The PBS NewsHour News Format
The concept of anything being perfect will never occur, thus it is necessary to support that which is the best of what is available.
At this time I believe the NewsHour News Format to be the best available. That format is basically; 1) a news summary, 2) a news story debate by a pro and a con moderated by a NewsHour person, and 3) some final commentary.
The best part of this format is that there is a debate by a person on both sides of an issue so that both sides get representation instead of the journalist making a decision and presenting only one side of the story.
There are still many weaknesses with the NewsHour News Format.
1) The debate should be between two people that represent both sides of the issue. If the NewsHour stacks the debate toward one side or the other, then this is no better than the ABC, NBC and CBS one sided presentation of their opinion of the world. Too often I see the NewsHour get people from the Washington, DC area. I would suggest a much wider selection.
2) The moderator must be very careful not to bias the debate by showing favoritism to one side or the other. If favoritism is shown by the moderator it will be difficult to get people to go in the show. A lot of good people do not get involved with the news media because the news media purposely makes them look bad so the other side of the issue (the side the news media supports) wins. If a person knows there opinion will be respected, I believe there could be some very interesting dialog.
3) The final commentary should be between equally qualified people. Mark Shields is the perfect liberal democrat and I believe the NewsHour prevents good Republican people from the discussion to make sure Mark Shields and the democrats control the agenda.
There are still many people at PBS who are so biased it is silly. Guen Ifill is so liberal it is pitiful. Mark Shields is a raving liberal democrat. Bill Moyer is a confused Christian that has been led astray by the liberals.
There are no conservative commentary show on PBS. The only one that got started, "The Wall Street Review" was quickly canceled. The liberal commentary shows are, Washington Week, NOW, McLaughlin Group, To the Contrary, etc. Charlie Rose does at least present many people and different views, but Charlie is so anti Iraq War it is pitiful.
PBS does have some excellent shows. Frontline and NOVA are excellent. NATURE is a good show, but it is so antireligious (evolution) it is pitiful.
I make a final appeal relative to fairness, and that is that religious people be included in all discussions. The news media has driven religious people out of the market place of ideas, but religion is an absolute essential to a sane civil society. The Iraq War is poorly understood because the news media does not understand the religious background.
Actually, the news media has driven many people out of the market place of ideas. I have seen journalists absolutely degrade people that present views that the journalists did not agree with. Sooner or later most Christians, conservatives and Republicans just avoid the news media and do not participate in the debate.
I believe the best choice for America is Democracy, Christianity and Capitalism. An essential part of the survival of America is an unbiased honest news media. The NewsHour News Format is the best that is available for now.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Failure - Biased reporting
Failure - Biased reporting
Everything stated in the following article fits the following pattern.
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
Until the news media becomes unbiased, they are the scum of the earth. The news media is on a mission to destroy Christians, Conservatives and Republicans.
America needs to win the Iraq War and Christians need to win the Cultural War.
----------------------------------------------
Iraqi Blowback - Explaining why Paul Wolfowitz is a travesty and Sandy Berger is a snooze.
By Victor Davis Hanson
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGVmNTI3NThhZDJmZDhjY2Q0ZWRlODU5NjY1MWFkMmU=
The resigned Scooter Libby did not leak Valerie Plame's name, a fact known to a special prosecutor charged with finding out who did and if were a crime. After hours of testimony, he was found self-contradictory under oath (though self-contradictory hardly to the extent of a Joe Wilson who said and wrote things about his yellow-cake inquiries that could not be conceivably true), and now faces a possible prison sentence.
Ditto the exemption given to the Duke accuser who repeatedly lied in her sworn testimonials, but will apparently not be charged with perjury because her stories are so implausible that officials think she must be unhinged — a new rationale that the perjurer is apparently free from indictment when the concoctions exceed possible belief.
Alberto Gonzalez perhaps (emphasize "perhaps," as yet we don't know all the facts) showed a lapse in judgment or at least of political savvy by firing politically appointed federal attorneys, something that was not unusual in past Democratic administrations.
Paul Wolfowitz, who sought to curb corruption that undermines support for World Bank aid to Africa, likewise is facing a lynch mob over perhaps a similar one-time lapse of judgment in regard to compensation of a companion — nothing, however, ranking with the various scandals surrounding Kofi Annan, whose son profited by United Nations exemptions given through his family ties. In today's moral calculus, presiding over a $50-billion-dollar Oil-for-Food scandal that led to frequent death in Iraq and profit among global elites is a misdemeanor, recommending a pay package for an employee one dates is an unforgivable felony.
One could go on with the furor over the misdirected pellets from Dick Cheney's shotgun, or the clamor for the Rumsfeld resignation. Yet contrast all this hysteria with the slight whimpers surrounding recent controversies over conflicts of interest or lapses in judgment surrounding Richard Armitage, Harry Reid, or Dianne Feinstein. The destruction of federal documents that might well alter history's consensus by former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger was a snore for most journalists.
What, then, is the one common tie that explains all these furious efforts of the media and partisans to go after these present and former Bush-administration officials?
Payback for Iraq.
Everything stated in the following article fits the following pattern.
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
Until the news media becomes unbiased, they are the scum of the earth. The news media is on a mission to destroy Christians, Conservatives and Republicans.
America needs to win the Iraq War and Christians need to win the Cultural War.
----------------------------------------------
Iraqi Blowback - Explaining why Paul Wolfowitz is a travesty and Sandy Berger is a snooze.
By Victor Davis Hanson
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGVmNTI3NThhZDJmZDhjY2Q0ZWRlODU5NjY1MWFkMmU=
The resigned Scooter Libby did not leak Valerie Plame's name, a fact known to a special prosecutor charged with finding out who did and if were a crime. After hours of testimony, he was found self-contradictory under oath (though self-contradictory hardly to the extent of a Joe Wilson who said and wrote things about his yellow-cake inquiries that could not be conceivably true), and now faces a possible prison sentence.
Ditto the exemption given to the Duke accuser who repeatedly lied in her sworn testimonials, but will apparently not be charged with perjury because her stories are so implausible that officials think she must be unhinged — a new rationale that the perjurer is apparently free from indictment when the concoctions exceed possible belief.
Alberto Gonzalez perhaps (emphasize "perhaps," as yet we don't know all the facts) showed a lapse in judgment or at least of political savvy by firing politically appointed federal attorneys, something that was not unusual in past Democratic administrations.
Paul Wolfowitz, who sought to curb corruption that undermines support for World Bank aid to Africa, likewise is facing a lynch mob over perhaps a similar one-time lapse of judgment in regard to compensation of a companion — nothing, however, ranking with the various scandals surrounding Kofi Annan, whose son profited by United Nations exemptions given through his family ties. In today's moral calculus, presiding over a $50-billion-dollar Oil-for-Food scandal that led to frequent death in Iraq and profit among global elites is a misdemeanor, recommending a pay package for an employee one dates is an unforgivable felony.
One could go on with the furor over the misdirected pellets from Dick Cheney's shotgun, or the clamor for the Rumsfeld resignation. Yet contrast all this hysteria with the slight whimpers surrounding recent controversies over conflicts of interest or lapses in judgment surrounding Richard Armitage, Harry Reid, or Dianne Feinstein. The destruction of federal documents that might well alter history's consensus by former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger was a snore for most journalists.
What, then, is the one common tie that explains all these furious efforts of the media and partisans to go after these present and former Bush-administration officials?
Payback for Iraq.
Friday, April 13, 2007
Failure - Duke Lacrosse Players
Failure - Duke Lacrosse Players
It is the news media that should be sued for the violation of the civil rights of the Duke Players.
The news media knew that this was a bogus story, but jumped on it because the story was racial (black/white), sexual, and political (northern liberals/southern conservatives).
The news media needs to report the new instead of makeing the news.
Only when the news media is held liable for gross neglect will there be real news reporting.
--------------------------------
Cleared Duke Players Could Sue
Apr 12 05:02 PM US/Eastern
By STEVE HARTSOE
Associated Press Writer
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) - The disgraced district attorney in the Duke lacrosse rape case apologized to the three athletes in a carefully worded statement Thursday as their lawyers weighed whether to sue him—and some legal experts say they have a case.
While prosecutors generally have immunity for what they do inside the courtroom, experts said that protection probably doesn't cover some of Mike Nifong's more questionable actions in his handling of the case—such as calling the lacrosse players "a bunch of hooligans" in one of several interviews deemed unethical by the state bar.
"I think their chances of success suing Mr. Nifong are reasonably good, despite what we call prosecutorial immunity," said John Banzhaf, a professor at the George Washington University School of Law.
On Wednesday, North Carolina Attorney General Roy threw out the case against the three young men, pronounced them innocent and delivered a withering attack on Nifong, portraying him as a "rogue" prosecutor guilty of "overreaching." Cooper said Nifong rushed the case, failed to verify the accuser's allegations and pressed on despite the warning signs.
In his first comment on that decision, Nifong said in a statement Thursday: "To the extent that I made judgments that ultimately proved to be incorrect, I apologize to the three students that were wrongly accused."
He issued what appeared to be a plea to the students not to take any further action, saying, "It is my sincere desire that the actions of Attorney General Cooper will serve to remedy any remaining injury that has resulted from these cases."
So far, attorneys for David Evans, Reade Seligmann, and Collin Finnerty have not said whether they plan a civil action against Nifong. But they have not ruled it out.
"We're certainly going to be advising him and the Seligmann family of all of their options. But nobody is racing to file any kind of a lawsuit at this point," said Jim Cooney, Seligmann's attorney.
Separately, the North Carolina bar charged Nifong months ago with several violations of professional conduct that could lead to his disbarment. The case is set for trial before a bar committee in June.
Among other things, the bar said Nifong made misleading and inflammatory comments about the athletes, even before they were charged. In the early days of the case, for example, Nifong said several times that members of the lacrosse team were not cooperating with investigators. Not true, according to court documents.
Experts said the ethics charges could form the basis for a lawsuit seeking damages from Nifong.
"Ordinarily, a prosecutor has absolute immunity for the actions he takes in preparation for a case, but there are some caveats to that, and one of them is he does not have absolute immunity for misleading statements he gives at press conferences," said Shannon Gilreath, an adjunct professor at the Wake Forest University School of Law.
Other actions Nifong took outside of the courtroom could open him up to a lawsuit, Banzhaf said. Nifong, among other things, directed the police lineup at which the accuser identified the three players; the lineup has been criticized as faulty. The bar has also accused Nifong of lying in court about having turned over all DNA test results to the defense.
"When he acts as an investigator and advises police, or makes representations to court which may be false, in all these situations he does not have absolute immunity," Banzhaf said.
But Norm Early, a former Denver district attorney who has worked for the National District Attorneys Association, said Nifong's actions alone are not enough to win a lawsuit. Nifong's intent is crucial.
"The protection of immunity is pretty broad unless it's ruled he had malicious intent or that it was something close to that," Early said. "It would be very difficult to prove a case against him."
Other potential targets for a lawsuit include the accuser herself. Cooper said his investigators concluded no attack took place.
"There's no question they've got a lawsuit against her if she's brought false charges against them, which may be even more easily provable than actions against Nifong," said Stan Goldman, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.
In October, months before the bar filed its ethics complaint, Evans' mother warned in an interview: "Mr. Nifong, you've picked on the wrong families ... and you will pay every day for the rest of your life."
How much money they could get out of Nifong is unclear.
Nifong is a career civil servant, and his financial disclosure statement filed with the state suggests he is not especially wealthy. His only listed income is his salary of about $110,000, and aside from his home in Durham and some unspecified real estate in western North Carolina, he appears to have no significant assets outside of any mutual funds and retirement accounts.
"I think it's fair to say they're angry," Cooney, Seligmann's attorney, said of the families. "It's an anger of, 'What part of innocent don't you understand?' It's not, `We're going to go take your house and pension plan.' There's no plan to seek revenge against anybody."
That has left some to suggest the players and their families might sue Duke University, which has been heavily criticized in some quarters for suspending the players and canceling the lacrosse team's season before the young men were even tried.
But Banzhaf said such a lawsuit is not likely to succeed, since university administrators did not have access to the facts of the case and were basing their actions on what they learned from Nifong.
A Duke spokesman declined to comment on the prospect of a lawsuit.
Goldman said the real aim of a lawsuit against Duke, an elite private school with a multibillion-dollar endowment, might be to win an out- of-court settlement and recoup what are sure to be staggering legal bills.
"I can see Duke University just settling with these guys, even if there isn't a tremendous basis" for a suit, Goldman said. "Duke's got a lot of money and been around a long time."
It is the news media that should be sued for the violation of the civil rights of the Duke Players.
The news media knew that this was a bogus story, but jumped on it because the story was racial (black/white), sexual, and political (northern liberals/southern conservatives).
The news media needs to report the new instead of makeing the news.
Only when the news media is held liable for gross neglect will there be real news reporting.
--------------------------------
Cleared Duke Players Could Sue
Apr 12 05:02 PM US/Eastern
By STEVE HARTSOE
Associated Press Writer
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) - The disgraced district attorney in the Duke lacrosse rape case apologized to the three athletes in a carefully worded statement Thursday as their lawyers weighed whether to sue him—and some legal experts say they have a case.
While prosecutors generally have immunity for what they do inside the courtroom, experts said that protection probably doesn't cover some of Mike Nifong's more questionable actions in his handling of the case—such as calling the lacrosse players "a bunch of hooligans" in one of several interviews deemed unethical by the state bar.
"I think their chances of success suing Mr. Nifong are reasonably good, despite what we call prosecutorial immunity," said John Banzhaf, a professor at the George Washington University School of Law.
On Wednesday, North Carolina Attorney General Roy threw out the case against the three young men, pronounced them innocent and delivered a withering attack on Nifong, portraying him as a "rogue" prosecutor guilty of "overreaching." Cooper said Nifong rushed the case, failed to verify the accuser's allegations and pressed on despite the warning signs.
In his first comment on that decision, Nifong said in a statement Thursday: "To the extent that I made judgments that ultimately proved to be incorrect, I apologize to the three students that were wrongly accused."
He issued what appeared to be a plea to the students not to take any further action, saying, "It is my sincere desire that the actions of Attorney General Cooper will serve to remedy any remaining injury that has resulted from these cases."
So far, attorneys for David Evans, Reade Seligmann, and Collin Finnerty have not said whether they plan a civil action against Nifong. But they have not ruled it out.
"We're certainly going to be advising him and the Seligmann family of all of their options. But nobody is racing to file any kind of a lawsuit at this point," said Jim Cooney, Seligmann's attorney.
Separately, the North Carolina bar charged Nifong months ago with several violations of professional conduct that could lead to his disbarment. The case is set for trial before a bar committee in June.
Among other things, the bar said Nifong made misleading and inflammatory comments about the athletes, even before they were charged. In the early days of the case, for example, Nifong said several times that members of the lacrosse team were not cooperating with investigators. Not true, according to court documents.
Experts said the ethics charges could form the basis for a lawsuit seeking damages from Nifong.
"Ordinarily, a prosecutor has absolute immunity for the actions he takes in preparation for a case, but there are some caveats to that, and one of them is he does not have absolute immunity for misleading statements he gives at press conferences," said Shannon Gilreath, an adjunct professor at the Wake Forest University School of Law.
Other actions Nifong took outside of the courtroom could open him up to a lawsuit, Banzhaf said. Nifong, among other things, directed the police lineup at which the accuser identified the three players; the lineup has been criticized as faulty. The bar has also accused Nifong of lying in court about having turned over all DNA test results to the defense.
"When he acts as an investigator and advises police, or makes representations to court which may be false, in all these situations he does not have absolute immunity," Banzhaf said.
But Norm Early, a former Denver district attorney who has worked for the National District Attorneys Association, said Nifong's actions alone are not enough to win a lawsuit. Nifong's intent is crucial.
"The protection of immunity is pretty broad unless it's ruled he had malicious intent or that it was something close to that," Early said. "It would be very difficult to prove a case against him."
Other potential targets for a lawsuit include the accuser herself. Cooper said his investigators concluded no attack took place.
"There's no question they've got a lawsuit against her if she's brought false charges against them, which may be even more easily provable than actions against Nifong," said Stan Goldman, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.
In October, months before the bar filed its ethics complaint, Evans' mother warned in an interview: "Mr. Nifong, you've picked on the wrong families ... and you will pay every day for the rest of your life."
How much money they could get out of Nifong is unclear.
Nifong is a career civil servant, and his financial disclosure statement filed with the state suggests he is not especially wealthy. His only listed income is his salary of about $110,000, and aside from his home in Durham and some unspecified real estate in western North Carolina, he appears to have no significant assets outside of any mutual funds and retirement accounts.
"I think it's fair to say they're angry," Cooney, Seligmann's attorney, said of the families. "It's an anger of, 'What part of innocent don't you understand?' It's not, `We're going to go take your house and pension plan.' There's no plan to seek revenge against anybody."
That has left some to suggest the players and their families might sue Duke University, which has been heavily criticized in some quarters for suspending the players and canceling the lacrosse team's season before the young men were even tried.
But Banzhaf said such a lawsuit is not likely to succeed, since university administrators did not have access to the facts of the case and were basing their actions on what they learned from Nifong.
A Duke spokesman declined to comment on the prospect of a lawsuit.
Goldman said the real aim of a lawsuit against Duke, an elite private school with a multibillion-dollar endowment, might be to win an out- of-court settlement and recoup what are sure to be staggering legal bills.
"I can see Duke University just settling with these guys, even if there isn't a tremendous basis" for a suit, Goldman said. "Duke's got a lot of money and been around a long time."
Sunday, April 8, 2007
Failure - Pelosi Syria Meetings
Failure - Pelosi Syria Meetings
The news media is failing to cover the activities of the democrats in the Middle East. Pelosi is off dealing with Syria and the news media is failing to provide the America people with the purpose of the dealings. The news media is also failing to get the democrats to provide a plan for dealing with the Middle East if there are forced troop reductions.
Pelosi could endanger America as Bill Clinton endangered America by entering into agreements that allowed the Islamic Terrorists to ultimately attack America and kill 3000 American.
President Bush has made his policy very clear, the democrats need to do the same.
The democrats will never make their policy clear until the news media begins to question the democrats.
If the news media would have questioned Clinton's foreign policy, 9/11 could have been prevented. The news media failed to question the Clinton Administration about the WMDs that the Clinton Administration stated were in Iraq. President Bush and most journalists assumed there were WMDs because the Clinton Administration said there were WMDs.
The news media failed America by not getting to the truth about what the democrats were doing.
--------------------------------------------
White House criticizes Pelosi's planned Syria visit
POSTED: 8:31 p.m. EDT, March 30, 2007
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House has criticized House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's plans to stop in Syria next week during a Middle East trip that began Friday.
She will be the highest-ranking U.S. official to visit Syria since relations deteriorated between Damascus and Washington.
The United States has accused Syria of aiding the Sunni insurgency in western Iraq with weapons and fighters. Syria also is accused of supporting the militant extremist groups Hezbollah, a Shiite political party and militia, and Hamas.
"We do not encourage and, in fact, we discourage members of Congress to make such visits to Syria," said White House deputy spokeswoman Dana Perino. "This is a country that is a state sponsor of terror, one that is trying to disrupt the (Prime Minister Fouad) Siniora government in Lebanon and one that is allowing foreign fighters to flow through its borders to Iraq.
"I don't know what she is trying to accomplish, and I don't know if anyone in the administration has spoken to her about it," Perino said. "In general, we do discourage such trips."
The news media is failing to cover the activities of the democrats in the Middle East. Pelosi is off dealing with Syria and the news media is failing to provide the America people with the purpose of the dealings. The news media is also failing to get the democrats to provide a plan for dealing with the Middle East if there are forced troop reductions.
Pelosi could endanger America as Bill Clinton endangered America by entering into agreements that allowed the Islamic Terrorists to ultimately attack America and kill 3000 American.
President Bush has made his policy very clear, the democrats need to do the same.
The democrats will never make their policy clear until the news media begins to question the democrats.
If the news media would have questioned Clinton's foreign policy, 9/11 could have been prevented. The news media failed to question the Clinton Administration about the WMDs that the Clinton Administration stated were in Iraq. President Bush and most journalists assumed there were WMDs because the Clinton Administration said there were WMDs.
The news media failed America by not getting to the truth about what the democrats were doing.
--------------------------------------------
White House criticizes Pelosi's planned Syria visit
POSTED: 8:31 p.m. EDT, March 30, 2007
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House has criticized House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's plans to stop in Syria next week during a Middle East trip that began Friday.
She will be the highest-ranking U.S. official to visit Syria since relations deteriorated between Damascus and Washington.
The United States has accused Syria of aiding the Sunni insurgency in western Iraq with weapons and fighters. Syria also is accused of supporting the militant extremist groups Hezbollah, a Shiite political party and militia, and Hamas.
"We do not encourage and, in fact, we discourage members of Congress to make such visits to Syria," said White House deputy spokeswoman Dana Perino. "This is a country that is a state sponsor of terror, one that is trying to disrupt the (Prime Minister Fouad) Siniora government in Lebanon and one that is allowing foreign fighters to flow through its borders to Iraq.
"I don't know what she is trying to accomplish, and I don't know if anyone in the administration has spoken to her about it," Perino said. "In general, we do discourage such trips."
Failure - GLSEN Social/Political Activities
Failure - GLSEN Social/Political Activities
A major story the news media is not covering is the activities of GLSEN an organization advocating teaching acceptance of homosexuality in the public school system.
http://www.glsen.org/
An organization that every Christian should be supporting is Mass Resistance.
http://www.massresistance.org/
The state of Massachusetts has been selected by homosexuals to establish a foothold for developing educational programs that endorse and advocate homosexuality. Massachusetts was selected because the judges in Massachusetts were already inclined to support homosexual activities.
GLSEN says it's purpose is to prevent verbal and physical abuse of homosexuals, and that is good, however the real purpose of GLSEN is to force the public school system to teach acceptance of homosexuality as an acceptable alternative lifestyle.
Homosexuality should never be considered an acceptable alternative so long as there is AIDS. No lifestyle should be advocated that has a very high probability of a deadly disease.
Homosexuality was tolerated so long as it stayed in the closet (not condemned, but not advocated). Sin is an ever present aspect of the world, but no one should advocate homosexuality and no one should advocate adultery.
The news media have also discontinued all coverage of AIDS deaths in Africa and America because this is negative news coverage for the democratic party which accepts and advocates homosexuality.
A major story the news media is not covering is the activities of GLSEN an organization advocating teaching acceptance of homosexuality in the public school system.
http://www.glsen.org/
An organization that every Christian should be supporting is Mass Resistance.
http://www.massresistance.org/
The state of Massachusetts has been selected by homosexuals to establish a foothold for developing educational programs that endorse and advocate homosexuality. Massachusetts was selected because the judges in Massachusetts were already inclined to support homosexual activities.
GLSEN says it's purpose is to prevent verbal and physical abuse of homosexuals, and that is good, however the real purpose of GLSEN is to force the public school system to teach acceptance of homosexuality as an acceptable alternative lifestyle.
Homosexuality should never be considered an acceptable alternative so long as there is AIDS. No lifestyle should be advocated that has a very high probability of a deadly disease.
Homosexuality was tolerated so long as it stayed in the closet (not condemned, but not advocated). Sin is an ever present aspect of the world, but no one should advocate homosexuality and no one should advocate adultery.
The news media have also discontinued all coverage of AIDS deaths in Africa and America because this is negative news coverage for the democratic party which accepts and advocates homosexuality.
Thursday, April 5, 2007
Failure - Fienstein Quits MILCON
Failure - Fienstein Quits MILCON
Another News Media Failure
There are two aspects of this story that is disturbing;
1) Six years and the news media did nothing. Haliburton and Cheney were constant headline news, but Feinstein got away with stealing for six years.
2) Even when the story was uncovered, it was not by the national news media (ABC, NBC, CBS) but rather by Peter Byrne, a local California reporter.
The failure of the national news networks to develop news events when democrats are involved further proves the news media participation in the Cultural War.
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
The only real question is whether the news media is the propaganda wing of the democratic party or the democratic party is the political wing of the Atheistic Liberal News Media.
-------------------------------------
March 21-27, 2007
Sen. Dianne Feinstein
Pencil her out: Sen. Dianne Feinstein resigned after six years on the Military Contruction Appropriations subcommittee.
Feinstein Resigns
Senator exits MILCON following Metro exposé, vet-care scandal
By Peter Byrne
SEN. Dianne Feinstein has resigned from the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee. As previously and extensively reviewed in these pages, Feinstein was chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years, during which time she had a conflict of interest due to her husband Richard C. Blum's ownership of two major defense contractors, who were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by Feinstein.
As MILCON leader, Feinstein relished the details of military construction, even micromanaging one project at the level of its sewer design. She regularly took junkets to military bases around the world to inspect construction projects, some of which were contracted to her husband's companies, Perini Corp. and URS Corp.
Perhaps she resigned from MILCON because she could not take the heat generated by Metro's expose of her ethics (which was partially funded by the Investigative Fund of the Nation Institute). Or was her work on the subcommittee finished because Blum divested ownership of his military construction and advanced weapons manufacturing firms in late 2005?
The MILCON subcommittee is not only in charge of supervising military construction, it also oversees "quality of life" issues for veterans, which includes building housing for military families and operating hospitals and clinics for wounded soldiers. Perhaps Feinstein is trying to disassociate herself from MILCON's incredible failure to provide decent medical care for wounded soldiers.
Two years ago, before the Washington Post became belatedly involved, the online magazine Salon.com exposed the horrors of deficient medical care for Iraq war veterans. While leading MILCON, Feinstein had ample warning of the medical-care meltdown. But she was not proactive on veteran's affairs.
Feinstein abandoned MILCON as her ethical problems were surfacing in the media, and as it was becoming clear that her subcommittee left grievously wounded veterans to rot while her family was profiting from the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. It turns out that Blum also holds large investments in companies that were selling medical equipment and supplies and real estate leases—often without the benefit of competitive bidding—to the Department of Veterans Affairs, even as the system of medical care for veterans collapsed on his wife's watch.
As of December 2006, according to SEC filings and www.fedspending.org, three corporations in which Blum's financial entities own a total of $1 billion in stock won considerable favor from the budgets of the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs:
# Boston Scientific Corporation: $17.8 million for medical equipment and supplies; 85 percent of contracts awarded without benefit of competition.
# Kinetic Concepts Inc.: $12 million, medical equipment and supplies; 28 percent noncompetitively awarded.
# CB Richard Ellis: The Blum-controlled international real estate firm holds congressionally funded contracts to lease office space to the Department of Veterans Affairs. It also is involved in redeveloping military bases turned over to the private sector.
You would think that, considering all the money Feinstein's family has pocketed by waging global warfare while ignoring the plight of wounded American soldiers, she would show a smidgeon of shame and resign from the entire Senate, not just a subcommittee. Conversely, you'd think she might stick around MILCON to try and fix the medical-care disaster she helped to engineer for the vets who were suckered into fighting her and Bush's panoply of unjust wars.
Contact Peter Byrne or send a letter to the editor about this story.
Another News Media Failure
There are two aspects of this story that is disturbing;
1) Six years and the news media did nothing. Haliburton and Cheney were constant headline news, but Feinstein got away with stealing for six years.
2) Even when the story was uncovered, it was not by the national news media (ABC, NBC, CBS) but rather by Peter Byrne, a local California reporter.
The failure of the national news networks to develop news events when democrats are involved further proves the news media participation in the Cultural War.
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
The only real question is whether the news media is the propaganda wing of the democratic party or the democratic party is the political wing of the Atheistic Liberal News Media.
-------------------------------------
March 21-27, 2007
Sen. Dianne Feinstein
Pencil her out: Sen. Dianne Feinstein resigned after six years on the Military Contruction Appropriations subcommittee.
Feinstein Resigns
Senator exits MILCON following Metro exposé, vet-care scandal
By Peter Byrne
SEN. Dianne Feinstein has resigned from the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee. As previously and extensively reviewed in these pages, Feinstein was chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years, during which time she had a conflict of interest due to her husband Richard C. Blum's ownership of two major defense contractors, who were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by Feinstein.
As MILCON leader, Feinstein relished the details of military construction, even micromanaging one project at the level of its sewer design. She regularly took junkets to military bases around the world to inspect construction projects, some of which were contracted to her husband's companies, Perini Corp. and URS Corp.
Perhaps she resigned from MILCON because she could not take the heat generated by Metro's expose of her ethics (which was partially funded by the Investigative Fund of the Nation Institute). Or was her work on the subcommittee finished because Blum divested ownership of his military construction and advanced weapons manufacturing firms in late 2005?
The MILCON subcommittee is not only in charge of supervising military construction, it also oversees "quality of life" issues for veterans, which includes building housing for military families and operating hospitals and clinics for wounded soldiers. Perhaps Feinstein is trying to disassociate herself from MILCON's incredible failure to provide decent medical care for wounded soldiers.
Two years ago, before the Washington Post became belatedly involved, the online magazine Salon.com exposed the horrors of deficient medical care for Iraq war veterans. While leading MILCON, Feinstein had ample warning of the medical-care meltdown. But she was not proactive on veteran's affairs.
Feinstein abandoned MILCON as her ethical problems were surfacing in the media, and as it was becoming clear that her subcommittee left grievously wounded veterans to rot while her family was profiting from the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. It turns out that Blum also holds large investments in companies that were selling medical equipment and supplies and real estate leases—often without the benefit of competitive bidding—to the Department of Veterans Affairs, even as the system of medical care for veterans collapsed on his wife's watch.
As of December 2006, according to SEC filings and www.fedspending.org, three corporations in which Blum's financial entities own a total of $1 billion in stock won considerable favor from the budgets of the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs:
# Boston Scientific Corporation: $17.8 million for medical equipment and supplies; 85 percent of contracts awarded without benefit of competition.
# Kinetic Concepts Inc.: $12 million, medical equipment and supplies; 28 percent noncompetitively awarded.
# CB Richard Ellis: The Blum-controlled international real estate firm holds congressionally funded contracts to lease office space to the Department of Veterans Affairs. It also is involved in redeveloping military bases turned over to the private sector.
You would think that, considering all the money Feinstein's family has pocketed by waging global warfare while ignoring the plight of wounded American soldiers, she would show a smidgeon of shame and resign from the entire Senate, not just a subcommittee. Conversely, you'd think she might stick around MILCON to try and fix the medical-care disaster she helped to engineer for the vets who were suckered into fighting her and Bush's panoply of unjust wars.
Contact Peter Byrne or send a letter to the editor about this story.
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Failure - Pelosi Corrupt
Failure - Pelosi Corrupt
Pelosi as corrupt as Bill Clinton
If I were elected president, the first thing I would do is to appoint a select committee to study the teaching of evolution in American schools.
In order to assure a harmonious working relationship, I would only appoint people to the committee that agreed that evolution is a unprovable faith based theory that supports the Atheistic Lifestyle and should not be taught in public schools.
This harmonious working relationship would also allow me to payoff those who had helped elect me.
--------------------------------
The Atheistic Liberal News Media reporters are hypocrites
If a Republican were to do this there would be 10,000 reporters making a story about the corrupt practice of appointing cronies to committees.
Pelosi exempting the San Francisco based fish companies from the minimum wage increase was another story that the Atheistic Liberal News Media would not cover because Pelosi is a democrat and the democrats and Atheistic Liberal News Media has a symbiotic relationship.
--------------------------------------------
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2007/01/18/D8MO0AJ00.html
Pelosi Creates Global Warming Committee
Jan 18 6:39 PM US/Eastern
By JOHN HEILPRIN
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sought to create a special committee Thursday in an effort to jump-start long-delayed government efforts to deal with global warming and produce a bill by Independence Day.
Pelosi, D-Calif., said the committee would hold hearings and recommend legislation on how to reduce greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide generated by fossil fuels, that most scientists blame for a gradual warming of the earth's climate.
The committee will be led by Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who shares Pelosi's goals, said a Democratic leadership aide, speaking on condition of anonymity because Pelosi had yet to announce her choice.
"We should probably name it the committee on world travel and junkets," said Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which overseas the Clean Air Act and the Environmental Protection Agency.
"We're just empowering a bunch of enthusiastic amateurs to go around and make speeches and make commitments that will be very difficult to honor," said Dingell, a champion of the auto industry, which could be required to producing cleaner-burning and more fuel efficient vehicles.
Dingell, the House's longest-serving member at age 80, long has viewed environmental legislation as being his domain.
"They're going to get under the feet of and interfere with those who are trying to do a decent job of legislating," Dingell said in an interview with The Associated Press. "I'm unaware of anything they will do that will be of any value."
Environmentalists hailed Pelosi's decision as a momentum-builder to challenge the administration.
"This is a really gutsy move by the speaker," said Philip Clapp, president of National Environmental Trust. "Action on global warming is so urgent that the speaker has probably taken the only course that could produce a comprehensive bill before the 2008 elections swamp the political process."
Pelosi as corrupt as Bill Clinton
If I were elected president, the first thing I would do is to appoint a select committee to study the teaching of evolution in American schools.
In order to assure a harmonious working relationship, I would only appoint people to the committee that agreed that evolution is a unprovable faith based theory that supports the Atheistic Lifestyle and should not be taught in public schools.
This harmonious working relationship would also allow me to payoff those who had helped elect me.
--------------------------------
The Atheistic Liberal News Media reporters are hypocrites
If a Republican were to do this there would be 10,000 reporters making a story about the corrupt practice of appointing cronies to committees.
Pelosi exempting the San Francisco based fish companies from the minimum wage increase was another story that the Atheistic Liberal News Media would not cover because Pelosi is a democrat and the democrats and Atheistic Liberal News Media has a symbiotic relationship.
--------------------------------------------
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2007/01/18/D8MO0AJ00.html
Pelosi Creates Global Warming Committee
Jan 18 6:39 PM US/Eastern
By JOHN HEILPRIN
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sought to create a special committee Thursday in an effort to jump-start long-delayed government efforts to deal with global warming and produce a bill by Independence Day.
Pelosi, D-Calif., said the committee would hold hearings and recommend legislation on how to reduce greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide generated by fossil fuels, that most scientists blame for a gradual warming of the earth's climate.
The committee will be led by Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who shares Pelosi's goals, said a Democratic leadership aide, speaking on condition of anonymity because Pelosi had yet to announce her choice.
"We should probably name it the committee on world travel and junkets," said Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which overseas the Clean Air Act and the Environmental Protection Agency.
"We're just empowering a bunch of enthusiastic amateurs to go around and make speeches and make commitments that will be very difficult to honor," said Dingell, a champion of the auto industry, which could be required to producing cleaner-burning and more fuel efficient vehicles.
Dingell, the House's longest-serving member at age 80, long has viewed environmental legislation as being his domain.
"They're going to get under the feet of and interfere with those who are trying to do a decent job of legislating," Dingell said in an interview with The Associated Press. "I'm unaware of anything they will do that will be of any value."
Environmentalists hailed Pelosi's decision as a momentum-builder to challenge the administration.
"This is a really gutsy move by the speaker," said Philip Clapp, president of National Environmental Trust. "Action on global warming is so urgent that the speaker has probably taken the only course that could produce a comprehensive bill before the 2008 elections swamp the political process."
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
News Stories NOT Being Investigated
News Stories NOT Being Investigated
Now that democrats have control of the senate and the house, there are a lot of things that the news media does not consider news worthy.
1) Pelosi exemption of San Francisco company from minimum wage bill.
2) Failure of the Pelosi's 100 day plan.
3) Failure of democrats to get America out of Iraq.
4) democrat Jim Webb caring a gun.
5) democrats adding pork projects to Iraq spending bill.
The reason for the Atheistic Liberal News Media not investigating these stories is explained by the following:
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
The news media in America is nothing more than the propaganda wing of the democratic party.
Journalists are hypocrites for their failure to treat democrats and Republicans equally.
Now that democrats have control of the senate and the house, there are a lot of things that the news media does not consider news worthy.
1) Pelosi exemption of San Francisco company from minimum wage bill.
2) Failure of the Pelosi's 100 day plan.
3) Failure of democrats to get America out of Iraq.
4) democrat Jim Webb caring a gun.
5) democrats adding pork projects to Iraq spending bill.
The reason for the Atheistic Liberal News Media not investigating these stories is explained by the following:
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
The news media in America is nothing more than the propaganda wing of the democratic party.
Journalists are hypocrites for their failure to treat democrats and Republicans equally.
News Media Failures
News Media Failures
The previous NARJ discussion was put together after the 2006 election as documentation of the 60 years of news media bias and especially the news media bias that produced the democratic victory in 2006.
Since then, there have many stories of democratic failures that the major national news organizations have failed to develop. If the same things had been done by Republicans the story would have been the lead story by ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN for at least 6 weeks.
The failure of the national news networks to develop news events when democrats are involved further proves the news media participation in the Cultural War.
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
The only real question is whether the news media is the propaganda wing of the democratic party or the democratic party is the political wing of the Atheistic Liberal News Media.
What will be presented are examples of democratic failures that the national news media failed to develop into a national news story.
The previous NARJ discussion was put together after the 2006 election as documentation of the 60 years of news media bias and especially the news media bias that produced the democratic victory in 2006.
Since then, there have many stories of democratic failures that the major national news organizations have failed to develop. If the same things had been done by Republicans the story would have been the lead story by ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN for at least 6 weeks.
The failure of the national news networks to develop news events when democrats are involved further proves the news media participation in the Cultural War.
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
The only real question is whether the news media is the propaganda wing of the democratic party or the democratic party is the political wing of the Atheistic Liberal News Media.
What will be presented are examples of democratic failures that the national news media failed to develop into a national news story.
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Need for NARJ
A Code of Ethics could be required by congress, but neither Republicans nor democrats will tackle this issue and private citizens do not have the time or money to pursue the court battle that will be required to get a Code of Ethics in place.
I am establishing a NARJ to pay individuals for proof of Code of Ethics violation and to pay for legal fees to get a Code of Ethics established by suing relative to a Code of Ethics that should be in place. If the lawsuit is won, the Code of Ethics now has legal standing.
I promise to use all the funds from the sale of this book to bring a lawsuit against a journalist using the violation of The NSJ Code of Ethics. When the case is won in a court, that will formally establish a Code of Ethics that can be used for later lawsuits.
I am establishing a NARJ to pay individuals for proof of Code of Ethics violation and to pay for legal fees to get a Code of Ethics established by suing relative to a Code of Ethics that should be in place. If the lawsuit is won, the Code of Ethics now has legal standing.
I promise to use all the funds from the sale of this book to bring a lawsuit against a journalist using the violation of The NSJ Code of Ethics. When the case is won in a court, that will formally establish a Code of Ethics that can be used for later lawsuits.
Solution For Problem
Code of Ethics
A Code of Ethics exists for journalists, the problem is that it is totally voluntary and there are no penalties associated with the code.
Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics
Preamble
Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility. Members of the Society share a dedication to ethical behavior and adopt this code to declare the Society's principles and standards of practice.
Seek Truth and Report It
Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
Journalists should:
* Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.
* Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.
* Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability.
* Always question sources' motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.
* Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
* Never distort the content of news photos or video. Image enhancement for technical clarity is always permissible. Label montages and photo illustrations.
* Avoid misleading re-enactments or staged news events. If re-enactment is necessary to tell a story, label it.
* Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information except when traditional open methods will not yield information vital to the public. Use of such methods should be explained as part of the story
* Never plagiarize.
* Tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it isunpopular to do so.
* Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.
* Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status.
* Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.
* Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.
* Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.
* Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.
* Recognize a special obligation to ensure that the public's business is conducted in the open and that government records are open to inspection.
Minimize Harm
Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.
Journalists should:
* Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
* Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
* Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
* Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone's privacy.
* Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
* Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects or victims of sex crimes.
* Be judicious about naming criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.
* Balance a criminal suspect's fair trial rights with the public's right to be informed.
Act Independently
Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know.
Journalists should:
* Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
* Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
* Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service incommunity organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity. * Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
* Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.
* Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
* Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.
Be Accountable
Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.
Journalists should:
* Clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct.
* Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media.
* Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
* Expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.
* Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.
Recommended Addition to Code of Ethics
1) All news stories must have a peer review and sign-off before publication. This is a normal Quality Assurance process for all business.
2) All news stories will contain comparative information if available. If the item is a common occurrence it should be stated. If the same thing has happened before the relative magnitude must be stated.
A part of the comparative information should be an evaluation of previous situations. The democrats have totally failed to do almost everything, but when the Republicans do something they get criticized because they do not do it perfectly.
3) The number of people represented by a news story must be stated. 20 people can be made to look like a football stadium is full but represent only .00001 percent of the population thus distorting the presentation.
3) All news stories will have data presented in as many ways as possible in order that it be as clear as possible. Usually percentages are a better representation than numbers. To state a particular number can be misleading. 1000 deaths many seem large, but not out of 200 million people.
4) The source of all information used in a news story must be identified.
5) Credibility information must be presented for all sources of information must be identified..
First 10 people exposing a violation of the Code of Ethics should be paid $10,000 each for the time spent to prove the violation of the Code of Ethics.
Only news (events) should be reported, thus speculation of future events should be eliminated.
Views by news anchors and reporters should be eliminated. Reports by differing opinions should be presented in a balanced manner.
Speculative journalism should be eliminated.
Must stay out of politics.
Reporters are required to immediately report to authorities any illegal activity they discover.
The first responsibility of any reporter is to assure the proper authorities are notified and that any possible help be rendered, then begin filming or reporting. The news media knew what was happening in New Orleans but failed to report to local and federal authorities. Instead the kept the cameras running to get good film footage.
Any reporter found to be in violation of the Code of Ethics will be fired and barred from ever working in any journalistic capacity ever again.
Penalties for Violation of Code of Ethics
The main reason the news media has been able to get away with trash has been the reluctance of the judicial system to take action against the news media because of the freedom of the press Constitutional issue. A lot of the item that are involved are political in nature, so there is a question of who used who.
The Republicans have never been successful proving the news media is biased, and the democrats get the benefit so nothing ever gets done. I believe the real harm is the American people who do not get the best government possible because of the news media bias so it is the America people that should be allowed to sue and who should be allowed to sue the news media.
The news media is big business and get more money for more bazaar things. The news media is basically a pornography distributor because they play on the base nature of humans to see bloody images and hear stories of weird sexual events.
It is time consuming to prove that something is a half-truth or a fabrication. Most people do not have the time to spend on investigations, where their results will never be paid for. Fines punish the guilty and reward the person that did the investigative work.
Fines/Damages
(to be awarded by court and paid to the person that exposed the situation)
$1,000,000 for proof of Treason - New York Times Wire Tap and Money Tracking Stories
$100,000 for fabricated lie - Dan Rather story about Bush
$10,000 for failure to research sources -
$1000 for violation of Code of Ethics
The person who revealed the letter that Dan Rather used against President Bush was produced by a word processor and not a typewriter should have been paid $100,000.
With fines and rewards to people who investigate the news media, there will be an effective check and balance that is defiantly needed.
A Code of Ethics exists for journalists, the problem is that it is totally voluntary and there are no penalties associated with the code.
Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics
Preamble
Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility. Members of the Society share a dedication to ethical behavior and adopt this code to declare the Society's principles and standards of practice.
Seek Truth and Report It
Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
Journalists should:
* Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.
* Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.
* Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability.
* Always question sources' motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.
* Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
* Never distort the content of news photos or video. Image enhancement for technical clarity is always permissible. Label montages and photo illustrations.
* Avoid misleading re-enactments or staged news events. If re-enactment is necessary to tell a story, label it.
* Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information except when traditional open methods will not yield information vital to the public. Use of such methods should be explained as part of the story
* Never plagiarize.
* Tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it isunpopular to do so.
* Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.
* Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status.
* Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.
* Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.
* Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.
* Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.
* Recognize a special obligation to ensure that the public's business is conducted in the open and that government records are open to inspection.
Minimize Harm
Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.
Journalists should:
* Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
* Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
* Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
* Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone's privacy.
* Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
* Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects or victims of sex crimes.
* Be judicious about naming criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.
* Balance a criminal suspect's fair trial rights with the public's right to be informed.
Act Independently
Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know.
Journalists should:
* Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
* Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
* Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service incommunity organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity. * Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
* Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.
* Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
* Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.
Be Accountable
Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.
Journalists should:
* Clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct.
* Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media.
* Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
* Expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.
* Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.
Recommended Addition to Code of Ethics
1) All news stories must have a peer review and sign-off before publication. This is a normal Quality Assurance process for all business.
2) All news stories will contain comparative information if available. If the item is a common occurrence it should be stated. If the same thing has happened before the relative magnitude must be stated.
A part of the comparative information should be an evaluation of previous situations. The democrats have totally failed to do almost everything, but when the Republicans do something they get criticized because they do not do it perfectly.
3) The number of people represented by a news story must be stated. 20 people can be made to look like a football stadium is full but represent only .00001 percent of the population thus distorting the presentation.
3) All news stories will have data presented in as many ways as possible in order that it be as clear as possible. Usually percentages are a better representation than numbers. To state a particular number can be misleading. 1000 deaths many seem large, but not out of 200 million people.
4) The source of all information used in a news story must be identified.
5) Credibility information must be presented for all sources of information must be identified..
First 10 people exposing a violation of the Code of Ethics should be paid $10,000 each for the time spent to prove the violation of the Code of Ethics.
Only news (events) should be reported, thus speculation of future events should be eliminated.
Views by news anchors and reporters should be eliminated. Reports by differing opinions should be presented in a balanced manner.
Speculative journalism should be eliminated.
Must stay out of politics.
Reporters are required to immediately report to authorities any illegal activity they discover.
The first responsibility of any reporter is to assure the proper authorities are notified and that any possible help be rendered, then begin filming or reporting. The news media knew what was happening in New Orleans but failed to report to local and federal authorities. Instead the kept the cameras running to get good film footage.
Any reporter found to be in violation of the Code of Ethics will be fired and barred from ever working in any journalistic capacity ever again.
Penalties for Violation of Code of Ethics
The main reason the news media has been able to get away with trash has been the reluctance of the judicial system to take action against the news media because of the freedom of the press Constitutional issue. A lot of the item that are involved are political in nature, so there is a question of who used who.
The Republicans have never been successful proving the news media is biased, and the democrats get the benefit so nothing ever gets done. I believe the real harm is the American people who do not get the best government possible because of the news media bias so it is the America people that should be allowed to sue and who should be allowed to sue the news media.
The news media is big business and get more money for more bazaar things. The news media is basically a pornography distributor because they play on the base nature of humans to see bloody images and hear stories of weird sexual events.
It is time consuming to prove that something is a half-truth or a fabrication. Most people do not have the time to spend on investigations, where their results will never be paid for. Fines punish the guilty and reward the person that did the investigative work.
Fines/Damages
(to be awarded by court and paid to the person that exposed the situation)
$1,000,000 for proof of Treason - New York Times Wire Tap and Money Tracking Stories
$100,000 for fabricated lie - Dan Rather story about Bush
$10,000 for failure to research sources -
$1000 for violation of Code of Ethics
The person who revealed the letter that Dan Rather used against President Bush was produced by a word processor and not a typewriter should have been paid $100,000.
With fines and rewards to people who investigate the news media, there will be an effective check and balance that is defiantly needed.
Censorship of News Media in time of War
No soldier should ever be asked to go into battle unless there is full support from the nation that sent that soldier into battle. It would be far better not to go to war than to go to war without a commitment to do "whatever it takes to win". If there is the slightest question about going to war, America should not go to war, but when congress authorizes America to go to war, every critic should be considered a traitor. Soldiers are the shield that stand between the enemy and freedom in America, the war protestors and critics are the ones that stand behind the shield and stab the soldiers in the back.
The Iraq War is a perfect example for the need for news media censorship. The Iraq War was authorized by congress by almost an unanimous vote, but when WMDs were not found the democrats saw an opportunity to gain political power by becoming critics of the way the Iraq War was being handled by President Bush. The effort failed by Kerry in 2004, but the democrats and ALNM kept up the attack on President Bush until they succeeded by getting democrats back in control of congress in 2006.
In the Civil War and WW II news media censorship was used. Those have been the only wars that America has won. War should always be the last resort, but when America declares war it should be "All in to Win" or stay out. War can too easily be used as a political weapon.
Clinton knew fighting a war would not be popular and would not enter into war. Bush was forced into war, but got blamed for the war not being waged perfectly.
The Case for Censorship
War is serious business and not to be entered into lightly, however when entered into it must be carried to completion at all costs. This is also true of marriage. War is ugly. Pools of blood and burning vehicles make excellent news footage. War is ugly, but then the death of 3000 Americans killed by Islamic terrorists was also very ugly.
Any act that prolongs a war or gives encouragement to the enemy is an act of treason. The Islamic terrorists have great hope that they can win the war in Iraq as the Vietcong did in Vietnam by the Atheistic liberal news media antiwar propaganda.
I want to point out four facts.
1) In the civil war Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus, thus imposing censorship.
2) In WW I Woodrow Wilson imposed censorship
3) In WW II Franklin D. Roosevelt imposed censorship.
4) Since WW II there has been no censorship, but America has not won a war.
There is something really ugly about discussing the conduct of a war during the war. That has been recognized in the past by establishing a separate branch of law called Military Law. Trying to impose Civil Law on a military situation is unworkable. War is not a normal situation and what is occurring is not normal or desired. However, it must have been the will of the people in a democracy to enter the war or the people would not be in the war. Discussing the conduct of a war can easily be treason because any criticism is an aid and comfort to the enemy. Any delay in the war means more casualties will occur. Censorship is needed to prevent the abuse of freedom of speech that usually occurs during a war.
The proper time to discuss the conduct of a war is before or after the war. After the war, all documents should be open to the news media and the judicial system, but not during the war.
All military action should be by a full Declaration of War with total censorship.
Pearl Harbor vs WMD
A comparison of the Pearl Harbor and WMD provides an excellent justification for news media censorship in time of war.
Pearl Harbor represented a clear attack of an American Military Base by an enemy that wanted world domination. WMD was a clear threat to America from an enemy that wanted world domination.
Pearl Harbor may also have been a setup to entice Japan into war because the Roosevelt administration thought that could not be defeated if Japan was allowed to continue to invade countries. The Roosevelt administration had already cut off oil to Japan and Japan considered that an act of aggression that some could say was justification for Japan to attack Pearl Harbor.
Based on Iraq having used chemical weapon it was widely thought by most Americans that Iraq was continuing to develop WMDs. There were conflicting reports, but the safe side of the issue was to assume that WMDs were being developed and to proceed to eliminate the threat. The congress was convinced that WMDs existed, an authorized the Bush Administration to go to War with Iraq.
No news media was allowed to question the decisions of the Roosevelt administration because there was total news media censorship. If the news media would have been allowed to dig into the justification for going to war with Japan, I believe that WW II would have gone the way that the Iraq War has gone.
Most of the news media agreed with the Bush Administration that WMDs did exist, but when no WMDs were found, the news media turned on the Bush Administration and questioned every aspect of the Iraq War. Instead of just admitting that the intelligence was bad and moving on, the news media blamed the Bush Administration for deceiving them. The democratic party saw an opportunity to get back control of the government so they joined the news media in the blame game. If the Bush Administration could be blamed for the WMDs mistake, then every person in congress and every person in the news media that said they agreed that WMDs existed, should resign and never hold their position again. Blaming the Bush Administration for the bad intelligence was the most cowardly thing that could have ever been done.
There were a few (there are always a few) that opposed the Iraq War and questioned the intelligence of the WMDs. Are they heros or zeros? Lets say they were wrong and there had been WMDs and America did not go to war with Iraq. There will always be questions about who was right and who took the safe course of action, but for me, I believe the Bush Administration took the safe course of action. Those in the news media that were right about the WMDs and those that turned on the Bush Administration have done a great disservice to America by their constant criticism of the war.
WW II was won because there was total censorship of the news media. The Iraq War has been extended by the criticism of the Bush Administration by the news media and the democrats. WW II could have been extended and maybe even lost if the news media had not been censored.
America should never enter into a war unless there is a total commitment to win. A total commitment to win means there is total news media censorship. No soldier should ever be committed to battle unless there is a total commitment to win.
The use of the Iraq War to gain control of congress by the democratic party was an act of treason by the democratic party.
The Iraq War is a perfect example for the need for news media censorship. The Iraq War was authorized by congress by almost an unanimous vote, but when WMDs were not found the democrats saw an opportunity to gain political power by becoming critics of the way the Iraq War was being handled by President Bush. The effort failed by Kerry in 2004, but the democrats and ALNM kept up the attack on President Bush until they succeeded by getting democrats back in control of congress in 2006.
In the Civil War and WW II news media censorship was used. Those have been the only wars that America has won. War should always be the last resort, but when America declares war it should be "All in to Win" or stay out. War can too easily be used as a political weapon.
Clinton knew fighting a war would not be popular and would not enter into war. Bush was forced into war, but got blamed for the war not being waged perfectly.
The Case for Censorship
War is serious business and not to be entered into lightly, however when entered into it must be carried to completion at all costs. This is also true of marriage. War is ugly. Pools of blood and burning vehicles make excellent news footage. War is ugly, but then the death of 3000 Americans killed by Islamic terrorists was also very ugly.
Any act that prolongs a war or gives encouragement to the enemy is an act of treason. The Islamic terrorists have great hope that they can win the war in Iraq as the Vietcong did in Vietnam by the Atheistic liberal news media antiwar propaganda.
I want to point out four facts.
1) In the civil war Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus, thus imposing censorship.
2) In WW I Woodrow Wilson imposed censorship
3) In WW II Franklin D. Roosevelt imposed censorship.
4) Since WW II there has been no censorship, but America has not won a war.
There is something really ugly about discussing the conduct of a war during the war. That has been recognized in the past by establishing a separate branch of law called Military Law. Trying to impose Civil Law on a military situation is unworkable. War is not a normal situation and what is occurring is not normal or desired. However, it must have been the will of the people in a democracy to enter the war or the people would not be in the war. Discussing the conduct of a war can easily be treason because any criticism is an aid and comfort to the enemy. Any delay in the war means more casualties will occur. Censorship is needed to prevent the abuse of freedom of speech that usually occurs during a war.
The proper time to discuss the conduct of a war is before or after the war. After the war, all documents should be open to the news media and the judicial system, but not during the war.
All military action should be by a full Declaration of War with total censorship.
Pearl Harbor vs WMD
A comparison of the Pearl Harbor and WMD provides an excellent justification for news media censorship in time of war.
Pearl Harbor represented a clear attack of an American Military Base by an enemy that wanted world domination. WMD was a clear threat to America from an enemy that wanted world domination.
Pearl Harbor may also have been a setup to entice Japan into war because the Roosevelt administration thought that could not be defeated if Japan was allowed to continue to invade countries. The Roosevelt administration had already cut off oil to Japan and Japan considered that an act of aggression that some could say was justification for Japan to attack Pearl Harbor.
Based on Iraq having used chemical weapon it was widely thought by most Americans that Iraq was continuing to develop WMDs. There were conflicting reports, but the safe side of the issue was to assume that WMDs were being developed and to proceed to eliminate the threat. The congress was convinced that WMDs existed, an authorized the Bush Administration to go to War with Iraq.
No news media was allowed to question the decisions of the Roosevelt administration because there was total news media censorship. If the news media would have been allowed to dig into the justification for going to war with Japan, I believe that WW II would have gone the way that the Iraq War has gone.
Most of the news media agreed with the Bush Administration that WMDs did exist, but when no WMDs were found, the news media turned on the Bush Administration and questioned every aspect of the Iraq War. Instead of just admitting that the intelligence was bad and moving on, the news media blamed the Bush Administration for deceiving them. The democratic party saw an opportunity to get back control of the government so they joined the news media in the blame game. If the Bush Administration could be blamed for the WMDs mistake, then every person in congress and every person in the news media that said they agreed that WMDs existed, should resign and never hold their position again. Blaming the Bush Administration for the bad intelligence was the most cowardly thing that could have ever been done.
There were a few (there are always a few) that opposed the Iraq War and questioned the intelligence of the WMDs. Are they heros or zeros? Lets say they were wrong and there had been WMDs and America did not go to war with Iraq. There will always be questions about who was right and who took the safe course of action, but for me, I believe the Bush Administration took the safe course of action. Those in the news media that were right about the WMDs and those that turned on the Bush Administration have done a great disservice to America by their constant criticism of the war.
WW II was won because there was total censorship of the news media. The Iraq War has been extended by the criticism of the Bush Administration by the news media and the democrats. WW II could have been extended and maybe even lost if the news media had not been censored.
America should never enter into a war unless there is a total commitment to win. A total commitment to win means there is total news media censorship. No soldier should ever be committed to battle unless there is a total commitment to win.
The use of the Iraq War to gain control of congress by the democratic party was an act of treason by the democratic party.
Proof of Problem
For many years the Atheistic Liberal News Media (ALNM) could get away with anything. With the advent of Fox News and the internet, the lies of the ALNM are being disclosed, but there is no reward for those who spend their time and effort to do investigative reporting on the news media.
Items to cover
revolutionary war
Jefferson used news media to attack Adams
McCarthy Hearings
The McCarthy hearing were the reason the news media assassinated Nixon. There was no question there were communists in the news media and the entertainment industry. Perfect revenge.
Woodward and Burstein assassinate Nixon. Woodward coverup.
Walter Kronkite losses a war. Legal case involved.
Dan Rather lie
News York Times Treason Twice
Newsweek lie
USA Today lie
Duke Lacrosse story
Of all incidents this is the one that I had hoped would produce a lawsuit against the news media. The story was not investigated by the news media before the feeding frenzy began. The story was very damaging to Duke University, and the people involved.
The reason the news media started a feeding frenzy, was because it was an election year and there would be nothing better than to embarrass southern white voters (Republicans) by showing how white men rape blacks women.
NASCAR sterotyping
Valery Plume lie
Foley affair
Abramcoff affair.
Democrats and Republicans both involved, Republicans blamed.
Tom Delay affair.
Political struggle in Texas.
Katrina Issue.
Same thing happened in Chicago but press did not report because it was on Clinton watch.
Stem Cell Research Issue.
This was a killer for any Republican that supported Bush (George Allen). The stories always included may cure, but the implication was very clear that Bush was preventing Steam Cell Research. The story never got a honest evaluation. There was never a statement of the probability of success or the potential of problems. In the past, cloning was going to solve all the world problems, then animal transplants were going to solve all the world problems. The use of medical research and science to discredit God is a serious matter.
Global Warming.
Again the issue was used against Republicans.
Free ride for Kennedys, Clintons, and Kerrys
All the above indicate a problem. I believe the problem is a lack of a "Code of Ethics" for journalists. Even if a total lie is uncovered or treason is obvious, there is nothing that is done. The Republicans do nothing because they have been attacked too much already, and the democrats do nothing because it benefits them.
Items to cover
revolutionary war
Jefferson used news media to attack Adams
McCarthy Hearings
The McCarthy hearing were the reason the news media assassinated Nixon. There was no question there were communists in the news media and the entertainment industry. Perfect revenge.
Woodward and Burstein assassinate Nixon. Woodward coverup.
Walter Kronkite losses a war. Legal case involved.
Dan Rather lie
News York Times Treason Twice
Newsweek lie
USA Today lie
Duke Lacrosse story
Of all incidents this is the one that I had hoped would produce a lawsuit against the news media. The story was not investigated by the news media before the feeding frenzy began. The story was very damaging to Duke University, and the people involved.
The reason the news media started a feeding frenzy, was because it was an election year and there would be nothing better than to embarrass southern white voters (Republicans) by showing how white men rape blacks women.
NASCAR sterotyping
Valery Plume lie
Foley affair
Abramcoff affair.
Democrats and Republicans both involved, Republicans blamed.
Tom Delay affair.
Political struggle in Texas.
Katrina Issue.
Same thing happened in Chicago but press did not report because it was on Clinton watch.
Stem Cell Research Issue.
This was a killer for any Republican that supported Bush (George Allen). The stories always included may cure, but the implication was very clear that Bush was preventing Steam Cell Research. The story never got a honest evaluation. There was never a statement of the probability of success or the potential of problems. In the past, cloning was going to solve all the world problems, then animal transplants were going to solve all the world problems. The use of medical research and science to discredit God is a serious matter.
Global Warming.
Again the issue was used against Republicans.
Free ride for Kennedys, Clintons, and Kerrys
All the above indicate a problem. I believe the problem is a lack of a "Code of Ethics" for journalists. Even if a total lie is uncovered or treason is obvious, there is nothing that is done. The Republicans do nothing because they have been attacked too much already, and the democrats do nothing because it benefits them.
Statement of Problem
The years from 2001 to 2006 have produced the most compelling reason for a change in journalism in particular and the communications industry in general.
On 9/11/01 America was attacked by Islamic Terrorists and America went to war (??) in Iraq and Afghanistan. The war was almost unanimously approved by congress. The initial success in Afghanistan and Iraq were quick and very popular. After no Weapons of Mass Destruction were found in Iraq the mood of the news media began to change. The democratic party ran the 2004 presidential election based on the concept that John Jerry and the democrats could run the Iraq War better than President Bush. The democrats lost the 2004 election not only on the Iraq War issue, but mostly on the moral issues of homosexuality.
Two significant domestic events during the 2001-2006 time frame were the Enron Failure and the Katrina Hurricane.
From 2004 to 2006 there was an explosion of news stories criticizing every aspect of the Iraq War and every aspect of the Republican party domestic policy. The news stories were always along the lines that some else could have done better. The democrats picked up on the concept being portrayed by the news media and were successful at wining the 2006 congressional election based on a need for a change. The democrats were elected on a change that had not been defined.
Some will say the 2006 election was all about the Iraq War and Republican Incompetence but I believe a great part of the 2006 election was the Cultural War in America. The 2004 election was more about Moral Values than the Iraq War. The Atheistic Liberal News Media and democrats won the 2006 election by making the Iraq War the central issue and avoiding the Moral Values issue.
This would imply that the news media controls elections more than the democrats or Republicans. I also believe the news and entertainment industry controls or influences the morality of America.
I roll all this together as the Cultural War in America.
Cultural War
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
The following are the propaganda tools used by the ALNM to wage war.
1) The liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats.
2) The liberal news media sweeps issues under the carpet during democratic administrations and pulls the carpet under Republican administrations.
3) During Republican administrations the liberal news media keeps up a constant barrage of negative news stories of how not enough is being done or it isn't being done right. With Republicans the liberal news media are pessimists and with democrats the liberal news media are optimists.
4) During Republican administrations the liberal news media consistent plays the race card, the wealth card, the underprivileged card, the homosexual card, the education card and the health care card. All of these are issues that no one has a solution for, but which are used as negative reporting during Republican administrations.
5) If the liberal news media can find a few people who disagree with a Republican, then the Republican is wrong, but if the liberal news media can find a few people who agree with a democrat, then the democrat is right.
6) The liberal news media presents only those who support their position and avoids those who disagree with the liberal news media.
7) If any person who disagrees with the liberal news media is presented, this is immediately followed by a, "but, other sources say" and three people are presented to prove the original person was wrong or it is implied that there is a 50/50 split on the issue, when in reality it is an 90/10 split.
8) One of the most disgusting propaganda tricks used by the liberal news media is to use unnamed sources. The story is never better than the source and the source needs to cross-examined.
9) Any news story presented more than three times, without significant new information being provided, is propaganda.
10) The liberal news media discredits an information source who is a Christian, Conservative, or Republican by giving equal credence to two statements when it is obvious one statement is from a highly unreliable source and the other statement is from a very reliable source
11) The liberal news media always treats atheists, liberals and democrats with great respect and treats Christians, conservatives and Republicans with contempt.
12) The ALNM takes polls on every issue, but will only publish a poll when the poll supports their propaganda.
This liberal news media bias is intended to keep the democrats in control of the government because the government is the god of the atheists, liberals and homosexuals.
The liberal news media must destroy the God of the Christians in order for the government to continue to be their god.
The Religion of Atheism
The fastest growing religion in America is Atheism.
The basic belief system of Atheism is that man does not need God because man can resolve all problems and explain all physical phenomena without the Biblical explanation of God.
The Atheist depends on the government for security, the judicial system for the definition of good and evil, science for the explanation of the world, and medial science for eternal life.
The preachers of Atheism are the network news anchors of CBS, NBC and ABC who follow the leadership of The New York Times. The Atheistic Liberal News and Entertainment Industry uses network television shows to prove the viability of the Atheistic Lifestyle and to attack the Christian Lifestyle.
The basic principles of faith of the Atheistic Religion are socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion and homosexuality. There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
Republicans have yet to prove to me that they really support Christian principles, but democrats have proven they do "not" support Christian principles.
The government funds programs that encourage the Atheistic Lifestyle. So long as Evolution is taught in the public schools, the government is funding and supporting the Atheistic Religion.
I will discuss many events, but I will not even attempt at absolute accuracy. I will stated my opinion and then as Woodward and Burstein stated, "run it up the flag pole and see who salutes." An awful lot of what the news media presents is opinion. Surly they call it summarizing the news or news analysis, but it fact it is just their opinion.
The news media has never been an honorable profession, but with President Nixon the news media turned ugly. Kennedy became their model for all presidents and began an ugly war on Republicans and Christians.
An old saying is, "The blackest lie is 10% pure truth." However, the 10% truth does not justify the black lie. America is being fed too many black lies because the Atheistic Liberal News Media has an Agenda.
Origin of Problem
The news media power has always been recognized. Freedom of the press was intended to mean all had access to the press, but it has not worked that way. The news media has been used and has abused its power ever since America was formed. The news media has been abused because the news media can sway the vote of people and that is power.
Although abused, the news media did not really become powerful until the Roosevelt Administration when a propaganda organization was formed to shape America opinion to support WW II. The tools and tactics of news propaganda were developed and perfected by this organization. Those tools are now being used to shape American opinion.
It is no wonder that New York City is the hub of the news media control because that is where the tools and tactics of news propaganda were developed. Television was a perfect medium for propaganda. It is no wonder that the news media supports the democrats and liberal policies since they came into existence under Roosevelt the democrat and the socialistic policies of the Roosevelt administration.
There is an old saying that a person should "Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way". Democrats and the Atheistic Liberal News Media do none of these. But rather the democrats and ALNM have perfected the fine art of criticism. This is the process of building yourself up by tearing others down.
A real question is whether the democrats control the news media or the news media controls the democrats.
The Lying Messengers (criticism/half truth)
The key tools of the news media are criticism and half truths. During the 2001-2006 time period, many (Dan Rather in particular) were caught in absolute lies, but most of the evil was done as criticism and half truths. The purpose of this was to build up democrats and the news media by tearing down President Bush and the Republicans.
An example of a half truth is an old statement, "Democracy is a bad form of government, but it is better than all the rest". A half truth would be to report that "Democracy is a bad for of government". Without a comparison, perfection is required for everything, thus forming a bases for criticism. There has been little about the news media that has been perfect.
Evic Severaide once said, "The problem with youth is that they look at the present and say it is bad without the understanding of how much it has improved or any knowledge of how to cause further improvement".
When confronted with examples of news media abuse, the news media always falls back on the question, "Doesn't someone need to report on what the government is doing?" That question has the obvious answer of Yes, but what if the messenger is lying. The concept of the reporter or messenger is that they faithfully tell to someone else what was told to them. The contention of this book is that the news media biases the news by selective telling half truths.
When criticized, the news media uses the excuse, "Don't blame us for the bad news, don't kill the messenger because the message is not good news." Every day good things and bad things happen. If you only report the good things when democrats are in office and only bad things when Republicans are in office then you have presented a half truth. If it is implied that someone else could have done a better job without supporting proof, it is a half truth.
When criticized the news media like to talk about investigative reporting and express the need for investigative reporting. Investigative reporting is needed, but only if both the democrats and Republicans are investigated. When Republicans are in office, the news media does an excellent job, but when democrats are in office the policy is, "don't ask, don't tell".
My answer is simple. The news media has a responsibility to "prove" they are unbiased. If they fail to prove they are unbiased by penalizing those who fail to follow a Code of Ethics for the news media, then it would be better to start every news show with a statement, "Caution the following presentation is our opinion on the days events and the material presented is intended to support our opinion thus is not necessarily the whole truth".
At present the news is little more than malicious gossip.
Some in the news media are going to say they are not Atheists and do not advocate Atheism, but I would say they need to support a Code of Ethics that allows the Atheists to be removed from the news media because the news reporting clearly shows a bias against the Christian religion. I believe President Bush was attacked by the news media more for the fact that he is a Christian, than the fact that he was in charge of the Iraq War. The 2004 election scared the news media because they did not control the election and it appeared that the Christian influence would control future elections. The day after the 2004 election the Atheistic Liberal News Media declared war on President Bush.
Some would say it is impossible to control the news, but why would a reporter write a favorable Iraq War story, when it is common knowledge that the news media outlets are only paying for bad Iraq War news stories. Why waste time going out and showing a new school, when you can pay a doctor at an Iraq hospital to call you when casualties come in so that you can rush to the bomb site and get a lot of bloody pictures that the news media outlets will pay big bucks for.
Who is or should be the watch dog for the news media? Some would say the news media monitors itself, but that is a joke. The only thing that ever works is an independent review.
Impact of Problem
I believe Democracy, Christianity and Capitalism is necessary for the survival of America. Democracy allows choice, Christianity defines the proper choice and Capitalism takes care of those who do not make the proper choice.
An essential element of Democracy is an informed public. By biasing the news, the ALNM is destroying Democracy.
The news media supports Socialism and Atheism. Because of the support of Atheism, the ALNM must destroy Christianity. Because of the support of Socialism, the ALNM must destroy Capitalism.
I believe people are very aware that the news media is dishonest. They also see that the news media gets away with dishonesty. I believe America has gotten to the point where dishonesty is the norm instead of the exception. This is where Christian principles should have been important, but the news media would rather go to hell than admit there is value to Christian principles. There is a great need for the news media to be punished for dishonest behavior. To truly qualify for the protection of "freedom of the press" the news media needs to be squeaky clean instead of tarnished as they are now.
The ultimate solution to dishonesty is Christian principles. The news media will not allow this to occur so long as they can continue with their criticism and half truths.
On 9/11/01 America was attacked by Islamic Terrorists and America went to war (??) in Iraq and Afghanistan. The war was almost unanimously approved by congress. The initial success in Afghanistan and Iraq were quick and very popular. After no Weapons of Mass Destruction were found in Iraq the mood of the news media began to change. The democratic party ran the 2004 presidential election based on the concept that John Jerry and the democrats could run the Iraq War better than President Bush. The democrats lost the 2004 election not only on the Iraq War issue, but mostly on the moral issues of homosexuality.
Two significant domestic events during the 2001-2006 time frame were the Enron Failure and the Katrina Hurricane.
From 2004 to 2006 there was an explosion of news stories criticizing every aspect of the Iraq War and every aspect of the Republican party domestic policy. The news stories were always along the lines that some else could have done better. The democrats picked up on the concept being portrayed by the news media and were successful at wining the 2006 congressional election based on a need for a change. The democrats were elected on a change that had not been defined.
Some will say the 2006 election was all about the Iraq War and Republican Incompetence but I believe a great part of the 2006 election was the Cultural War in America. The 2004 election was more about Moral Values than the Iraq War. The Atheistic Liberal News Media and democrats won the 2006 election by making the Iraq War the central issue and avoiding the Moral Values issue.
This would imply that the news media controls elections more than the democrats or Republicans. I also believe the news and entertainment industry controls or influences the morality of America.
I roll all this together as the Cultural War in America.
Cultural War
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
The following are the propaganda tools used by the ALNM to wage war.
1) The liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats.
2) The liberal news media sweeps issues under the carpet during democratic administrations and pulls the carpet under Republican administrations.
3) During Republican administrations the liberal news media keeps up a constant barrage of negative news stories of how not enough is being done or it isn't being done right. With Republicans the liberal news media are pessimists and with democrats the liberal news media are optimists.
4) During Republican administrations the liberal news media consistent plays the race card, the wealth card, the underprivileged card, the homosexual card, the education card and the health care card. All of these are issues that no one has a solution for, but which are used as negative reporting during Republican administrations.
5) If the liberal news media can find a few people who disagree with a Republican, then the Republican is wrong, but if the liberal news media can find a few people who agree with a democrat, then the democrat is right.
6) The liberal news media presents only those who support their position and avoids those who disagree with the liberal news media.
7) If any person who disagrees with the liberal news media is presented, this is immediately followed by a, "but, other sources say" and three people are presented to prove the original person was wrong or it is implied that there is a 50/50 split on the issue, when in reality it is an 90/10 split.
8) One of the most disgusting propaganda tricks used by the liberal news media is to use unnamed sources. The story is never better than the source and the source needs to cross-examined.
9) Any news story presented more than three times, without significant new information being provided, is propaganda.
10) The liberal news media discredits an information source who is a Christian, Conservative, or Republican by giving equal credence to two statements when it is obvious one statement is from a highly unreliable source and the other statement is from a very reliable source
11) The liberal news media always treats atheists, liberals and democrats with great respect and treats Christians, conservatives and Republicans with contempt.
12) The ALNM takes polls on every issue, but will only publish a poll when the poll supports their propaganda.
This liberal news media bias is intended to keep the democrats in control of the government because the government is the god of the atheists, liberals and homosexuals.
The liberal news media must destroy the God of the Christians in order for the government to continue to be their god.
The Religion of Atheism
The fastest growing religion in America is Atheism.
The basic belief system of Atheism is that man does not need God because man can resolve all problems and explain all physical phenomena without the Biblical explanation of God.
The Atheist depends on the government for security, the judicial system for the definition of good and evil, science for the explanation of the world, and medial science for eternal life.
The preachers of Atheism are the network news anchors of CBS, NBC and ABC who follow the leadership of The New York Times. The Atheistic Liberal News and Entertainment Industry uses network television shows to prove the viability of the Atheistic Lifestyle and to attack the Christian Lifestyle.
The basic principles of faith of the Atheistic Religion are socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion and homosexuality. There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
Republicans have yet to prove to me that they really support Christian principles, but democrats have proven they do "not" support Christian principles.
The government funds programs that encourage the Atheistic Lifestyle. So long as Evolution is taught in the public schools, the government is funding and supporting the Atheistic Religion.
I will discuss many events, but I will not even attempt at absolute accuracy. I will stated my opinion and then as Woodward and Burstein stated, "run it up the flag pole and see who salutes." An awful lot of what the news media presents is opinion. Surly they call it summarizing the news or news analysis, but it fact it is just their opinion.
The news media has never been an honorable profession, but with President Nixon the news media turned ugly. Kennedy became their model for all presidents and began an ugly war on Republicans and Christians.
An old saying is, "The blackest lie is 10% pure truth." However, the 10% truth does not justify the black lie. America is being fed too many black lies because the Atheistic Liberal News Media has an Agenda.
Origin of Problem
The news media power has always been recognized. Freedom of the press was intended to mean all had access to the press, but it has not worked that way. The news media has been used and has abused its power ever since America was formed. The news media has been abused because the news media can sway the vote of people and that is power.
Although abused, the news media did not really become powerful until the Roosevelt Administration when a propaganda organization was formed to shape America opinion to support WW II. The tools and tactics of news propaganda were developed and perfected by this organization. Those tools are now being used to shape American opinion.
It is no wonder that New York City is the hub of the news media control because that is where the tools and tactics of news propaganda were developed. Television was a perfect medium for propaganda. It is no wonder that the news media supports the democrats and liberal policies since they came into existence under Roosevelt the democrat and the socialistic policies of the Roosevelt administration.
There is an old saying that a person should "Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way". Democrats and the Atheistic Liberal News Media do none of these. But rather the democrats and ALNM have perfected the fine art of criticism. This is the process of building yourself up by tearing others down.
A real question is whether the democrats control the news media or the news media controls the democrats.
The Lying Messengers (criticism/half truth)
The key tools of the news media are criticism and half truths. During the 2001-2006 time period, many (Dan Rather in particular) were caught in absolute lies, but most of the evil was done as criticism and half truths. The purpose of this was to build up democrats and the news media by tearing down President Bush and the Republicans.
An example of a half truth is an old statement, "Democracy is a bad form of government, but it is better than all the rest". A half truth would be to report that "Democracy is a bad for of government". Without a comparison, perfection is required for everything, thus forming a bases for criticism. There has been little about the news media that has been perfect.
Evic Severaide once said, "The problem with youth is that they look at the present and say it is bad without the understanding of how much it has improved or any knowledge of how to cause further improvement".
When confronted with examples of news media abuse, the news media always falls back on the question, "Doesn't someone need to report on what the government is doing?" That question has the obvious answer of Yes, but what if the messenger is lying. The concept of the reporter or messenger is that they faithfully tell to someone else what was told to them. The contention of this book is that the news media biases the news by selective telling half truths.
When criticized, the news media uses the excuse, "Don't blame us for the bad news, don't kill the messenger because the message is not good news." Every day good things and bad things happen. If you only report the good things when democrats are in office and only bad things when Republicans are in office then you have presented a half truth. If it is implied that someone else could have done a better job without supporting proof, it is a half truth.
When criticized the news media like to talk about investigative reporting and express the need for investigative reporting. Investigative reporting is needed, but only if both the democrats and Republicans are investigated. When Republicans are in office, the news media does an excellent job, but when democrats are in office the policy is, "don't ask, don't tell".
My answer is simple. The news media has a responsibility to "prove" they are unbiased. If they fail to prove they are unbiased by penalizing those who fail to follow a Code of Ethics for the news media, then it would be better to start every news show with a statement, "Caution the following presentation is our opinion on the days events and the material presented is intended to support our opinion thus is not necessarily the whole truth".
At present the news is little more than malicious gossip.
Some in the news media are going to say they are not Atheists and do not advocate Atheism, but I would say they need to support a Code of Ethics that allows the Atheists to be removed from the news media because the news reporting clearly shows a bias against the Christian religion. I believe President Bush was attacked by the news media more for the fact that he is a Christian, than the fact that he was in charge of the Iraq War. The 2004 election scared the news media because they did not control the election and it appeared that the Christian influence would control future elections. The day after the 2004 election the Atheistic Liberal News Media declared war on President Bush.
Some would say it is impossible to control the news, but why would a reporter write a favorable Iraq War story, when it is common knowledge that the news media outlets are only paying for bad Iraq War news stories. Why waste time going out and showing a new school, when you can pay a doctor at an Iraq hospital to call you when casualties come in so that you can rush to the bomb site and get a lot of bloody pictures that the news media outlets will pay big bucks for.
Who is or should be the watch dog for the news media? Some would say the news media monitors itself, but that is a joke. The only thing that ever works is an independent review.
Impact of Problem
I believe Democracy, Christianity and Capitalism is necessary for the survival of America. Democracy allows choice, Christianity defines the proper choice and Capitalism takes care of those who do not make the proper choice.
An essential element of Democracy is an informed public. By biasing the news, the ALNM is destroying Democracy.
The news media supports Socialism and Atheism. Because of the support of Atheism, the ALNM must destroy Christianity. Because of the support of Socialism, the ALNM must destroy Capitalism.
I believe people are very aware that the news media is dishonest. They also see that the news media gets away with dishonesty. I believe America has gotten to the point where dishonesty is the norm instead of the exception. This is where Christian principles should have been important, but the news media would rather go to hell than admit there is value to Christian principles. There is a great need for the news media to be punished for dishonest behavior. To truly qualify for the protection of "freedom of the press" the news media needs to be squeaky clean instead of tarnished as they are now.
The ultimate solution to dishonesty is Christian principles. The news media will not allow this to occur so long as they can continue with their criticism and half truths.
Introduction
At this time there is no National Association for Responsible Journalism. My purpose is to present my views about the need for a NARJ and see if I get a response.
I would appreciate your comments and any indication that you would financially support such an organization.
I enjoy opposing views. Proverbs 27:17 states "Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend."
I would appreciate your comments and any indication that you would financially support such an organization.
I enjoy opposing views. Proverbs 27:17 states "Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)