Speak No Evil & See No Evil - MNBC's & CNN's Pandering To Their Corporate (NeoCon) Owners11/10/2013 Background: NBC's fake Obama Scandal Radical Centrist: Jon Stewart and False Equivalency - YouTube Jon Stewart Creating False Equivalency With Cable News - YouTube Hear No Evil - Fox News ObamaCare Lies & Other Panic Inducing Strategies Senate Intelligence Report - Number Two Phase 2 of the Senate's report on whether the Bush administration manipulated intelligence to go to war finally comes out and man, is it worth the wait. (04:24): The Daily Show 1:47 - 'IN going to war, the administration did not say stuff supported by the facts and said things they knew were lies' 1:50 "There's a Headline: Government Misled Us Into War" Jon Stewart 3:30 - Stated that the report said the the Bush-Cheney administration misled us about the connections of Saddam Hussein to Al-Qaeda ... and the whole Iraq War (this should have led to a through media investigation) With all the deaths during the Iraq War based on lies and the 4 deaths in Benghazi with constant fake reports to back it up... makes me wonder if the right only listens to it's authorized news channel because they are in love with the anchors! The headlines that ACTUALLY were on the news Channels... A Republican was involved in preparing the reportA Democrat from Virginia was involved in preparing the report as wellThese are the ACTUAL headlines on Cable News Channel websites when the Iraq War lies were exposedOn CNN: Home ForeclosuresTop Stories In The US: Lesbians Kissing!These were the big three for the left in 2008ABC On The Day Of The Senate Intelligence Report... A French Spider Man (Hey! At least they let go of the "freedom fries" thing!)CBS did a report on web gossip... which wasn't even news back then.MSNBC DID Carry The Senate Intelligence Report for a few minutes & then not another word.So... on the one hand Benghazi with four deaths and still no proper lies found... gets months of media coverage while the proven lies over the Iraq War with the thousands & millions of deaths gets 5 minutes on the channel that is supposed to be opposing the right (& opposition is said to be good in a Democracy...). Am I the only person seeing something wrong with this picture?Moment Of Zen: If Defying Minor MSNBC Rules Can Get You Suspended...... How Can The Anchors Possibly Remain Truthful & 100% Accurate? A Half Truth Just Creates Conflict... Keeps The Left-Right Thing Going Without Any Resolution. Or In Other Words Everything Becomes "Good VS Bad" Without ANY Meaningful Analysis...The Daily Show 1:15 - The News Newtworks are there to tell you that whether you look at the news from the right or the left, these are the only two ways of looking at them. 1:25 - CNN cut everything down to good or bad i.e. all of news is either good or bad making the transformation to Disneyland consciousness complete. The perfect example of "see no evil"... CNN can't even analyze a situation without doing a pollA perfect example of "hear no evil" b Fox News... they act as if they are always right (perfect fundamentalists i.e. they demonize thier opponents & lie like crazy when caught... acting as if they were saying what they are saying now all along. Why do thier viewers not get this? Probably because they are SO in love with thier anchors that cognitive dissonance takes over)A perfect example of "speak no evil", conservatives don't get sarcasm (not to mention managing to avoid analyzing the Iraq War for the entire time the GOP had the White House... (how fast will they slip back into silence if the GOP regains the white house? I'm guessing, immediately... hell, they seemed to have begun in 2012 in-case Mitt Romney won)"See No Evil" (Just Give Me An Answer Dude!)... Good/BadFellas - Good Thing or Bad Thing? CNN breaks complex news stories down to their most reductive essence. (02:27): The Daily Show No discussion of what "legally blind" means OR if the actual blind people can really shoot (how was this policy decision made? Like Rand Paul from watching a movie?)The Daily Show BTW, In Case You're Wondering How Neocons Could Own ALL Of US Media... Simply Think Of It This Way... If You Lied For An Oil War Would You Leave Something Like The Media (Freedom Of The Press) To Chance Or Would You Buy It To Make Sure You Controlled All The Cards? Background: You will be shocked at how ignorant Americans are - What Americans don't know and don't understand is an obstacle to progress It's true. When it comes to the GOP, to whom Fox News/Biz pays over a million dollars a year (i.e. The money trail), they can't hear of any fault. But then, if the goal of war is misinformation and the GOP is the "War Party" then Fox Corp IS accomplishing it's job rather well. Meet the cult of the misinformed who can't handle an iota of negative feedback, the channel of 'hear no evil' (as ONLY the OTHER side is evil and they are the saints!)... Affordable Horror Story - President Obama qualifies his formerly definitive statements regarding the Affordable Care Act, and his opponents lie like motherf**kers about its effects. (06:09): The Daily Show At 24 secs: 'If you like your plan you will be able to keep it' Obama Later, Obama explains it with a sleight of words as politicians do... the difference is that when this is done under a GOP administration (i.e.The War Party) then it leads to a war for oil, deaths painted as "OK" depending on GOP involvement, an increase in terrorism, assassination squads, sex for oil (& god knows what else). But under the Democrats (Welfare Party) these slight of word techniques are used to help people ... even if done in a more expensive & inefficient way... which is normal for the Federal Government, by the way. [ In an case, I make so little money I probably qualify for an exception, so no healthcare for me :( ]. {4 Ron Paul Libertarians: So how can the GOP & Democrats be considered to be 'equal in evil' when one helps you & your kids get healthcare - though it may be expensive - and the other kills you? Also, when have Cheney or Bush EVER apologized... infact, apologizing was anathema in the last election season a well i.e. GOP kept saying Obama shouldn't apologize & now he did} Also this policy was made by lobbyists so it was bound to have problem... afterall, we have a corporate welfare system which the Democrats & Republicans are both a part of, the choices we face when dealing with them is... the GOP is supported by Oil & War factories so they will promote war & the other side more by welfare dominated issues (except the GOP types pretending to be Democrat, a normal political strategy). It's not a good system but choosing war over welfare to protect a hypothetical future for children that don't exit when we ARE facing big problems now is delusional. Ron Paul has been saying for over 30 years that the inflation would destroy the country & it hasn't (we even went through period of deflation - that said, cost of living VS wages HAS risen). It still may but it will probably not happen in our lifetimes unless we let the war machine get out of hand... so we need to organize our prioritizes. So on one side you have major lies leading to immediate deaths & the other minor lies that end up helping you. "if it hasn't changed since the law has passed" Obama i.e. if the plan is MORE extensive or has LESS benefits than under the Affordable Care Act, in other words, the Affordable Care Act sets a minimum level of standards for health care insurance, like saying Food can't have radioactive ingredients or like saying cars must have working brakes & not cause enough pollution to kill you while your idling in your garage. Here Is A Video From The Matrix (Engineering Level Conversation) Which Accidentally Explains Why "Controls/Regulations" Are Needed By Human Societies To Manage It' Bureaucratic Systems (I shouldn't have to post this video a an explanation, it should be common sense .... even if the Constitution didn't explicitly say Government was of "we the people" & why would people we elect to office want to hide thier discussions from us? If I was senator, do such stuff. Anyways. - Alternative viewing for video.)... Fox News ObamaCare Lies In Image Form...By The Way... Republicans have shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that they will listen to thier Constituents and do whatever they can to make their constituents panic & feel worse about thier lives. Helping thier constituents after listening to them is OBVIOUSLY NOT A PRIORITY for them (I, of course, would listen to my constituents if I was a Senator and seek to solve thier issues NOT cause more problems but I'm more of a Ron Paul Republican not a War Party or a Koch Brother... "Republican") Article: GOP’s latest, desperate Obamacare strategy: Try to confuse Americans! Rather than field inquiries or provide constituents with information, Republicans want them mixed up by Obamacare If you’ve received a letter from your health insurance company advising you that your plan has been canceled because of Obamacare (and perhaps offering to shift you into much more expensive coverage) you’re probably wondering what remedies are available to you. In an ideal world you could call your member of Congress or one of your senators and ask his or her staff to help you sort through your options. But if your representatives are Republicans, the very idea of providing you assistance runs at cross-purposes with their desire to turn you into a talking point. Introducing… #YOURSTORY! It’s a new campaign organized by the Senate Republican conference to turn your frustration, anger and/or confusion over the Affordable Care Act into an anecdote for a floor speech or a sound bite for a reporter whose job it is to find some Obamacare “losers.” Now obviously most of the submissions Senate Republicans will field will come from constituents who are already unfavorably disposed toward the law. And their stories will be relayed to other constituents who are unfavorably disposed to the law. So the public relations value of #YOURSTORY is probably pretty marginal. {My comment: The Republicans are listening to thier constituents & creating an echo chamber to keep thier constituents misinformed} But consider for a moment what it implies about the GOP’s commitment to providing responsible constituent services. Recall Dianne Barrette, who did an about-face on Obamacare once its benefits were explained to her clearly and responsibly. But it wasn’t a member of Congress who provided that assistance. It certainly wasn’t any of the Republicans who helped turn her into the embodiment of the Affordable Care Act’s failure and President Obama’s broken promises. It was a reporter. --------------------------------------------------------- Article Extract on the extremely slow & inefficient rollout of the healthcare program (Libertarians: ObamaCare VS 2 trillion spent on unconstitutional wars... & this is the greater evil? You help the war party & thier Fox Business stooges? Shame on yall.) Health insurance cancellations are no surprise - A leading expert on health reform policy explains some of the most common misconceptions about Obamacare Q. What’s your take on the coverage cancellations arriving in mailboxes around the country? A. It was always known that the ACA would outlaw millions of existing individual or non-group health insurance policies. From a policy wonk perspective, that was a no-brainer. It was self-evident in the law in March 2010 and confirmed in subsequent rules and analyses. Also obvious all along was that consumers would face a very different marketplace under the ACA, with some seeing lower premiums (including me), some seeing larger premiums, and most everyone seeing higher deductibles, higher co-pays, and a narrower choice of providers. Quantifying the impact of ACA on the individual — estimating the number of people affected — was always tough. Whether it would cause 60 percent or 80 percent of individual plans to be cancelled was hard to estimate because data on individual coverage is hard to come by, rules and products varied by state, the ACA grandfathering rules came out slowly and in pieces, and even things like the essential health benefit package varies a bit by state. Also, not all these policies expire on December 31. What’s frustrating is how it took three and a half years, the failed launch of the federal exchange, and the news media starting the question the administration’s core talking points for anyone to focus on this. Whether you like or dislike the ACA policies, the 19.4 million Americans in the various parts of individual market deserved a heads up. Q. Could this have been prevented? A. From a regulatory perspective, health insurers in the individual market have no choice but to discontinue non-compliant policies and, if they wish to keep business, offer new, compliant policies. Health insurance is a binding contract. Insurers can’t merely transfer people. They have to cancel policies that no longer meet federal and state law, give notice, and then try to sell people into the new one policies. Having said this, the new policies will generally be more expensive. The ACA requires people to buy a richer benefit package – it only permits sale of the richer benefit packages. You can argue that this is better for society but there is no free lunch and it does eliminate choices many consumers were fine with. The higher cost sharing – deductibles and co-payments – that many are seeing (including me) is an inevitable byproduct of the ACA insurance market rules, the brave new actuarial risks of the post-ACA marketplace, and competition based on premiums and brand. Q. You’ve been particularly critical of the administration’s transparency and follow-through on its own rules. A. Presidential executive orders have long required cost estimates and impact analyses for every major proposed or final rule. In Executive Order 13563, President Obama reiterated the longstanding requirement and further directed each federal agency {My comment: How many of thee federal agencies are controlled by corporation stooges and/or GOP people?} “… to use the best available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as possible.” A Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) must be prepared for rules with economically significant effects — anything with an impact of $100 million or more in any one year. Obviously, every ACA rule had an impact of over $100 million. Related Posts: Phil Donahue On His 2003 Firing from MSNBC, When They Couldn't Tolerate Antiwar Voices "Republican's And Thier Revenue Sources Own 90% Of Media" Bernie Sanders via The Daily Show Amanpour On CNN On Iraq: Where Were The Journalists? How Big Money & Big Media Have Coupled To Create A 'Disney World' Of Democracy The Hypnotic Power Of TV: Keeping Ron Paul Out Of The Public Eye Despite Being At The Top Of Local Straw Polls US Media: MSNBC, Fox News & CNN Are Connected In Many Ways A Bill Moyers Documentary Exploring How Mainstream Media Failed To Question The War In Iraq CNN 1 - The Most Busted Name In News (The Boston Marathon Bombing) CNN 2 - Introducing CNN's Blairwitch Project Style Reporting Of The 3 Main US "News" Channels CNN 2 - Introducing CNN's Blairwitch Project Style Reporting Of The 3 Main US "News" Channels11/2/2013 Wrongnado - When America needs context and clarity, it can depend on cable news to provide speculation and error: The Daily Show Intro: You can see the primary goal of the US "News" Media is to create controversy for entertainment value to attract viewers (I've heard anchors say stuff along the lines of 'we can get some lively debate out of this, I'm sure' Lively debate doesn't lead to answers, but of course, the problem withthe big 3 (CNN-Fox-MSNBC) are much worse than the pointless drama filled debates). At 2:24 Jon Stewart brings up the fundamental proof that Us "News" Media isn't dealing in news but speculation. It's like sitting around a campfire and speculating what the sounds in the dark night could be. It's fun but it can't even remotely be called news. Notice how the speculation begins with 'what if there are 2 or 3 shooters', its like saying what if the sky falls or an asteroid falls to earth... would we have a Bruce Willis to protect us? what would we do if we didn't? Once again, it's not news it but just random campfire scarring tactic for fun (ghost stories)... only this is done during a serious incident on a "news" channel. When the "news" media talks of reports (as of today, Nov 3) they seem to be referring to rumors and only rumors. Once again, rumor doesn't constitute news. Here are the 3 big media channels engaged arguments, which not only becomes the main mode of thier followers behavior (this is elementary education info), but fighting, like the World Wrestling Federation, i fun to watch EVEN WHEN IT"S FAKE OR STAGED.Now, normally, even with this daffy duck & porky pig style "news" reporting there is an anchor reporting on the new at a distance... Wrongnado - CNN - Reporting on a mass shooting in Washington, CNN doesn't let a lack of facts get in the way of drawing speculative conclusions: The Daily Show CNN's unique take from the 3 Main Media "News" Outlets is to sound tense and describe stuff they see like they are doing one of those home movie type movies like the blair witch project (spin-offs of this style of movie was a zombie type and a Godzilla type, forgot thier names)... basically a kinda movie but without anything interesting in it... the goal seems to be to make a standard crime scene area look like a preparation for defense from an alien invasion or something like that. Basically, CNN's STYLE OF REPORTING INVOLVE RUNNING AROUND IN A SORT OF PANIC AS IF THE KY REALLY WAS FALLING! Video Notes: 2:20 The whole 'how large is the building thing' when the building i right in front of them seem to be a tactic to fill time a it turn out there' no alien invasion in progress jut one of the thousand of shooting that happen every year in the States. 3:00 Again a filling time tactic by Wolf Blitzer trying to draw conclusions from clothing. Nonsensical unless he was looking for an angle to demonize Goths or Luke Skywalker (he dresses in black in "Return Of The Jedi" and most, if not all, the books after the movie ended). 5:50 'The peculation is like a compulsion' Jon Stewart - Answer, Yes. It's a marketing strategy. Fox News has one (liberal haters), MNBC has one (GOP haters) & so CNN, the third leg of the GOP media, needs an angle as well. So they pick panic as if we are about to get stormed by aliens or just found ourselves in some woods with a witch hunting us. 6:4 By saying what we are telling you 'might be wrong' CNN covers it' back for the last Daily Show segment o being the mot busted name in news. That' a fact. My point is that this fear creating or just boring speculation IS thier marketing strategy to fight Fox & MNBC for a larger share of viewers within thier already established limits. The Daily Show Illustrates CNN's Style Of Reporting During Serious Situations (more fun to make fun of)... The Best F#@king News Team Ever Covers Breaking News - The Best F#@king News Team Ever describes the scene of breaking news as it happens: The Daily Show The Most Busted Name in News - CNN's exclusive report on an arrest in the Boston Marathon bombing was exclusive because it was completely wrong... The Daily Show The Most Busted Name in News - Exclusive and First: John Oliver and Jessica Williams share an exclusive, possibly credible report of an unconfirmed arrest in the Boston Marathon bombing.... The Daily Show This is CNN?: While other networks used a studio anchor to keep Boston bombing coverage from going adrift, CNN instead went with a sandlot football approach... The Daily Show Arrest Development - Caucasian Terrorists: Aasif Mandvi explains how the Boston Marathon bombers' ethnic background disrupts the story Americans have long been told about who the bad guys are and what they look like... The Daily Show NOTES (notice the statistics... white terrorists have attacked THE MOST): {News Report} http://www.salon.com/2013/04/22/i_am_not_the_tsarnaevs/ Before brothers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were even identified as the Boston bombing suspects, the media announced the usual villains: a “dark-skinned suspect,” a 21-year-old Saudi “jihadi” whose only crime was to run away from a violent explosion, and a 17-year-old Moroccan high school track star who attended the marathon carrying a bag. There was also a clarion call from conservative columnist (and sometime Fox News guest) Erik Rush to murder all Muslims. We now know the suspected brothers were born in Kyrgyzstan, are ethnically Chechen, and lived in America for several years. They are literally Caucasian since their family originates from the northern Caucasus region. Neither of them were dark-skinned, “Saudi,” bearded or brandished a fiery red trident or horns on their head. Muslim mass murderers excluded from “Whiteness” are usually labeled “terrorist” as opposed to being categorized as “lone wolf,” “lone radical/gunman ” or “deeply disturbed.” The latter applies to white men, such as mass murderers Wade Page, Jared Loughner, Adam Lanza, James Holmes and Anders Breivik. This raises the legitimate question: What’s the difference between the “terrorism” of the Tsarnaev brothers and the “lone radical” violence of white supremacist Wade Page, who shot and killed six Sikh Americans at their temple? What are the definitions and standards for “terrorism”? Who decides? Apparently, it’s new media, which covered the police hunt for the brothers as a “Choose Your Own Adventure” novel scripted by amateur Hardy Boys and “CSI” aficionados. Overnight, the world witnessed the birth of a great career opportunity for self-proclaimed experts on Chechnya, jihad, radicalization and counterterrorism, who emerged instantly using Google and Wikipedia to obtain their dubious scholarship. This includes Chuck Woolery, self-identified conservative and a relic of ’80s game shows, who displayed brilliant, evidence-based, sociological insights with this helpful tweet: “Muslims can’t seem to live in peace with anyone. Even each other. FACT.” He continued his love connections with Muslims by adding, “All Muslims are not terrorists. Most, if not all terrorists are Muslims. Please dispute that.” Sure, Chuck, I will. In the U.S., 56 percent of terrorist attacks and plots have been perpetrated by right-wing extremists, 30 percent by eco-terrorists and 12 percent by Islamic extremists. The Southern Poverty Law Center recently reported the highest number of extremist hate groups ever recorded in U.S. history, with the sharp rise attributed to massive growths in white supremacist, anti-immigrant and radical anti-government groups. Anti-Muslim hate groups have also increased by 300 percent. 17 Years After Oklahoma City Bombing, Right-Wing Extremism Is Significant Domestic Terror Threat http://thkpr.gs/HTlF1u The 'Patriot' Movement Explodes | Southern Poverty Law Center:http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/the-year-in-hate-and-extremism#.UXWifz3gkHM.twitter … Related Blog Posts: Phil Donahue On His 2003 Firing from MSNBC, When They Couldn't Tolerate Antiwar Voices "Republican's And Thier Revenue Sources Own 90% Of Media" Bernie Sanders via The Daily Show Amanpour On CNN On Iraq: Where Were The Journalists? How Big Money & Big Media Have Coupled To Create A 'Disney World' Of Democracy The Hypnotic Power Of TV: Keeping Ron Paul Out Of The Public Eye Despite Being At The Top Of Local Straw Polls US Media: MSNBC, Fox News & CNN Are Connected In Many Ways A Bill Moyers Documentary Exploring How Mainstream Media Failed To Question The War In Iraq |
© Abe
(Syed Abbas Eugene Abedi) Archives
December 2014
Categories
All
|
|