the mainstream media tells them. It is like they worship "important" or "prestigious" institutions. Thomas E. Ricks is a military correspondent for the Washington Post. He is the tricky kind that a lot of liberals fall for, because he appears critical of the establishment but in fact is far from from it. A brief search reveals that besides the book mentioned in the intro of the above article, he also wrote a book called Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq. Even to come up with a name like that is automatically suspect; of course everyone knows it has been a freakin' fiasco! But the problem is that Ricks thinks the war was just a question of mismanagement instead of recognizing it for the moral and legal atrocity and imperial hubris that it is.

Ricks therefore functions as a Pentagon shill, or more specifically as General Petraeus' personal propaganda machine. Punditman finds the worshipping of any General to be a rather worrisome activity. Thankfully, there are internet journalists like Jeff Huber and Gareth Porter to set the record straight.