I’ve been watching with interest as the White House has “nudged” Fox “news” in a way that has stimulated a bit of dialogue on what their (Fox “news”) REAL purpose is. Of course, few “out there” will take the “bait” and we will continue to lack for actual news coverage as the cable networks focus on ratings and entertaining. Even when I try watching the local stations or the national news on the main broadcast networks, NBC, CBS, and ABC I come away shaking my head. I suppose I need to discipline myself to watch the CSPAN networks and make my own interpretation of what’s going on, but – of course – like most of the rest of America I DON’T HAVE THE TIME. And, I would be OK with what’s happening right now if I thought for a minute that the news broadcasters were “investigative” reporters who would be putting the pressure on our government as the fourth “leg.” I’m old enough to remember the Viet Nam War and the Watergate breakin and the reporters who were reporting what was actually going on.

For example, in the 1968 Presidential Convention – right in the middle of the Viet Nam conflict – there were riots all over America and they were reported as they happened and there was no “hiding” of pictures. I’m someone who voted for President Obama, but I’m aghast that he’s chosen to be “bullied” by the military and the CIA in, not only hiding pictures of what our troops and representatives have done in our name, but in supporting legislation which makes it easier to do that in the future. We voted for change AND I’M NOT SURE THAT THE CHANGE WE’RE GETTING IS THE “CHANGE WE NEED.” Make no mistake, President Obama is a darn site different and, in my view, better than the previous administration. BUT THAT’S NOT SAYING MUCH! So what we have today is a President who recognizes the problem with “fixed” news, yet who signs a bill that insures a lack of information being available to the public going forward. But, I digress……

I don’t see how anyone could not be better than Bush/Cheney – well, now that you mentioned it, McCain/Palin would have been more than most of us could take! So, the fact there is a President which I feel is more in tune to the will of the working public, doesn’t excuse this continuance of secrecy in our government which is furthered by “news” organizations who participate in the partisan “rancor” which permeates America at this point in time. In the sixties and seventies we had a news media that was willing to expose corruption and abuse NO MATTER WHO WAS DOING IT. If you remember – well, even if you don’t you can take my word for it – the Watergate hearings were FAR LESS divisive (especially when it became evident that Nixon had obstructed justice) than what you have in Congress today. Even though Republicans didn’t like it, they didn’t spend all their time trying to impede the investigation more than a lawyer who is defending his/her client in court. Justice was always going to happen (or at least that was the way I saw it at the time) Senators back then realized that what one President gets away with “today” is potentially what another President will feel empowered to do “tomorrow.”

That is to say that Republicans today might not be so excited about GW Bush’s illegal wiretapping policies if they find out that Barack Obama is following suit – only aiming the “satellite” in a different direction. It was reported that the “target” of much of Bush’s illegal wiretapping was the press. Of course, all the while as it was happening I remember Sean Hannity – for one – on Fox “news” saying how important those privileges were – TO PREVENT TERRORISM. Well, what do you think Mr. Hannity would think today if he found out that he was the “target” of government eavesdropping. I’m sure that would just confirm in his mind that President Obama is a Communist, Socialist, Fascist, or some such other term which actually implies the type of authoritarian powers which appeal to Republicans. Guess what, the next time a Republican’s in office, he’d (Hannity) be singing a differnet tune again. Which kind of gets me back to my original thought for the evening – Fox “news,” as EVERYONE KNOWS, is just a “wing” of the Republican party. They are an integral part of the propoganda scheme that’s been shoved down the throats of unsuspecting Americans since the early days of the Ronald Reagan Presidency. Control of the media was a key component of the “Permanent Republican majority” strategy of Lee Atwater and inherited by Karl Rove. On the one hand I see the President challenging their credibility, but as mentioned above, on the other hand I see him hiding things from the American people (including the crimes of Bush/Cheney) – BOTH ARE WRONG!

That is why I’m glad to see someone taking on Fox “news” besides Keith Olberman – but it should be someone other than the President. Politicians from BOTH SIDES OF THE ISLE should be able to see the danger of a “news” outlet participating in the caucus of a political party. Now, I’m not so naive to miss Olberman’s bias or Rachel Maddow’s bias or the bias of just about any “commentator” these days. I don’t consider these people news journalists, but they are journalists and, while there’s no way to expect them to have no biases, it is absurd to have a group who are using the EXACT SAME keywords being “thrown out” by the Republican caucus and then claiming they’re “FAIR AND BALANCED.” I remember noticing this years ago – one “pundit” after another would come onto the cable “news” broadcasts and spew the “company” line while pretending to be giving actual facts (I believe the Democrats practice a crude form of this by necessity, but they’re no match for the Republicans). THIS IS WRONG. As soon as I believe Keith Olberman, for example, is regurgitating the “message” handed out in the Democratic caucus, that will be the last day I watch his show on MSNBC. I once heard GW Bush make the comment that to get people to believe the “propoganda” (he actually used that word, I’m sure there were some people behind the scenes unhappy he did it, but most people missed it) you’ve got to “say it over and over until it sinks in.” THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN DOING FOR OVER TWENTY YEARS.

And EVERYONE KNOWS their main outlet is Fox. It’s owned by Rupert Murdoch, who’s not even an American (I have no idea why that doesn’t set in on more people), and run by Roger Ailes who’s an avid Republican supporter and part of the “inside” of the Republican party. THAT’S JUST NOT RIGHT. It’s not that they shouldn’t be able to do business, it’s that they shouldn’t be able to call what they do “news.” There are too many Americans who actually believe what the people on Fox say is “fair and balanced.” The other day I wrote a piece about an article I read in the Washington Post by Charles Krauthammer – a regular on Fox. I couldn’t believe he could pass off his venom on the Post, but putting him on TV as some kind of “expert” is ridiculous. What he is, as are most of the rest of them, is someone who’ll sit in front of a camera and say what he’s told by the “powers that be.” I talk to one person after another who are dismayed at the shape of our “liberal media,” and it always comes back to the fact we have a spineless Congress who are pretty much (with a few exceptions like Dennis Kuchinich, Alan Grayson, Ron Paul, and some of the new ones) bought and sold by the multi-national corporations who control this nation.

Murdoch and Fox were the beneficiaries of the Telecommunications act which was signed by Bill Clinton and allowed the consolidation of media outlets resulting in a constantly contracting number of options for those of us seeking information. In fact, THANK YOU AL GORE for inventing the internet! :o) OK, I’m kidding, but without the internet we would be TOTALLY SCREWED. And, I guarantee, the forces behind Fox and other right wing “water carriers” are frantically trying to figure out how to increase their “footprint” on the internet. I don’t follow Sarah Palin, but I keep hearing reports of her Facebook postings. I also don’t participate in Facebook, but it seems to be an effective form of communication for her, and I expect the Republicans to be more active on the web as time moves forward. I believe they understand they got their “clocks cleaned” on the web in the last two elections and they have the money to fight back. So, it behooves any American who cherishes the idea of a truly free press and investigative reporting to support the anti-Fox movement. THEY ARE NOT FAIR AND BALANCED and anyone with half a brain can easily figure that out. Just yesterday I accidentally logged into a program that had Glenn Beck on it. I’m sure the guy is laughing all the way to the bank, but the reality is that people like him who are willing to say or do anything for money ARE DANGEROUS! I could only handle about one or two minutes of his diatribe, but he was equating our President with Communists or Fascists or something of that nature. And, the way he was going about it was so ridiculous and irrational that I had to wonder what mentality would someone have who would actually listen to that and believe it’s true? It sounded overtly racist to me and it was a far cry from the criticisms I heard about GW Bush for the eight years he was in office (Beck was trying to equate Bush’s lies to something Obama said as an equivalent lie – his diatribe was a lie in itself, but the logic TOTALLY ESCAPED ME – it went something like if Beck disagrees with Obama, Obama must be lying – as opposed to with Bush – his lies about Iraq were PROVEN) but what was evident was that Fox “news” is NOT FAIR AND BALANCED, they are trying to undermine the Presidency of Barack Obama! Democrats weren’t trying to undermine President Bush, they were just trying to get him to bring the troops home and to tell the truth about the war efforts – which didn’t happen in either Iraq or Afganistan. The differences were policy differences that were debated, but they never openly tried to undermine his Presidency – there’s a big difference from trying to change someone’s policies to insuring their (and therefore America’s) failure.