Posted on 09/12/2005 6:00:49 AM PDT by Quilla
Can I encourage FReepers to copy Ben Stein's commentary and send to everyone on their email list. What I have found is that far more people will read an email from a friend than they will read a commentary in a newspaper.
The best way for Free Republic to refute the tabloid-talking-heads in the Main Stream Media is to get our message out via the email system.
Yes, I agree: "outta the park," BUT, I also think that Democrats are incapable of making sense about this and other very, very important issues. They're just hammering on about Hillary in 2008 and this is just the start of it, but they'll never make sense and, worse, time and again prove that they are not capable of providing leadership.
Which answers, right there, what the incentives are: lack of leadership for the United States and then everything they want afterward will fall into place, along with our democracy.
i dunno, maybe we should look at a higher office for him. from the aritcles i've read, he seems to be fairly conservative, anyone know his politics or if he would ever run for office?
Good idea.
"anyone know his politics"
His dad was the famous economist, Herb Stein, who was an adviser to Richard Nixon. He got his Republican leanings with his mother's milk.
Scrolling across the screen on Fox News this morning, I noticed two comments but missed any commentary on their content. One was that the democrats may refuse to appoint members for a congressional hearing on the response to Katrina. Secondly, Hillary doesn't want to point fingers.
Well of course not! An investigation will reveal the failings of the first responders and if anyone's going to point fingers, they will all be in the direction of incompetent democrats.
bump
I'm interested in the issue of the promised congressional hearings on the relief response to Katrina.Clearly Congress has the authority to investigate the conduct of the Administration; Congress after all has the authority to impeach the president of the United States.
But does Congress have the authority to investigate a sitting governor? Congress doesn't select or ratify the nominations of governors, and Congress doesn't have the authority to impeach them, either. And governors don't report to the president, either - President Bush was completely stymied when the Governor of Louisiana did not elect to do what President Bush recommended.
So the issue becomes whether in fact the Republican congressional majority can do anything at all about the propaganda assigning all blame for the aftermath of the hurricane to the Bush Administration. But when the issue is framed as a propaganda issue, it should be clear that the federal government does in fact have some resources. And a legitimate investigative target.
The problem is in fact that the distiction between "objective journalism" and the Democratic Party is not a substantive difference. Liberal "objective" journalism will always hype any problem, and will always blame the nearest Republican for any given problem. And that is all that is going on in the fingerpointing over the Katrina aftermath.
The organizational reality is that the local and state governments of New Orleans and Louisiana were the first responders in the Katrina disaster; the federal government has a role only as the governor of Louisiana requestst it. And the fact is that the (Democratic) governor of Louisiana did not ask for - did not allow - federal involvement in the aftermath of Katrina until the die was cast that there would be an insurrection in New Orleans delaying rescue efforts and until unnecessary suffering in the Superdome and the Convention Center was inevitable.
True to form, "objective" journalism and the rest of the Democratic Party has been insinuating that President Bush should have done what only the Democratic governor and mayor in question were authorized to do. Print journalism is as independent of the Congress as the governor of Louisana is, but print journalism is not where the action is. The core of the problem is broadcast journalism, and broadcast journalism - all broadcasting - exists at the pleasure of Congress. It exists because the FCC censors competion in radio transmission, and the FCC exists by congressional statute.
IMHO the right thing for Congress to do is investigate the disaster response to define the limits of the president's authority to respond, and compare that to the actual behavior of the administration. And compare the performance in Louisiana with that in Mississippi and Alabama, with the differing behaviors of the governors of those states. But part of documenting the problems in Louisiana must be to discuss the coverage of the event. The broadcast coverage which is ultimately done under government sanction. The real issue is the fact that government is giving sanction to claims of objectivity from Democratic activists.
Excellent Choice. The man defines unflappable.
The MSM lost a long time ago. I turned on the news last night to see what was going on. The first 2 stories on the NBC station were so factually challenged that I turned the TV off rather than scream at them for getting it wrong.
One of the main problems with the U.S. is that a large portion of the population does not know any thing about state laws and the difference between state and federal laws and which has which responsibility and that will believe anything that anyone tells them that seems plausible.
Yes, it's a Nancy Pelosi dictum that she is asking that no Democrats participate on any Katrina Commission. Maybe an order, but the message is the same.
THAT way, they can cry out about anything and everything that is determined by the Commission.
Pelosi is yet another example of Democrats who cannot lead just trying to get in the way. Honestly, if ever there was a more foolish directive by anyone in the House, this one is it by Pelosi.
Ben Bump.
BE-U-ELL-ER!!! Ben Stein is the MAN!
bump
That's my question, too: we know this type of reporting is a cancer on our country---it probably set the poorest of the poor back 100 years in terms of the hate and anger it fomented---but what do we do about it?
I like the idea of taking a cue from how Ben described Bush---not lashing out (except here, of course, where we need to vent for sanity's sake), but doggedly going about the work of spreading (through word and deed) the truth.
Fortunately, the lamestream media's days are numbered. Unfortunately, the people who most need the power that knowledge brings will be the last off the lamestream media's plantation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.