Re: Civil Liberties
"The press was totally different in WWII and if we would have the anti-war press that exists now would we have been able to finish the job? That is the point "Huh? In WWII we were attacked on our own soil by another sovereign nation. We entered the other front because our allies were certainly falling without our assistance. There was an Anti-war movement during WWII, it was covered by the press, but it wasn't a big movement because we were attacked. Not afraid we would be attacked sometime in the future by weapons that probably didn't exist anyway.I don't think the press is Anti-War. They're pro-money. They report what sells, and right now, anti-war sells. Just a little under 6 years ago it was fear that sold. Then revenge. Then "We'll find Osama and we'll get him". Then WMDs. Then "Mission Accomplished". Then "Stay the Course". And now, because the public is sick and tired of this needless, pointless, war staged by a bunch of corporate cronies, they're reporting the Anti-War slant.And you're right, the press was totally different in the 1940's. It had something called integrity. It wasn't considered a money-making extension of an entertainment conglomerate. It's interesting, you're making EXACTLY the same point Al Gore makes in his book about the historical role of the media in politics. Tough shit Pat, you agree with Al Gore. If the press was even half interested in the truth they would have been all over the PNAC and their fingers in the Bush camp way back in 2000. But the press isn't interested in the truth, on either side of the aisle.Comparing this fiasco to WWII is only fair inasmuch as the US can be equated with Germany or Japan in WWII, since they were the agressors, with the enormous exception that the US hasn't committed mass genocide. So far. Iraq didn't bomb one of our naval bases. Iraq hasn't overrun one of our military and economic allies. Iraq hasn't done one god-damned thing to the US or our allies (if we have any left) other than not kow-tow to our every demand. They didn't harbor terrorists, fund terrorists, or give the terrorists my sister's phone number.So sure, stay the course. Keep calling up those reservists. Keep spending the money. Keep the world safe from all those terrorists in Iraq. The ones that weren't there before we showed up.
Thank god for George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld. Under their guidance we've made so much progress....well....nowhere. But thank god for 'em anyway.Maybe this stand-up bunch of Congresspeople we've got now will do the right thing and repeal term limits so we can elect Georgie-boy again. Then maybe they'll repeal the entire Constitution, since it's just a scrap of paper written 220 years ago and no one seems to give a rat's ass about it anyway. Then maybe they'll vote themselves and the Supreme Court out of existence and give Georgie divine providence, since he talks to Jesus anyway.Same as WWII indeed. Stop reading the talking points Pat.
P
pkjensen
(view)
"The press was totally different in WWII and if we would have the anti-war press that exists now would we have been able to finish the job? That is the point "Huh? In WWII we were attacked on our own soil by another sovereign nation. We entered the other front because our allies were certainly falling without our assistance. There was an Anti-war movement during WWII, it was covered by the press, but it wasn't a big movement because we were attacked. Not afraid we would be attacked sometime in the future by weapons that probably didn't exist anyway.I don't think the press is Anti-War. They're pro-money. They report what sells, and right now, anti-war sells. Just a little under 6 years ago it was fear that sold. Then revenge. Then "We'll find Osama and we'll get him". Then WMDs. Then "Mission Accomplished". Then "Stay the Course". And now, because the public is sick and tired of this needless, pointless, war staged by a bunch of corporate cronies, they're reporting the Anti-War slant.And you're right, the press was totally different in the 1940's. It had something called integrity. It wasn't considered a money-making extension of an entertainment conglomerate. It's interesting, you're making EXACTLY the same point Al Gore makes in his book about the historical role of the media in politics. Tough shit Pat, you agree with Al Gore. If the press was even half interested in the truth they would have been all over the PNAC and their fingers in the Bush camp way back in 2000. But the press isn't interested in the truth, on either side of the aisle.Comparing this fiasco to WWII is only fair inasmuch as the US can be equated with Germany or Japan in WWII, since they were the agressors, with the enormous exception that the US hasn't committed mass genocide. So far. Iraq didn't bomb one of our naval bases. Iraq hasn't overrun one of our military and economic allies. Iraq hasn't done one god-damned thing to the US or our allies (if we have any left) other than not kow-tow to our every demand. They didn't harbor terrorists, fund terrorists, or give the terrorists my sister's phone number.So sure, stay the course. Keep calling up those reservists. Keep spending the money. Keep the world safe from all those terrorists in Iraq. The ones that weren't there before we showed up.
Thank god for George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld. Under their guidance we've made so much progress....well....nowhere. But thank god for 'em anyway.Maybe this stand-up bunch of Congresspeople we've got now will do the right thing and repeal term limits so we can elect Georgie-boy again. Then maybe they'll repeal the entire Constitution, since it's just a scrap of paper written 220 years ago and no one seems to give a rat's ass about it anyway. Then maybe they'll vote themselves and the Supreme Court out of existence and give Georgie divine providence, since he talks to Jesus anyway.Same as WWII indeed. Stop reading the talking points Pat.
