Top Leaderboard, Site wide
August 27, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


The Guns of August






Truthdig Bazaar
PornoPower

The Pornography of Power

By Robert Scheer
$11.89

more items

 
Arts and Culture

‘Dixie Chicking’: Post-9/11 Blacklisting in the Entertainment Industry

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Oct 25, 2007
Dixie Chicks
AP photo / Dima Gavrysh

Still singing:  Dixie Chicks (from left) Emily Robison, Natalie Maines and Martie Maguire perform on “Good Morning America” on May 26, 2006.

Ed Rampell

(Page 2)

“Watch What You Say”: The Post-9/11 Dixie Chicked:

* Like truth, comedian Bill Maher was an early casualty of war. Discussing 9/11’s skyjackers on the Sept. 17, 2001, episode of “Politically Incorrect,” Maher stated: “We have been the cowards lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That’s cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, it’s not cowardly. Stupid maybe, but not cowardly.” Maher’s remarks prompted Bush’s then-spokesman Ari Fleischer to warn: “Watch what you say.” The Disney-owned ABC network canceled Maher’s show in June 2002.

* Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Phillip Noyce’s adaptation of Graham Greene’s novel “The Quiet American,” starring Michael Caine and Brendan Fraser, was reportedly shelved because it critiqued U.S. foreign policy in 1950s Vietnam. According to the Toronto Sun, Miramax (then part of Disney) “abandoned it because ... Harvey Weinstein did not like the politics.” Caine, a two-time Oscar winner knighted by Queen Elizabeth, was forced to plead for the release of the film, which finally opened in November 2002.

* In February 2003, Sean Penn sued producer Steve Bing for $10 million for allegedly firing the actor from a film because of Penn’s 2002 Washington Post anti-war ad and trip to Baghdad. Bing counter-sued.

* After the Dixie Chicks’ frontwoman Natalie Maines said at a March 2003 concert in London, “[W]e’re ashamed that the president of the United States is from Texas,” the Chicks, who were the top-selling all-girl group, went on to lose airtime on country-western radio stations owned by Clear Channel and other corporations, and CD and concert ticket sales plummeted. Egged on by reactionary bloggers and DJs, anti-“DXC” listeners destroyed Dixie Chicks’ CDs during “Dixie Chicks Destruction” events.

* In 2003, actor David Clennon was targeted by a right-wing Internet campaign seeking to have him fired from CBS’ CIA series “The Agency” for comparing Bush’s America to Nazi Germany.

* Conservatives attempted to impeach “acting president” Martin Sheen from NBC’s “The West Wing” and his Visa and American Express endorsements.

* Also in 2003, right-wingers lobbied MCI to drop activist-actor Danny Glover as its spokesman.

* As the Iraq war loomed, the peace sign Amanda Bynes flashed was removed from ads for 2003’s “What a Girl Wants.”

* After Michael Moore said, “Shame on you, Mr. Bush,” at the March 23, 2003, Academy Awards ceremony, a right-wing, “pro-family” group published the address of Moore’s house in rural Michigan, according to Moore, who said, “They published a photo of it. My home was vandalized. There have been attempts to do various things. Harvey and Bob [Weinstein] have to pay for 24/7 security for me. It’s a rotten way to live.”

* Phil Donahue’s liberal-leaning talk show was canceled on March 28, 2003, despite being MSNBC’s highest rated program (surpassing “Hardball”).

* Madonna reportedly self-censored her April 2003 “American Life” music video.

* On April 6, 2003, CBS fired Ed Gernon after the producer of the 2003 miniseries “Hitler: The Rise of Evil” told TV Guide that the series’ story “basically boils down to an entire nation gripped by fear who ultimately chose to give up their civil rights and plunge the whole world into war. I can’t think of a better time to examine this history than now.”  The New York Post, owned by Rupert Murdoch, denounced “Hitler: The Rise of Evil”  as “a sign of Hollywood’s anti-Americanism.”  Fox News commentator and “Bush Country” author John Podhoretz called the docudrama “an act of slander against the president” in his New York Post column.

* In 2003, the Cooperstown, N.Y., Baseball Hall of Fame canceled a 15th anniversary “Bull Durham” commemoration because of the anti-war politics of its stars Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon. On April 15, 2003, Robbins told Washington’s National Press Club: “A history teacher tells [my] 11-year-old ... nephew [that] Sarandon is endangering the troops by her opposition to the war. Another teacher ... asks our niece if we are coming to the school play. ‘They’re not welcome here,’ said the molder of young minds. ... A friend listen[s] to the radio down South as the talk radio host calls for the murder of a prominent anti-war activist. Death threats have appeared on other prominent anti-war activists’ doorsteps. ... Relatives of ours have received threatening e-mails and phone calls. And my 13-year-old boy ... has recently been embarrassed and humiliated by a sadistic creep who writes—or, rather, scratches his column with his fingernails in dirt. Susan and I have been listed as traitors, as supporters of Saddam ... by the Aussie gossip rags masquerading as newspapers, and by their ‘fair and balanced’ electronic media cousins, 19th Century Fox.”

* At a September 2003 fundraiser for presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, actor Ed Begley Jr. said: “There’s a boycott list on the Internet for all the people who spoke out against the war, to write letters to studios telling them you don’t want to see shows featuring Jamie Cromwell, [myself], Ed Asner, Tim Robbins. ... Janeane Garofalo [took] a big hit. They’ve suffered financially, can’t get work now. They’ve been blackballed. People don’t want to hire them. ... Janeane gets so much hate mail. ... I didn’t work from when that boycott list happened until just a few weeks ago. ... I’ve never only worked three days in nine months since ... 1967.” Reactionary Web sites, including celiberal.com and boycott-hollywood.net, urged boycotts of activist actors.

* Conservatives reportedly pressured CBS to edit and reschedule the less-than-laudatory miniseries “The Reagans” from its original November 2003 CBS broadcast date to 2004 on the cable TV channel Showtime, which—like CBS—is owned by Viacom but has fewer viewers.

* The FCC proposed a $495,000 fine against six Clear Channel stations airing Howard Stern’s radio show on April 8, 2004. The shock jock responded, “This is a follow-up to the McCarthy-type ‘witch-hunt’ of the administration and the activities of this group of presidential appointees in the FCC, led by ‘Colin Powell Jr.’ [FCC Chairman Michael Powell]. ... They ... are ... imposing their opinions and rights to tell us all who and what we may listen to and watch and how we should think. ... It is pretty shocking that governmental interference into our rights and free speech takes place in the U.S. It’s hard to reconcile this with the ‘land of the free’ and the ‘home of the brave.’ I’m sure what’s next is the removal of ‘dirty pictures’ like the 20th century German exhibit in a New York City museum and the erotic literature in our libraries; they too will fall into their category of ‘evil’ as well.”

* In May 2004, Disney reneged on its distribution deal for Michael Moore’s “Fahrenheit 9/11,” momentarily leaving the Cannes Palme d’Or winner in limbo until Lionsgate released it.

* After Linda Ronstadt praised “Fahrenheit 9/11” during her July 17, 2004, concert at Las Vegas’ Aladdin resort, fans grew irate; she was escorted by security guards off the property and banned from performing there again.

* CBS News producer Mary Mapes was fired, and Dan Rather eventually forced out, after their Sept. 8, 2004 “60 Minutes II” election-year report challenged George W. Bush’s Vietnam War service record. The expose presented compelling evidence that strings had been pulled to get Bush out of going to ‘Nam, and into the Texas Air National Guard’s “Champagne Unit” instead. 

* On Sept. 21, 2004, a Washington-bound passenger jet bearing British musician Cat Stevens—who had long before converted to Islam and had re-recorded his 1970’s “Peace Train” hit to protest the Iraq war—was diverted to Maine after U.S. authorities matched his name with one on a no-fly list. Homeland Security denied Stevens admission to the U.S.

* Following a successful 2005 run on the London stage, on March 22, 2006, the premiere of the pro-Palestinian rights play “My Name Is Rachel Corrie” at off-Broadway’s New York Theatre Workshop was postponed. The drama was based on the titular 23-year-old American peace activist, who was crushed on March 16, 2003, by an Israeli military bulldozer as she attempted to prevent the demolition of a Palestinian pharmacist’s home in Gaza. The play finally debuted at Greenwich Village’s Minetta Lane Theatre in October 2006.

* On Sept. 15, 2006, Bill Maher claimed that CBS News withdrew its offer for the comic to appear in the short-lived “Free Speech” segment on Katie Couric’s “CBS Evening News” program after Maher—an atheist—chose religion as his proposed topic.

* In October 2006, right-winger Florian Sokolowski sent left-leaning talk show host Stephanie Miller a letter declaring: “As with Cindy Sheehan, the best thing that could happen to you would be seeing some wonderful activist sticking an AK-47 up your glory holes and sending you into eternity.”

* By early 2007, the Clear Channel-owned radio station WTPG-AM changed its liberal talk show format, dropping programs including the nationally syndicated Stephanie Miller and Ed Schultz shows, although the Columbus, Ohio, station had reportedly tripled its ratings. Miller, Schultz and Air America programs were replaced by right-wing shows hosted by Michael Savage and Laura Ingraham. Miller alleges, “There’s a concerted effort to shut down progressive talk. [Conservative] Christians are buying radio stations.” In the April 6, 2007, edition of the Los Angeles Times, Schultz claimed his program’s move to the evening on Clear Channel-owned KTLK-AM in Los Angeles “has nothing to do with ratings or sales.” “Big Eddie”—whom Talkers Magazine called America’s leading “progressive talk” host—alleged that Air America “wrote [KTLK] a check” to put a host with lower Arbitron ratings in Schultz’s afternoon time slot.

* Folk singer Joan Baez, who had performed at numerous anti-Vietnam-War demonstrations, was forbidden to participate in John Mellencamp’s April 27, 2007, Walter Reed Hospital concert for wounded troops.

* On the fourth anniversary of the start of the U.S. military’s “shock and awe” campaign in Iraq, CNN’s White House correspondent Ed Henry sparred with Bush’s press secretary over what the “recipe for success” in Iraq is. During the March 19, 2007, briefing, Tony Snow told Henry to “zip it.” 

* On May 2, 2007, the U.S. Treasury Department notified Michael Moore that he was being investigated for violating the U.S. trade embargo’s travel restrictions to Cuba by taking ailing 9/11 rescue workers for treatment there as part of his movie “SiCKO.” In case U.S. authorities tried to seize it, Moore hid a copy of his health-care documentary in an overseas safe house. After “SiCKO” opened on June 29, Moore was grilled by many mainstream media outlets with the kind of zeal the corporate press had failed to exhibit during the lead-up to the Iraq war.

* On May 9, 2007, retired Maj. Gen. John Baptiste, former commander of the First Infantry in Iraq, appeared in an anti-war TV ad—and was quickly fired as a CBS news consultant.

* Following a May 23, 2007, on-the-air confrontation with conservative co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Rosie O’Donnell quit ABC’s “The View” before her contract expired. The outspoken O’Donnell called Hasselbeck “cowardly” for not defending her when “Republican pundits”  accused O’Donnell of equating American troops with “terrorists.”

* On June 25, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against former Alaska high school student Joseph Frederick, who had unfurled a “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” banner seen on national TV during the Olympic relay. Frederick contended that subsequent reprisals by school administrators violated his First Amendment rights. This was the high court’s first ruling on student free speech rights in 20 years. 

* The Interior Department and Republican Sens. James Inhofe and Mitch McConnell reportedly blocked the U.S. portion of the anti-global-warming Live Earth telecast from taking place at Washington’s National Mall. The July 7, 2007, global concert and environmental fundraiser was co-presented by Al Gore, whose documentary “An Inconvenient Truth” won an Oscar.

* In a front-page story, the August 21, 2007, Los Angeles Times reported that the Israeli Defense Forces are blacklisting celebrities and performers who have evaded the draft or not completed their service, barring them from entertaining at military functions and venues and on its media outlets.

* When Sally Field attempted to make an anti-war statement during her acceptance speech on the Sept. 16, 2007, Emmy awards ceremony televised live on FOX TV, network censors cut the audio and video. What the censored actress said was,“Let’s face it, if the mothers ruled the world, there would be no goddamned wars in the first place.”

* Former CBS news anchor Dan Rather filed a $70-million wrongful termination lawsuit against CBS on Sept. 19, 2007, alleging that, in the aftermath of the “60 Minutes II” report charging that Bush had ducked military service, CBS had made Rather a “scapegoat” in order to “pacify” the White House. Rather told the L.A. Times that “any money he collects will go to nonprofit groups, including the Committee to Protect Journalists.”

* The U.S. Senate passed a resolution condemning a MoveOn.org ad by a 72-25 vote on Sept. 20, 2007. MoveOn’s full-page ad in The New York Times was headlined and subheaded: “General Petraeus or General Betray Us? Cooking the books for the White House.” Apparently the 22 Democratic senators who voted with the majority agreed with Bush, who attacked MoveOn’s ad as “disgusting.”

On Oct. 26, the precise 60th anniversary of the Committee for the First Amendment’s first “Hollywood Fights Back!” broadcast, contemporary talents, along with blacklist survivors and their relatives, will reenact the original 1947 radio program. Performers scheduled to participate include: former SAG President Ed Asner, Norma Barzman, Larry Gelbart, Isabelle Gunning (ACLU/Southern California president), Marsha Hunt, Camryn Manheim, Ramona Ripston, Christopher Trumbo, James Whitmore and Becca Wilson. The event, presented by the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, will take place at Los Angeles’ Skirball Center. For more information call (213) 977-9500, Ext. 227.


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Kristen R., January 2, 2008 at 11:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I went to the link you provided <http://www.masada2000.org/dirt-list.html> and was thoroughly appalled.  We’re living in scary times, indeed!

Report this

By cann4ing, November 26, 2007 at 4:05 pm Link to this comment

Patrick Henry, interesting that both Norm Finkelstein and Ilan Pappe were placed on a list of supposed “traitors” to Israel.  Sort of underscores the fascist mindset of Zionism.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, November 26, 2007 at 3:24 pm Link to this comment

While the dixie chicks who deserve a medal of some kind, blacklists are a real problem.  Here’s one I came across.

http://www.masada2000.org/dirt-list.html

Report this

By 1drees, November 26, 2007 at 3:05 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

These girls deserve a lot of credit for holdingout to bullying on the personal and professional scale.

These were good artistes who were suddenly banned and harassed for voicing their frank and honest opinion ( theoretically possible in USA) AND then again what they were saying was correct on the long term, I mean most of the people who maybe harassed or threatenned them THEN are most probably by now very very SICK of BUSH’s BULLSHIT in the ZIONIST NEW WORLD ORDER GAME.
YES in USA there are all sorts of LISTS especially BLACKLISTS, who maintains them? Well, if you live in the USA and dont know that maybe you should try and wake up someday.
There is approved people to invite to press conferences and approved people to hand out contracts to, and approved people this and that. MAYBE if you been dissenting then most probably local law enforcement authorites might have made aware to you that your presence is known to them. the ROOT behind all this is the ZIONIST desire to get things done by non-Jews of the world as “a Zionist fingernail must not break BUT a thopusand Goyims can persish, such valuable is zionist blood” so in order to safeguard their agenda and mission they do keep lists and who knows maybe i might be on one of them.
So whoever gets in the way of the next war, the war on IRAN, you better watch out too coz you might get the same as the dixie chicks.

Report this

By PaulMagillSmith, November 10, 2007 at 3:49 am Link to this comment

No problem, Ernest, I wasn’t coming down on you at all. I’ve read enough of your stuff to know you’re one of the ‘good guys’.

Keep on keepin’ on, friend.

Report this

By cann4ing, November 8, 2007 at 4:43 pm Link to this comment

Whoa there Paul, you need to lighten up a bit.  My statement about not remembering the 60s was merely tongue-in cheek humor.  Most people accuse me of being to the left of Ralph Nader rather than someone who parrots neocon propaganda.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, November 8, 2007 at 6:34 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“It’s a quote from one of OURS not one of THEIRS, intended as humor rather than a put down.”

Robin Williams (IMHO) is not one of anyone’s except his own.  self serving megalomaniac who had a hand in murdering his “friend”. If he had been o poor boy he’d be in jail.. But as with all things US money money money is what is important.

Why go all the way back to Shakespeare, when there is ample example much closer… in CABARET.

Report this

By PaulMagillSmith, November 8, 2007 at 2:48 am Link to this comment

RE: #112044 by Ernest Canning on 11/06 at 11:28 pm
(1048 comments total)

“Thanks for the title and singer Paul, but you know what they say about the 60s?  If you can remember them, you weren’t there.”

Well I certainly WAS there, Ernest, and believe your statement is just MSM neo-CON promoted propaganda designed to marginalize people like us. It’s a quote from one of OURS not one of THEIRS, intended as humor rather than a put down. 

From a memory like an elephant going back to age three & having the nads to go travel during a very interesting/confusing time in human existence, research & study of history using eclectic sources, and despite undergoing 4 brain surgeries & more than my share of chemical ‘experiments’ (the two not related), I find my grasp of what has happened in the past, as well as where civilization is headed improving almost daily.

Ever the optimist, in the vein of Voltaire’s “Candide”, yet failing in the intense good fortune of Forrest Gump, I still hold hope for the social evolution of humanity. That good must always triumph over evil (God over Devil if one prefers the religious derivatives)is a given, and to come back to the point of this article, also why the Dixie Chicks have rebounded higher despite seemingly insurmountable Zionist controlled MSM obstacles placed in their way.

Spike Lee had it right in the movie title “Do the Right Thing”, a personal philosophy of living I had condensed long before the movie to “DO RIGHT” (although that word should always be interpreted directionally & morally rather than politically.

Although the writing on the wall indicates we are in for a very bumpy future ride, what is the point of carrying on if we don’t hold to the belief Shakespeare was correct in stating “The truth will out.”?

Report this

By PaulMagillSmith, November 8, 2007 at 1:42 am Link to this comment

RE: #111964 by Colorado on 11/06 at 12:32 pm
(Unregistered commenter)

“And this article confirms there is a blacklist in hollywood today?  And who is behind this blacklist?”

Well you asked so here it is:

http://www.natvan.com/who-rules-america/

Report this

By cann4ing, November 7, 2007 at 12:28 am Link to this comment

Thanks for the title and singer Paul, but you know what they say about the 60s?  If you can remember them, you weren’t there.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 6, 2007 at 8:26 pm Link to this comment

Colorado,
If you do not agree with the article and do not believe their is a blacklist in hollywood today, why do you not be more specific, oh my, oh my.

You don’t want to waste your time, Unreal. oh my, oh my, Unreal, Like where are you Colorado, why are you here? Oh my Unreal? Amazing the comments from individuals and add to this journalism?  Oh my!

Yes you made a point Colorado and it is on top of your head.
Oh My was McCarthy real or unreal?

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 6, 2007 at 6:03 pm Link to this comment

Paracelsus on 11/06 at 4:55 pm
(94 comments total)

#111933 by RBS

http://takingaimradio.com/hhz/index.htm

Ralph Schoenmann, a Jewish man, crystallizes for me the illegitimacy of the nation of Israel.  BTW, Palestine as a protectorate of Britain had an immigration policy during the interregnum that ignored the wishes of the Palestinian people. All the usual claptrap about the Palestinian Arabs being anti-Semites was used to argue for an open border policy in Palestine. I think that the nation of Israel should be dissolved and all Jews given Commonwealth passports and British citizenship. This was a problem caused by the elites of the Anglo aristocracy. They are the real rulers of the USA through their shadow governments. The CFR, and the Bilderbergers are the true governments and they give their pronouncements to those in the apparent governments. Please read Francis Bacon’s The New Atlantis. He foresaw in 1598, the rise of a puppet republic in the British colonies of North America.

What an IDIOT!  By that standard of logic, every US and Canadian citizen who isn’t “Native American” should be given a British passport, and the United States and Canada dissolved.  That would also solve the immigration problem. 

It sounds really stupid when you change the context from one “usurper”, Israel, to another “usurper”, the United States.

And, like most hypocrits who dictate what’s right for OTHER people you’ll bitch and moan and whine when it happens to you.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 6, 2007 at 5:55 pm Link to this comment

#111933 by RBS

http://takingaimradio.com/hhz/index.htm

Ralph Schoenmann, a Jewish man, crystallizes for me the illegitimacy of the nation of Israel.  BTW, Palestine as a protectorate of Britain had an immigration policy during the interregnum that ignored the wishes of the Palestinian people. All the usual claptrap about the Palestinian Arabs being anti-Semites was used to argue for an open border policy in Palestine. I think that the nation of Israel should be dissolved and all Jews given Commonwealth passports and British citizenship. This was a problem caused by the elites of the Anglo aristocracy. They are the real rulers of the USA through their shadow governments. The CFR, and the Bilderbergers are the true governments and they give their pronouncements to those in the apparent governments. Please read Francis Bacon’s The New Atlantis. He foresaw in 1598, the rise of a puppet republic in the British colonies of North America.

Report this

By Colorado, November 6, 2007 at 1:32 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

And this article confirms there is a blacklist in hollywood today?  And who is behind this blacklist?  It is like throwing confetti in the air and saying it’s evidence of a celebration. Get a rope!

I don’t where to begin and won’t waste my time.  Unreal.  Amazing the comments from individuals that add to this… journalism?  Unreal. How I ended up here…. I wondered where the comments were being fueled from – that bubble up in the media about this subject but if this is the clear view, oh my.  Unreal.

Report this

By RBS, November 6, 2007 at 9:46 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

PaulMagillSmith: “It’s not a matter of who was Jewish or not. The real enemy of humanity is the Zionists, many of whom are not even Jewish.”

You’re fucking kidding me.

Do these people even know what Zionism is?

I can’t help but think these are white supremacists (who also make these blanket anti-Zionist comments on their own sites) poisoning the well of “liberal” thought.

The 9/11 Truth movement is already compromised with this type of 1933 thinking.

Of all the hundreds of Christian, Muslim, and Buddhist nations on earth—the urge for the Jews to own one measly little patch of desert is “the greatest threat to humanity”?

All the people who argue against Empire for its effect on persons displaced in diaspora who oppose even the concept of a Jewish state—it’s hypocrisy. The Jews were displaced by the Romans, booted from their ancestral earth.

That’s not to say the Israeli government doesn’t do a whole lot of stupid.

And there is a valid argument that some Evangelical Christians, who see Zionism as a shortcut to the apocalypse, are somewhat of a threat to peace. After all, many voters re-elected George Bush for this reason—BECAUSE he was going to bring on the armageddon. But Zionism is about a country for the Jews where they don’t have to put up with anybody else’s bullshit (good luck, right?) like pogroms, inquisitions, concentration camps, and crucifixions, for example.

Moving Jews into place in the “Holy Land” to prepare the way for the final battle between Jews and Muslims that will sweep the good Christian soldiers onto the great spaceship is not Zionism.

Report this

By msgmi, November 6, 2007 at 9:35 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Since post 9/11, the crusaders of paranoia have done a successful job in promoting their 21st century ‘inquisition’ of those that speak out against the neo-CON new world order. Leadership structured on fear should be an awakening to those that have supported it without question. Does the German inquisition in the 1930’s or the homegrown McCarthyism of the 1950’s ring a bell?

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, November 6, 2007 at 6:16 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

EC Country Joe was great Heard him sing at Woodstock (wasn’t inside this extravaganza,which was really in the town of Bethel,  was out side towing cars for Sullivan County)

For anti war songs though My favorite is Phil Oches “I ain’t marching anymore” (which they wouldn’t play on New Yorks radio stations way before “Clear Channel”

http://www.KaZaA.com has it ready to steal.

Report this

By loverofpeace, November 5, 2007 at 8:16 pm Link to this comment

Ernest, the songwriter was Country Joe McDonald. He’s still around and still against war as a solution to our problems.

Report this

By PaulMagillSmith, November 5, 2007 at 7:58 pm Link to this comment

Ernest,

It’s the ‘Feel Like I’m Fixin’ To Die Rag’ by Country Joe and the Fish, a great San Francisco group I saw many times when I lived out there from 1968-1972. (two blocks from the intersection of Haight & Asbury Sts)

I’m impressed you remembered the words…you ole Hippie you…and that’s a compliment, because despite the Reich Wing/Right Wing spin of those days the Hippies were right in many ways about a number of concepts.

Report this

By cann4ing, November 5, 2007 at 6:57 pm Link to this comment

CY, perhaps its a matter of age bias, but I really think a better set of anti-war songs emerged in the 60s and early seventies.  Peter, Paul & Mary’s “Where have all the flowers gone” led the way in 1962.  Dylan’s “Universal Soldier” is a classic that applies to “war” period.  But I can’t even recall the name of the one that bore those sarcastically biting lyrics:

“Well, it’s one, two, three
  What are we fightin’ for
Don’t ask me, I don’t give a damn,
  Next stop is Vietnam
And it’s five, six, seven
  Open up the Pearly Gates
Ain’t no time to wonder why,
  Whoppee we’re all gonna die.”

Report this

By Ricardo, November 5, 2007 at 12:10 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

In this country FULL of religious freaks…it is a shame no discussion can ever be had without bringing religion into the mix…get it through your heads!!!!!!!!1…THERE IS NO GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..please let us pick up the pieces caused by everyone’s broken tears upon this realization…and lets get on with the art of living….godless…and intelligently

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, November 5, 2007 at 6:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

111655 by PaulMagillSmith on 11/04 at 5:25 pm

“Although a ‘son of the south’ I’m not a big country fan, but will always hold the Dixie Chicks in highest esteem for bravely eduring a temporary sacrifice to stand up to this fascist attempt to tyranize artists. In the long run their courage has gained them well deserved awards, a wider more respectful audience, rebounded record & concert sales, but most importantly their self-respect. Hold your heads high girls/ladies/CHICKS, you deserve it.”

Although born and raised in New York City, I loved C&W;music at a time when NYC didn’t have a single C&W;station. I listened to WWVA from Wheeling W.Va. late at night and became a Huge Kitty Wells fan.

People on this board are probably not aware of this, but Woody Guthrie and Joan Baez were both accepted on the Country stations before they were allowed to sing on “more mainstream” media. 

To put this in perspective, the Dixie Chicks are far from the first entertainers censored by our government Alan Freed was censored harassed, and broken by a government that thought the “Rock & Roll” of the fifties was indecent. Johnny Cash was banned from some C&W;stations for his “Vietnam talking blues” Buffy St. Marie couldn’t get any recognition for her “native American protest songs” and most East Coast stations wouldn’t play “Universal Soldier” (a good song for this war too!) Peter LaFarge is almost unknown, and his tribute to “Lake Perfidy” (AS LONG AS THE GRASS SHALL GROW) has been ignored by the mainstream media. The C&W;station that plays “oldies” in this part of the world (A Clear Channel Station) won’t play Charlie Danial’s “Still in Saigon”

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 4, 2007 at 8:37 pm Link to this comment

@ #111578 by Leefeller

No one here would say that the Dixie Chicks deserved this blacklisting and slander. In Nazi Germany an entertainer would die an unexplained suicide for politically unpopular views. Have you heard of the Swing Kids? The Soviet Union was no different. Frequently a tyranny accuses others of its own crimes. The Pinks in Hollywood had not responsibility for the arming of the Communists in North Vietnam during the closing months of WW2. This was accomplished by our own Army in Iowa Jima. The Chinese Maoists were well supplied by Western corporations while Kiang Chai Chek forces were under an UN arms embargo. Los Alamos an dthe Pentagon had long had “misshipments” of Uranium 235 and bomb plans to the Soviet Union. Julius and Ethel Rosenbergs were
the Wen Ho Lee’s of their time. So if our media and our government accuses the Dixie Chicks of aiding terrorists by their words and actions, then you must know that the accuser is actually the accused.
I would speculate that the high cabal has long experimented with different forms of scientific dictatorship.

Report this

By PaulMagillSmith, November 4, 2007 at 6:25 pm Link to this comment

RE: #111629 by Conservative Yankee on 11/04 at 2:15 pm
(Unregistered commenter)

You wrote:
“Since evangical Xtianity springs from an evolution of the Xtian experience is it unreasonable to feel the xtians have a responsibility & duty to reign in these wayward anti-social people?”

CY, I reiterate from my post:
“I am tolerant of all people’s religions, but subscribe to none of their organized efforts myself.”

To clarify, I am not opposed to the philosophical foundations of religions, which I perceive as necessary to provide moral & ethical guides as to how to treat your fellow human beings. I am opposed to organized religion, however, since they take good concepts from far seeing prophets and warp/pervert them into businesses seeking only profits & domination of populaces. Regardless of choice of worship it is a sad fact we all now have our ‘cross to bear’ (so to speak). Although your reply had a sarcastic intent, I don’t believe we are really that far apart in a common shared belief religion & politics have now combined into some bizarre & dangerous form of mass dementia, and regardless of spiritual inclination theocratic forms of government represent a ‘clear & present danger’ to all of us.

To return focus to the article at hand (somehow the discussion went tangential, but not completely abstracted just distracted a bit), the ‘Dixie Chicking’ of the Dixie Chicks, although primarily by fundamentalist Christians, is indicative of a propensity by ALL religions to stifle free speech, free will, free thought, and free choice, in order to bring errant patrons back into the fold of dogmatic conformist enslavement/control.

Although a ‘son of the south’ I’m not a big country fan, but will always hold the Dixie Chicks in highest esteem for bravely eduring a temporary sacrifice to stand up to this fascist attempt to tyranize artists. In the long run their courage has gained them well deserved awards, a wider more respectful audience, rebounded record & concert sales, but most importantly their self-respect. Hold your heads high girls/ladies/CHICKS, you deserve it.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 4, 2007 at 4:25 pm Link to this comment

Since neoconism springs from the thighs of opportunism, and runs rampant like mad dogma, those who are not neocons, have no power to reign in their selfish bent than a Jewish person has to reign in a Zionist. Even though we would hope that neither existed.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, November 4, 2007 at 3:15 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

111599 by PaulMagillSmith on 11/04 at 10:44 am

“Since Zionism springs from an evolution of the Jewish experience is it unreasonable to feel the Jewish community has a rsponsibility & duty to rein in these wayward anti-social people?”

Since evangical Xtianity springs from an evolution of the Xtian experience is it unreasonable to feel the xtians have a responsibility & duty to reign in these wayward anti-social people?

We are all predators. Those little canine teeth tell our history, and unfortunately our future.

Report this

By PaulMagillSmith, November 4, 2007 at 11:44 am Link to this comment

ITW & PH, enough of this already. It’s not a matter of who was Jewish or not. The real enemy of humanity is the Zionists, many of whom are not even Jewish.

On the other hand the Jewish claim of being ‘the chosen people’ must be understood to carry with it responsibility to do something FOR the human race, rather than just TO it. Now I understand there is a great divide between Torah Jews and Zionists, the latter preferring to TAKE rather than patiently wait for God to GIVE.

For the curous I am what might be referred to as a WASSP (white Anglo Saxon spiritual person). I am tolerant of all people’s religions, but subscribe to none of their organized efforts myself. I AM, however, opposed to Zionists, who I see as a greater threat to the human race than any particular religion, or combinations of religious peoples.

Since Zionism springs from an evolution of the Jewish experience is it unreasonable to feel the Jewish community has a rsponsibility & duty to rein in these wayward anti-social people?

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 4, 2007 at 8:44 am Link to this comment

Well the fact that McCarthy did what he did was reprehensible and heinous, his destruction of peoples lives on conjecture and hearsay and lets name it what it was, a witch hunt. Black listing the Dixie Chicks, is a relative tactic to swiftboating.  Freedom of speech means mass media and programed bias, linked to special interests; after all they are one; attempts to destroy disagreeing peoples lives,  seems their needs to be a line drawn in the sand. 

What would have happened if the mass media had supported the Dixie Chicks instead of trying to discredit them?  Truth must not be told, especially in public, so the Dixie Chicks could have lied and said they were happy with Bush a fellow Texan and are proud he is our president.  Well they didn’t and they said how they felt about Bush. 

Republicans send out attack dogs like, Ann Colter or Fat Russ spewing hate and lies, but the Dixie Chicks cannot state feelings or opinions?

Black listing is just one small tactic, all part of the greater plan, just another part of the attack on the Constitution and destruction of peoples rights and liberties.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, November 4, 2007 at 7:25 am Link to this comment

ITW,

Lenin was an ethnic jew - an athesist, close to being an agnostic like you.

You wrote:

“You really should learn that people will put anything on the web they want.  That doesn’t make it true”.
——————————————————————————-
Your personal attacks on me in a nutshell and in your own words.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, November 4, 2007 at 7:12 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Well, this thread has become yet another “Jew roast”

This whole site is filled with antisemitic liberals, a breed I never before met…. My only regret is I attempted to dialogue with these people.

I never considered myself a “Zionist” but if the only choices I have are Zionist or wimpy self-hatingJewish apologist, guess where I’m going?

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 4, 2007 at 7:10 am Link to this comment

PatrickHenry on 11/03 at 7:20 pm
(274 comments total)

#111465 by Inherit The Wind

“Your blanket unquestioning use of web sites tell you Lenin was a Jew.  He was not. He was a lower-level aristocrat—not a drop of Jew in him.  Of course, his friend and comrade, Trotsky was a Jew, but not Lenin—so your facts are wrong, as usual”.
_________________________________________________

And as usual you stand corrected again.

http://www.adherents.com/people/pl/Vladimir_Lenin.html

You really should learn that people will put anything on the web they want.  That doesn’t make it true. 

Now you are telling us that you believe in biological racism—Lenin was baptized Russian Orthodox and raised as such, but that he still had “corrupted” blood because he MIGHT have had a Jewish grandparent.

Of course, that’s no surprise coming from a KKK ignorant redneck, that you would follow Hitler’s biological racism and HIS definition of a “Jew”.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, November 3, 2007 at 8:20 pm Link to this comment

#111465 by Inherit The Wind

“Your blanket unquestioning use of web sites tell you Lenin was a Jew.  He was not. He was a lower-level aristocrat—not a drop of Jew in him.  Of course, his friend and comrade, Trotsky was a Jew, but not Lenin—so your facts are wrong, as usual”.
_________________________________________________

And as usual you stand corrected again.

http://www.adherents.com/people/pl/Vladimir_Lenin.html

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 3, 2007 at 6:02 pm Link to this comment

PatrickHenry on 11/03 at 12:08 pm
(272 comments total)

The Mcarthy hearings came about because of the Rosenbergs (an american jewish family) sold the Soviet Union the secrets to the A-Bomb.

The list of ethnic jews (atheists) who were communists begins with Karl Marx and Lenin and flows down from there.

Truth hurts some, but all you have to do is computer search on Jewish communists and you can find out for yourself.

What is your brand of judaism ITW?  ethnic or religious? Sephartic or Ashkenazi or are you one of the big mouth New Yorker type trolls, you talk like one.

And there’s this…

PatrickHenry on 11/03 at 2:58 pm
(272 comments total)

#111414 by FFURKS

Leefellers post #111163 ended,

“I guess McCarthy should have been after the jewish people instead of the communists”?

My point was that they were the communists.

I don’t agree with Semitic rewriting of history.

I do agree with Paracelsus post #11147 that alot of the true military-industrialist families need to be exposed.  They’re still in action today.

Your hatred, ignorance, bigotry and flat-out stupidity continue to astound me.  Your blanket unquestioning use of web sites tell you Lenin was a Jew.  He was not. He was a lower-level aristocrat—not a drop of Jew in him.  Of course, his friend and comrade, Trotsky was a Jew, but not Lenin—so your facts are wrong, as usual.

Meanwhile, Ethel Rosenberg’s brother, David Greenglass admitted he lied when he testified against his sister—he was caught—either his wife or his sister.  He saved his wife.  Ethel Rosenberg was murdered and was innocent.

Julius MAY have been guilty, but he was a machinist and probably not able to even RECOGNIZE atomic bomb plans if he saw them.

Again, your facts are wrong, your ignorance revealed.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, November 3, 2007 at 3:58 pm Link to this comment

#111414 by FFURKS

Leefellers post #111163 ended,

“I guess McCarthy should have been after the jewish people instead of the communists”?

My point was that they were the communists.

I don’t agree with Semitic rewriting of history.

I do agree with Paracelsus post #11147 that alot of the true military-industrialist families need to be exposed.  They’re still in action today.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 3, 2007 at 3:28 pm Link to this comment

@ #111389 by Leefeller on 11/03 at 7:24 am
(473 comments total)

Well it is nice to know that, explains McCarthy was really just a bigot.  He did his whole circle jerk only to attack 2 percent of the population.
*********************************

I think that McCarthy erred in his jihad in going after the little people. You will notice that he was only stopped in his tracks when he tried to investigate the US Army. Instead of going after a bunch talented Jews he should have investigated the roles of wealthy ruling families in supporting Communism in Russia and China. I think he had good reason to suspect infiltration in the military and the State Dept. Instead he went after a good many naive good hearted people in the media.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 3, 2007 at 3:21 pm Link to this comment

To be fair Marx was supported by many wealthy Englishmen, who liked his ideas. That a large number of Jews were Communists should not obscure the fact that most Jews are not Communists. I do not think most conservative, orthodox, reform and reconstructionist Jews would feel comfortable living in a society that overlooks merit and talent in rewarding the goods of the economy. Aristocratic England is famous for setting up loony causes that seem to come from nowhere. Zionist Christianity has it roots in London gentlemen’s clubs. The key feature of communism is its ability to destroy the middle class as well as setting up authoritarian governments. I think of the era of the 1930’s as gentleman’s bet to see which system worked best in efficiency, fascism or communism.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, November 3, 2007 at 1:08 pm Link to this comment

The Mcarthy hearings came about because of the Rosenbergs (an american jewish family) sold the Soviet Union the secrets to the A-Bomb.

The list of ethnic jews (atheists) who were communists begins with Karl Marx and Lenin and flows down from there.

Truth hurts some, but all you have to do is computer search on Jewish communists and you can find out for yourself.

What is your brand of judaism ITW?  ethnic or religious? Sephartic or Ashkenazi or are you one of the big mouth New Yorker type trolls, you talk like one.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 3, 2007 at 11:23 am Link to this comment

PatrickHenry on 11/03 at 7:04 am
(266 comments total)

#111163 by Leefeller

Most of the communists were jews.

*****************

You’ll post horseshit like this, then bitch and whine and make snotty remarks when your basic KKK persona is noted.

You don’t LIKE being called a neo-nazi KKK bigot? Then stop posting racist and bigoted crap that you do.

You troll for the racists, but are too much of a coward to ADMIT what you are.

If Patrick Henry were alive he’d drop dead to see a Benedict Arnold like you besmirching his name and legacy.

Report this

By FFURKS, November 3, 2007 at 10:32 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

111383 by PatrickHenry on 11/03 at 7:04 am

#111163 by Leefeller

Most of the communists were jews.


Not to butt in, BUT I (as a reader) need to get this straight. Most of the Jews were communist, but they were so adept at using capitalism they cornered the banking industry, and the media companies. 

Was that the communism of Marx?  or some other variety?

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, November 3, 2007 at 9:07 am Link to this comment

The subject of Israel and the jews who unconditionally support it is a preeminent subject of social importance in this country which emcompasses the control of the media and campaign finance of our lawmakers. Together, these issues formulate our domestic and foreign policy which if you haven’t noticed lately, sucks.

Leefeller, I see by your “stale” comments ascribing others views as anti-semite (which I could care less) you use the same buzzwords KKK, bigoted, Israel bashing, etc.  It’s like you are using the same script as the Troll patrol which posts here.

No one more than I would like to see Israel turn their swords into plowshares, make peace with their neighbors and turn down any aid from the United States.  In the same breath I would like to see anti trust action in the media to ensure it is truely unbiased and not preferential to any race, religion, sex or creed as any employer knows is discrimminatory.

Report this

By Can of Whoop Ass, November 3, 2007 at 8:47 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I say line up all the conservaloon, christofascist coo-coos and give ‘em the Kool-Aid.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 3, 2007 at 8:24 am Link to this comment

Well it is nice to know that, explains McCarthy was really just a bigot.  He did his whole circle jerk only to attack 2 percent of the population.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, November 3, 2007 at 8:04 am Link to this comment

#111163 by Leefeller

Most of the communists were jews.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 3, 2007 at 7:55 am Link to this comment

weather,

Corporate lobbies have undue influence on our government, the simple fact bigoted people disregard all the other lobbies and tunnel vision focus on Israel is clear deep seated bigotry.  Attempting to connect and blame Judaism, Israel or any other ethnic group for the problems within our country, is nothing but smoke and mirrors.  Hitler revisited, deception the key. 

Even though I disagree with Feinstein and Schumer on voting for the neocon choice as AG, the low road attack on their names is exactly what I am talking about.  Disagreeing on the issue is relevant, attacking ones ethnicity is not. 

Yes I may be stale only because I do not agree with your refreshing bigotry.  Israel bashing is just another necon tool to subtract focus from the truth.

Let me make it clear, it is the Israel bashing that is stale, not the posts on topic, seems as if TD has been caucused by the KKK, maybe I have been here to long and have become stale. So be it!

Report this

By weather, November 3, 2007 at 3:36 am Link to this comment

leefeller, what motivated Chuck"drama queen"Schumer and Feinstein to push Mukasey the waterboarding enigma for AG?

When you have the courage to confront that question and ponder what it says about their character then you’re ready to accept that its you who’s stale and these posts are as fresh as it gets.

Report this

By Bert, November 2, 2007 at 1:36 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Remember Glenn Beck on CNN talking about the
california wildfires burning people’s homes that
hated america? Who REALLY hates America, maybe its the neo-con craven cronies who’ll do anything for a
buck, or in this case, a Bushbuck? What OTHER
high crime, fraud, and larceny will be perpetrated
under this administration? Who ELSE does their
army of assholes include? With friends like BushCo,
who needs Osama? What’s REALLY going on, here?
I don’t really care about the Dixie Hicks one way
or another, but I think that a lot of the stuff
we’ve read about political allegiance should
give ANYONE pause next time they see UberChimp
on TV…
9 trillion, and counting…

Report this

By kevin99999, November 2, 2007 at 9:41 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

For those of us who are outraged by this type of black listing by the hollywood directed towards those who dare to speak up against unjust wars and other similar causes. I wish I knew who are the people responsible and what products and services they sell so that I can choose not to buy those products and services and persuade others to do the same.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 2, 2007 at 8:07 am Link to this comment

Turning every post on TD into some sort of Jewish bashing feasts is really getting stale.  This kind of bigoted bull is what Hitler did, I find it reprehensible, not because the jewish people are perfect, but as a group they are individuals who like any other have different opinions from each other.  The Japanese internment camps are a prime example of bigoted misanthropic actions, why were there no German internment camps? 

Blind Prejudices like blind faith require nothing more than ignorance,  the opposite of enlightenment a common and easy recipe to direct the lemmings approach to self demise, the main purpose taking the focus off and away from the real problems, and I suppose that is the grand tactic we see on these posts. 

So, I guess McCarthy should have been after the jewish people instead of the communists?

Report this

By Dr Richard Blackmoor, November 2, 2007 at 2:23 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It is important to make it law that a business can only own ONE media outlet. 
  Repeat; a business can only own ONE media outlet.  One news paper…one TV network….one magazine etc.  and just as important   total net neutrality forever with the public owning ALL internet “airwaves”.

Report this

By RBS, November 2, 2007 at 1:05 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Those Dixie Chicks CD-smashing rallies were sponsored by the Bush-aligned radio conglomerates. And then covered on the TV news as news, rather than as what they were—pseudo-events.

Also, much of Clear Channel, et al’s kowtowing to the Bush Administration line began to dissolve as soon as the Bush FCC (under Colin Powell’s son) announced rule changes that would allow those very corporations to own a greater percentage of the media outlets in a given market.

That time the rules failed—but the current Bush FCC is trying it again.

How is that affecting news coverage today?


http://scorpionbowl.blogspot.com/2007/10/return-of-know-somethings.html

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 1, 2007 at 10:54 pm Link to this comment

One solution to diversifying media.

I think if Christians would like to consume media that is not centered on that dominated by Jews, that it would be up to them to found a movie industry in a city friendly to them. Perhaps Memphis, Tennessee would be a good location as it already serves as an area for Country and Western. A Christian owner could set forth a corporate culture that Christian talent would flock to. The important thing is that corporate control would be kept in Christian hands. This would mean that a public corporation would have to be closely held by majority owners. Or the movie studio would be a private concern. I think if Christians wan t media that reflects values that are Disney like then they should be as entrepreneurial and risk taking as their Jewish cousins in Hollywood. I think that those in a majority culture and religion tend to get complacent and risk shy as compared to a group of people who have always considered themselves outsiders. After all isn’t the word chutzpah used very often in Hollywood itself. Also Christians need to be able to toot their own horns, but too often they are taught to be humble and meek. I think the attitudes of the evangelical community could be very helpful in this regard. If you as a Christian are tired of movies portraying every preacher as a Lonesome Roades stereotype in The Movies, then it is up to you to create your own media.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 1, 2007 at 10:53 pm Link to this comment

One solution to diversifying media.

I think if Christians would like to consume media that is not centered on that dominated by Jews, that it would be up to them to found a movie industry in a city friendly to them. Perhaps Memphis, Tennessee would be a good location as it already serves as an area for Country and Western. A Christian owner could set forth a corporate culture that Christian talent would flock to. The important thing is that corporate control would be kept in Christian hands. This would mean that a public corporation would have to be closely held by majority owners. Or the movie studio would be a private concern. I think if Christians wan t media that reflects values that are Disney like then they should be as entrepreneurial and risk taking as their Jewish cousins in Hollywood. I think that those in a majority culture and religion tend to get complacent and risk shy as compared to a group of people who have always considered themselves outsiders. After all isn’t the word chutzpah used very often in Hollywood itself. Also Christians need to be able to toot their own horns, but too often they are taught to be humble and meek. I think the attitudes of the evangelical community could be very helpful in this regard. If you as a Christian are tired of movies portraying every preacher as Randy Roades stereotype in The Movies, then it is up to you to create your own media.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 1, 2007 at 9:18 pm Link to this comment

Is it possible that to have one ethnic/religious group in ownership of media is not all that healthy? Suppose mostly Irish Catholics owned movie studios in Hollywood. We would see loads of movies with Popes as heroes. You would never see any movies about Queen Elizabeth the First. You might see a ton load of comedies involving nuns. No one would ever see a movie about the inquisition. You might be see movies where Protestants realize The Truth. There would be a ton of media stories of baby being christened by priests. These would interwoven into comedies and movies as well. There would tons of movies on the Potato Famine. There might even be movements asking for reparations for Irish Famines of the 1840’s. There might even be some ugly movies and films of Mohls infecting little boys by accident from a clumsy bris. I am not knocking Judaism. I just don’t think it is good to have one religious ethnic group to predominate the culture industry, which consumed by the whole country. I think media is healthy if there are all kinds of different cultures in control of their own movie studios, newspapers, and television stations. I don’t think it is healthy for one ethnic cultural group to monopolistically pervade the culture industry. I don’t have any ideas to solve this problem.

Report this

By tigger, November 1, 2007 at 5:11 pm Link to this comment

well look what happens when one speaks the truth. last time i remember we all had the freedom of speech and the right to our opions.  whatever something is said political, it always leads to some sort of drama.  Lets talk drama, the US gov has spent billions on the war in Iraq but has managed to do very little for the US. for example the SCHIP program and hell new orleans is still a mess.  Its all about the war!!  nothing else.  just imagine what programs could have been repaired or improved by not having to spend billions on a war in Iraq, for which we always be there, just like we are in Bosnia and vietnam still.

Report this

By Bert, October 31, 2007 at 4:56 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

McCarthy rides again, turn the People against each
other, control them all…

Report this

By ocjim, October 31, 2007 at 11:30 am Link to this comment

If Dixie-Chicking has its own meaning then Bushing has a very wide meaning, including lying, deceiving, distorting, pandering, exploiting, pontificating and puppeting.

Report this

By cann4ing, October 29, 2007 at 8:06 pm Link to this comment

No CY, I was quoting Bill Moyers.  He seems to have borrowed the phrase from Spiro.

When I first began practicing law, I worked for a guy who had been served in the Justice Dept. under Robert Kennedy and, as a young lawyer, was one of the attorneys who prosecuted Hoffa.  He taught me that the turning point in a case is to wait for your opponent to make a verbal mistake, then beat him over the head with it.

In this case, Agnew had referred to “nattering nabobs of negativism”—I kind of 60s version of the hard right’s “they hate America” label they hang on anyone who would dare question dubya’s policies.  Moyers turned the phrase around by referring to “nattering nabobs of know-nothing radio”—an obvious reference to Rush Limbaugh and his ditto heads.  Moyers borrowed a hard-right phrase, then beat them over the head with it.  In the context of his full quote, I thought it pretty effective.

Report this

By Logician, October 29, 2007 at 3:15 pm Link to this comment

Re#110287 by PJ on 10/29 at 12:52 pm:

But pj, you still didn’t answer the question:  Which “one God” are you talking about?  I’m sure that with your oh so witty rejoinder, “idiots like you” you must be oh so smart and therefore aware that mankind has invented THOUSANDS of “Gods”, so which manmade “one God” are you using to justify your condemnation of people who do not share YOUR manmade “one God”? 

Would it be the manmade “one God” that justifies burning the CDs of people whose feces you aren’t fit to eat? Would it be the manmade “one God” that justifies porking little boys?  Would it be the manmade “one God” that justifies snorting crack after oral sex with a male prostitute?  Would it be the manmade “one God” that justifies building a “University” then getting “spiritual” with the young male atheletes?  Or would it be the manmade “one God” that justifies flying airplanes into buildings?  How about the manmade “one God” that justifies killing traverlers?

You see, pj, there are THOUSANDS of “one Gods”. So, you need to be very specific about which “one God” you want to bless America and damn everyone who doesn’t agree with little old you. If you would take some time out from your enthusiatic research on inbreeding you would have a greater understanding of things other than inhaling the fumes of burning CDs.  You would also find that the reason so many disagree with you is that, unlike you, our parents weren’t related.  That’s why we know there are no gods, manmade or otherwise.

Report this

By PJ, October 29, 2007 at 1:52 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Struck a nerve-huh? There is only one God. My comments were in regard to the actions of the dc and the consequences of those actions. God bless America where even idiots like you have freedom of speech. I never commented on the war. It must have been the voices in your head.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, October 29, 2007 at 5:25 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“nattering nabobs”

Careful EC That’s Spiro T. Agnew you’re quoting!

“In the United States today, we have more than our share of the nattering nabobs of negativism”

S.T. Agnew on opponents of the Vietnam conflict

Report this

By PaulMagillSmith, October 28, 2007 at 7:49 pm Link to this comment

Hey Ernest, didn’t Tomlinson also get his butt in a sling at CPB/PBS/NPR for spending unathorized funds to research whether stories leaned Republican or Democrat?

Report this

By cann4ing, October 28, 2007 at 3:55 pm Link to this comment

Leefeller, you are correct to note that deception is accomplished by lies as well as censorship.

Consider the Fox network which reaches 4.7 billion people world-wide.  As revealed by Frank O’Donnell, a former Fox News Producer, in the Robert Greenwald documentary, “Outfoxed,” early on they “were ordered from the top to carry Republican right-wing propagands” by cutting away from a newscast to air a fawning tribute to Ronald Reagan from the floor of the Republican Convention.

Within the White House, throughout the right-wing media, and especially at Fox, “message control” is the order of the day.  In “Weapons of Mass Deception” Danny Schechter quotes a former Fox News producer about the content of the “memo” that is electronically distributed each morning instructing on what stories will be covered, how often and how they were to be presented.  In “Outfoxed” Greenwakd discloses that these memoranda come from high with in the corporation, John Moody and Roger Ailes, the CEO of Fox News and a former media advisor to the Nixon, Reagan and Bush I administrations.

Greenwald not only displays the memos but depicts segments in which this form of tight message control is carried out by one Fox anchor after another.  In one, successive anchors, following the memo’s commands, impugn the motives of Richard Clarke as part of a Bush administration damage control project.  In another, a chorus of voices, one after another, sings out the words “flip-flopper” to describe John Kerry.  While when viewed in succession in “Outfoxed,” the “flip-flopper” segment is amusing, there is nothing funny about the devastating impact of simplistic messages when they are spread over a 24/7 news cycle.  “The wider context,” observes Prof. Juan Cole “is that Rupert Murdoch & Richard Mellon Scaife…have deeply corrupted our information environment.”

The notion of staying “on message” with a simple message-of-the-day which is then repeated throughout the right-wing echo chamber did not originate with the Bush administration or the neoconservatives.  It comes straight out of “Mein Kampf:”  “All effective propaganda,” Hitler tells us, “must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand….Propaganda had to be continuous and unvarying in its message.”

In the view of Bill Moyers, Fox forms only a portion of “the quasi-official press ideologically linked to an authoritarian administration that in turn is the ally and agent of the most powerful financial interests in the world….Stretching from the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal to faux news of Rupert Murdoch’s empire to the nattering nabobs of know-nothing radio to a legion of think tanks bought and paid for by conglomerates, the religious, partisan, and corporate right has raised a mighty megaphone for sectarian, economic, and political forces that aim to transform the egalitarian and democratic ideals embodied in our founding documents.”

Report this

By Logician, October 28, 2007 at 11:17 am Link to this comment

RE#109970 by PJ on 10/27 at 11:57 am and #109995 by Ernest Canning on 10/27 at 4:08 pm:

Hey PJ! That was a really good question from EC (see above)! Just who WOULD the mythical character Jesus bomb?  I know that because NOT ONE THING in your filthy little bible is true, you can justify anything: murder, masturbation, incest, ANYTHING. So, even though we know there are more women in the group of Dixie Chicks than you have teeth in your mouth, let us in on your big inside line to the big fictional creator of your little world: Who Would Jesus Bomb?

And remember, PJ, when you say God Bless America, you have to be SPECIFIC: the God of Abraham, the God Ra, the God Ganesha, the God Zues, etc, etc, etc.  After all, PJ, “actions have consequences”!

And hey!  Stay out of those airport bathrooms!  If you’re going to troll, be safe!  Another character who LOVES to say God Bless America without being specific got caught in his hypocrisy, you wouldn’t want to either, now would you?

Report this

By 911truthdotorg, October 28, 2007 at 11:12 am Link to this comment

The “official” story of 9/11 is an absolute lie.

Period.

All you have to do is believe your own eyes and not what “your parents” are telling you to believe.

The simple fact that the bush crime family, clintons, etc won’t release ALL the 9/11 information, Pentagon
security camera videos, etc proves that they have everything to hide.

The truth is their biggest enemy, and they know it.

Google videos: 9/11 Press for Truth, Loose Change 2nd Edition (LC Final Cut on DVD Nov 11), 9/11 Mysteries, Terror Storm, America: Freedom to Fascism

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, October 28, 2007 at 8:51 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

EC

In the past I have frequently had real problems with your arguments and posts, but on this topic, Damn! You are right on the mark in every post!  I feel no need to present arguments for re-establishing the PEOPLES’ control of the airwaves, rather than conglomerates who contribute big to the Re-Thug-lican cause, because you are doing it so well!

Just goes to show that people can vehemently disagree on one issue and make common cause on another.

ITW.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 28, 2007 at 7:21 am Link to this comment

Deception by lies or censorship the effect is the same, absence of the truth.  Once exposed the liars and censors should be weaker, but we have not seen that.  Most people would rather not be bothered by the truth, or we just looking at the old saying “who gives a damn about apathy.” 

Time to buy a new album of the D.C.‘s, at least it will make me feel better.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, October 28, 2007 at 5:21 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

This “conversation is becoming tedious to say the least.

WE have the power (STILL) to make the government free our airwaves.  It matters not who holds the leases.  AND when I was a child back in New York City, my like-minded friends and I bemoaned the fact that 77-(WABC) 1010-(WINS)and 68.9 (WMCA) wouldn’t play Buffy St. Marie, Phil Ochs, or some of the longer Bob Dylan riffs. We began a “call everyone” campaign and stuck our posters in subway stations, street signs, and any empty wall where space was available.  “Cousin Brucie” (one of the right wing disc jockeys at ABC for those who didn’t live on the East Coast) even mentioned our campaign on his show saying; “There are some teeny-boppers out there who are messing up our city with needless signs attempting to get this station to change it’s play-policy. STOP already, it’s not gonna happen.”

But it did. by 1969, even ABC was playing Jim Croce and Gimme Shelter (a full five minutes) WMCA played Dylan’s Sad Eyed Lady of the Lowlands (admittedly late at night) which took over 20 minutes.

Change is possible.  BUT it probably won’t happen by discussing it with like minded people here.

Report this

By Verne Arnold, October 28, 2007 at 2:26 am Link to this comment

Excellent article; thanks Ed Rampell:
Holy shit…the censorship thing isn’t new…it’s the same old thing.  This is not scary at all.  The truly scary thing is (this site excepted) the huge lack of concern by the general population.  It has always been said that America will never be conquered by an outside enemy; but rather, from the enemy within.  I think we’re there.

Report this

By cann4ing, October 27, 2007 at 5:09 pm Link to this comment

Does “PJ” stand for Poor Judgment?

Report this

By cann4ing, October 27, 2007 at 5:08 pm Link to this comment

Hey PJ, if this God of yours only blesses America, what does He do to the rest of the world?  And since you seem to be one of the 27 percenters still applauding the duplicitous policies of our “War President” that the Dixie Chicks so appropriately challenged, perhaps you can provide me with another answer.  Tell me PJ, “Who would Jesus have bombed?”

To PaulMagillSmith, there are, indeed, remnants of FCC rules preventing further consolidation, especially as it pertains to cross-ownership of multiple forms of communications, e.g. radio, TV & newspapers, within a single market.  The current FCC in which Bush appointees hold a 3-2 majority, through its chairman, is pushing new rules that would destroy these last impediments to complete corporate control—this despite a previous court decision overturning the same effort by the former head of the FCC, Michael Powell—son of Collin Powell and a Bush appointee—and despite overwhelming public opposition.

Bush administration ideologues have not simply engaged in demolishing the last vestige of anti-consolidation rules, but have also directly targeted the range of discourse.  Former CPB chairman Ken Tomlinson erected the “liberal bias” canard not only to take aim at journalists who speak truth to power like Bill Moyers but as a means to infiltrate PBS with right-wing punditry, spending $5 million in taxpayer money to create a new weekly broadcast for the Wall Street Journal’s Paul Gigot, prompting Moyers to profess “puzzlement that The Wall Street Journal, which in the past editorialized to cut PBS off the public tap, is now being subsidized by American taxpers when its parent company, Dow Jones, had revenues in the first quarter of this year, of four hundred million dollars.”  (Guess who has since bought Dow Jones—Ruppert Murdoch!). 

As far back as 1984, Tomlinson joined with Charlie Wick to run the CIA-dominated Voice of America.  The two politicized the U.S. Information Agency, deleting a large number of journalists, writers and politicians from a list of prominent Americans who would lecture abroad, including “Walter Cronkite, James Baldwin, Gary Hart, Ralph Nader, Ben Bradley, Coretta Scott King & David Brinkley.”  Tomlinson “hired a Republican operative to monitor the political leanings of shows hosted by Moyers, Tavis Smiley and Diane Rehn.” 

CPB’s Inspector General found that Tomlinson had violated CPB contracting rules and code of ethics in order to promote conservative causes, linking Tomlinson’s maneuverings to the White House via e-mails between Tomlinson and White House staff, including Karl Rove.

Report this

By PaulMagillSmith, October 27, 2007 at 4:28 pm Link to this comment

Thank you,  Ernest Canning & Conservative Yankee, for making good points. The airwaves are on paper ‘ours’, but in fact with deregulation & consolidation come closer & closer to being totally ‘theirs’. The attempt a year or so ago to grant the existing media giants even a larger share of ownership in localities of newspapers, radio stations, & TV stations wasn’t due to legislation, but a ruling made by an administration lackey who was head of the FCC. Within a very short time millions of very concerned Americans sent E-mails, faxes, letters, and phone calls to their representatives in congress, and the public outcry was so great the administration & FCC were forced to back down.

There is an excellent site http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm giving the 14 points of Fascism,  and how the neo-CONs have been moving us in that direction. Control of the media is #6 on this list.

I am one of the founders of a local LPFM (Low Power FM—-100 watts) radio station and have seen first hand how this administration in collusion with big media companies tries to block all competition and alternate points of view. It took us a year and a half just to get our application for one of the new bandwidths that came available approved. They (FCC) stalled & stalled, then finally even told us they had lost all our paperwork and we needed to re-submit the application, which put us down back to the bottom of the list. We then had until Jan 1, 2005 to be on the air or we would lose our permit to broadcast. Only through the dedicated efforts of our numerous volunteers (it’s a non-profit dedicated to serving the needs of the community rather than someone’s need to fatten their bottom line or control local citizens’ thinking) was this done and we did get on the air.

At the time of our initial application the two largest owners of radio stations in the US owned 128, but by the time we went on the air they owned over 1,500. Aren’t there some sort of laws still on the books against monopolies?

Report this

By cann4ing, October 27, 2007 at 4:27 pm Link to this comment

Yeah, right oh great “Voice,” and if we discard the democracy preserving provisions of the Federal Communications Act of 1934 because they predated television and the internet, what do we do with the Constitution and the first amendment which were adopted long before we had radio?  Oh, that’s right, your buddy dubya thinks the Constitution is “just a piece of paper,” and documents like the Magna Carta which created the right to habeas corpus, not to mention little tidbits like the Geneva Conventions are, oh what was that word our neocon former attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, used, “quaint.”

As Danny Schechter so aptly noted, “we are all living in the crosshairs of powerful media institutions that offer more spin than truth.  Their fire is ‘incoming,’ into our living rooms, and then into our brains.”

The expansion of media from radio, to television to the internet simply creates a greater potential for monopoly control by a select wealthy few to exhibit undemocratic controls over what we see, hear and read.  It extends to moguls like Ruppert Murdoch a power far beyond that which any one, unelected individual should hold.

In “Tragedy & Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections, and Destroy Democracy,”  John Nichols & Robert McChesney set forth three components essential to a democracy-sustaining media:  “It must be a rigorous watchdog of those in power and those who wish to be in power; it must provide a wide range of informed views on the pressing issues of the day; and it must expose deception and permit truth to rise to the top.”  The failure of corporate media to come close to those standards has created a “media crisis” in which “a highly concentrated profit-driven media system…makes it rational to gut journalism and irrational to provide the content a free society so desparately requires..” 

In “Exception to the Rulers,” Amy Goodman observes, in “a media landscape where there are more channels than ever, the lack of diversity of opinion is breathtaking”—a point she later underscored by a Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting study of the weeks prior to, during and after the critical Collin Powell speech at the U.N. which spun the WMD canards in the run up to the disasterous invasion of Iraq, and at a time when nearly 60% of Americans favored further inspections, only 4 out of 296 “on-air” experts appearing on the four major networks (excluding Fox News) were associated with the anti-war movement.

Compare that to the words of Justice Hugo Black in NY Times vs. Sullivan (1971):  “In the First Amendment the Founding gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy.  The press was to have served the governed, not the governors.  The Government’s power to censor the press was abolished so the press would remain forever free to censure the Government.  The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people….And paramount among the responsiblities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die….”

Report this

By PJ, October 27, 2007 at 12:57 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The dippy chicks got what they deserved. They exercised free speech and so did the fans (they left in droves) God bless America. Actions have consequences. Welcome to the real world. Even the “drive by” (left wing, mainstream) media couldn’t save the dc. They tried though. McCain is a disgrace and should be tossed out for betraying his constituants. If ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN,MSNBC,ETC.. can’t brainwash enough people for you anymore and you can’t compete on radio I guess the unfairness doctrine looks pretty good. Anything to regain your media monopoly-huh?

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, October 27, 2007 at 11:30 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

People should remember the airwaves are OURS!!!

The channel on the radio, the over-air TV stations, and the frequencies where cell phones operate ALL OURS!

The government (as our agent) RENTS or LEASES these “properties” to Clear Channel, Disney, and KKR. As with any land lord we have the right (at the beginning of the next lease) to say what we want to hear, what we do not want to hear, and what requirements tenants must meet to stay tenants.

I thought Good-by Earl was great, but where’s thee REAL C&W;?

Report this

By voice of truth, October 27, 2007 at 10:08 am Link to this comment

Mr. Canning

“the Federal Communications Act of 1934”

Exactly.  That was written even before TV.  The world has changed a bit.  Or hadn’t you noticed?

I guess we should re-enact all the laws from back then as well.  We can start with the Jim Crow laws, then, etc., etc.  Your post does nothing but reinforce my point.

Report this

By cann4ing, October 27, 2007 at 9:42 am Link to this comment

Gerald Nelson:  Clinton did not kill the Fairness Doctrine.  It was eliminated by the FCC during the Reagan administration.

Report this

By cann4ing, October 27, 2007 at 9:13 am Link to this comment

Dead wrong again, oh disembodied “voice.”  The Fairness Doctrine came about because of the monopoly control of the public airwaves provided by FCC licenses to the corporate conglomerates provides wealth and power with an unfair control over what the public sees, hears and reads.

As Bill Moyers points out, the clear intent of the Federal Communications Act of 1934 “was to prevent a monopoly of commercial values from overwhelming democratic values—to assure that the official view of reality—corporate or government—was not the only view of reality.”

Last year, as the hypocrites with the flags on their lapels link up behind closed with the owners of the media conglomerates and telecommunications industries seeking to maximize profits through extension and consolidation of monopoly power, the American people found themselves faced with the prospect of forever losing the availability of an alternative reality.  That is when a Republican-controlled House of Representatives sought passage of COPE which would have permitted phone and cable companies to operate Internet and other digital communications servers as private networks, free of policy safeguards or governmental oversight.  The bill would have ended “net neutrality” which is the concept that everyone, everywhere, should have free, universal and non-discrimatory access to all the Internet has to offer.

The same telecommunications companies who linked with the NSA to spy on Americans would man toll booths on the internet highways.  Like their counterparts in the commercial media, the telecom giants would then be in a position to maximize their message, just as Sinclair Broadcasting did when it ordered 62 affiliates during the 2004 campaign to pre-empt their programming with the swift-boat propaganda piece, “Stolen Honor.”

The conservative mantra of “deregulation” is an Orwellian canard.  All media are regulated.  You think not?  Try broadcasting on an established airwave without a license.  In route to federal court and prison, you would quickly learn just how regulated.

The question was never “deregulation,” but how media is regulated.  Regulations either advance the public interest in the diversity of available information and opinion (as afforded by the “Fairness Doctrine”) or they advance the interests of the media conglomerates who make billions on re-regulations that expand and consolidate monopoly power.

Report this

By davr, October 27, 2007 at 1:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The Bush/Republicans ARE Nazis!  Bush IS another Hitler!  They’re goal is to turn the USA into the Fourth Reich!

And that’s the f**king Truth.

Report this

By voice of truth, October 26, 2007 at 3:30 pm Link to this comment

There is nothing “fair” about the Fairness Doctrine.

“however, if it is quoted in the media, equal time should be required to be given to the opposing view by that said media.”

Why in the world should “equal time” be mandated?  You talk as if the media is not simply a conglomeration of public companies, with private owners, but is something to be controlled by the government.  Your prescription is only viable in a government controlled media environment.  In your scenario, that means that for every looney post on this site bashing Bush, or Isreal, or whatever, there should be an equal amount of posts that support the same.  This website is as much a part of the media as ABC.

Can’t say I would be happy to live in your worldview.

Report this

By thomas billis, October 26, 2007 at 3:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To silence opposition to public policy is the issue.The similarities to Mccarthyism are eerie.They do not care if you speak out against a policy in your bedroom. It is when other people may be swayed by your opinion that is when they clamp down.Joe Mccarthy or Ari Fleisher saying “watch what you say” is ominous.Instead of a fullthroated debate on the war we ended up with one point of view and everybody else taking notes.Is this the type of democracy we are trying to export?

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, October 26, 2007 at 3:02 pm Link to this comment

Ask Marlon Brando about blacklisting.

Mel Gibson got a taste.

http://www.rense.com/general78/mdot.htm

Report this

By Gerald Nelson, October 26, 2007 at 2:34 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Some of you on the right and the left are confused:
Anyone can say any non-libelus (sp?) thing they want to; however, if it is quoted in the media, equal time should be required to be given to the opposing view by that said media. This was always the case until Clinton allowed the “Fairness Doctrine” to be killed. I will never forgive Clinton for this, plus some other rightwing (triangulation) things he pulled.

Report this

By PaulMagillSmith, October 26, 2007 at 2:28 pm Link to this comment

RE: #109762 by voice of truth on 10/26 at 11:43 am
(71 comments total)

“My point is that your Isreal bashing has no place on a thread regarding the Dixie Chicks.”

Well you’re absolutely wrong there, vot, who do you think owns most of the media in this country anyway, and since they benefit by support of this illegal invasion of Iraq don’t you think they have thir nasty fingers on the button to nuke/“Chick” anyone who stands to reveal the truth that 911 was very possibly a ‘false flag’ operation by Mossad & radical Zionist elements? You can call me anti-Semitic all you want, but that ploy of ‘slime the messenger’ just won’t fly any more. It’s just a tactic to distract from the real message.

I don’t have any blame for people who subscribe to the Jewish ‘religion’, but there is more than enough to go around for the collusion of the Isreali ‘political’ structure, and the fascist intentions of the Bushie neo-CONS. They walk hand-in-hand, and both are intent on censorship of all who disagree with their desire for world domination, and the means they use to accomplish this feat, mainly trickery, lies, and deception, are well known & verifiable. 

The fascist neo-CONS hide behind Christianity as a foil for dissent, and fascist Isrealis & Zionists hide behind , because of guilt felt by westerners related to allowing the holocaust to happen, labeing their opposition as anti-Semitic. It’s a ruse only bought into by uninformed PROPAGANDIZED suckers.

Why do you think it’s so important for them to control the media? If there is no avenue for dissent this gives the impression there is none, and the ill-informed brainwashed right leaning plebes can go back to their mundane trivial sitcoms, faux noise (Fox News), and what Brittney, Anna Nicole, & other ‘flakes’ are doing, feeling all is well, fat & happy in the belief their ‘mainstreamness’ is the norm.

They will also try to foist on the public the fiction that the media is liberal, but numerous studies show the contrary. Who owns most of the media? Right! Corporations, or rather a few who own the media corporations. Are most of the CEO’s in charge liberals? Hardly! Most are staunch right-wingers, and just like this article points out they will stomp on anyone who doesn’t project the company ideology. Got it now?

Report this

By WriterOnTheStorm, October 26, 2007 at 1:47 pm Link to this comment

As every good confidence man knows, the mark is always most vulnerable at the moment when they are absolutely convinced that they can’t be conned. A mark is said to be “ripe” or “cooked” when they are in this state, and much of the artistry of the con is aimed at achieving it.

When it comes to founding myths in this country, many Americans could be said to be ripe. Freedom of speech is one of those founding myths. It is most often invoked by the haves to pacify the have nots. And, like many of the founding myths, it is curiously perpetuated by the have nots who, against overwhelming evidence to the contrary, are awash in the faith that they soon will become haves, that their own engraved invitation to the party is in the mail.

Now, the ripest Americans of all, are the patriots. These flag waving narcissists have no doubt that they live in the best country in the world with the best government the world has ever witnessed. They hawk and grin while politicos play three-card-monty with their tax dollars. They sing chorus and verse in the Fox news singalong while sending their children off to fight for democracy, never guessing that what those kids are really doing is pacifying foreign lands for corporate plunder.

Anyone who objects will be hog tied by the very patriots and the have nots they are attempting to defend. It’s the best game going - as all the good confidence men know.

Report this

By BobZ, October 26, 2007 at 1:15 pm Link to this comment

A great recap of the efforts to thwart free speech in the U.S. It is pretty sad reading, and makes one wonder about the real state of this great country. George W. Bush has not only been a disaster as president, he has greatly divided the country and pitted us against each other in his Rovian strategy of trying to govern with a bare majority, and appealing to his own minority base against the wishes of America as a whole. His opposition of SCHIP funding and pulling troops out of Iraq are in direct opposition to the overwelming support for these issues by the American people. Unfortunately, most of us never took the right wing seriously. We looked on them as a modern version of the John Birch Society, but they have become much more powerful and represent the darkest side of our American society. We now have a better appreciation of how Hitler managed a rise to power using similar but more brutal tactics. I’m not by any stretch of the imagination comparing Bush to a monster like Hitler, but America has turned into a country that embraces fascist tendencies, such as corporatism and curtailment of basic freedoms. I too became a Dixie Chicks fan after their trashing by country western fans. I also support the other anti-war celebrities who have had the courage to challenge our president. We will win in 2008 and restore the honor and integrity to our country.

Report this

By voice of truth, October 26, 2007 at 12:43 pm Link to this comment

My point is that your Isreal bashing has no place on a thread regarding the Dixie Chicks.

Report this

By weather, October 26, 2007 at 12:19 pm Link to this comment

vot

Wrong screenplay. What Israel hates most, getting caught in the headlights of their very own remarkable deceit and finding no one to manipulate blame onto.

Hate doesn’t motivate me at all, you simply hate what I say. Talk to Silverstein about the WTC 9/11 event of evil - that’ll keep you busy.

Report this

By xyzaffair, October 26, 2007 at 11:20 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It’s ironic that someone would try to plant a bomb to harm someone who spoke out against a so-called War on Terror

Report this

By voice of truth, October 26, 2007 at 9:47 am Link to this comment

“Please free us from the remarkable arrogance and manipulating deceit that is Israel - this was never a realtionship, its extortion.”

Where the hell did that come from?  I think you’re on the wrong site.  What you want is http://www.anti-semites.com

Report this

By dp, October 26, 2007 at 9:33 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

How truly terrifying this is.  I have a friend with an Irish name who recently had trouble getting on a domestic flight.  How many people do these policies have to affect before we wake up?  Just last night on the news, Brian Williams reported on children in Pakistan being taught in schools to be little jihadists.  But there’s not been a single report on US news about the military “summer camps” in Israel for American Jewish children, or the Christian camps making little warriors for Jesus.  It seems we’re all pointing fingers at other cultures for doing the same things we’re doing.

Report this

By weather, October 26, 2007 at 9:08 am Link to this comment

Please free us from the remarkable arrogance and manipulating deceit that is Israel - this was never a realtionship, its extortion.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 26, 2007 at 8:05 am Link to this comment

voice of truth,

Manipulation by censorship seems to be only one small part of the problem,  who calls the shots and defines said censorship may be more like it.  Control of the mass media by one opinion dost limit the other, hence Hitler and his deception of the truth.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 26, 2007 at 7:56 am Link to this comment

asmysdad,

Did you read the article?  Why don’t you define censorship for us.

Report this

By voice of truth, October 26, 2007 at 7:26 am Link to this comment

Mr. Inherit

First off, Amysdad is correct.  It is not censorship to decide not to buy something from someone one finds offensive.  And it is not censorship for Clear Channel to stop playing someone on their stations if they think someone on their stations is offensive to many.  This is absolutely no different than MSNBC and CBS kicking out Imus after his “nappy headed hoes” comment.

Do not forget that freedom of speech comes with the responsibility of speech.  Imus, the Dixie Chicks and Howard Stern can continue to say whatever they want, but there is no “right” to a forum to say it in.  They have no more right to criticize Bush, or anyone, on someone’s radio station than I do.

Report this

By loneagle, October 26, 2007 at 6:36 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Rush Limbaugh understands very well, “it’s entertainment folks.” He admits it. And much as you might hate his “always-derogatory-slant-to-the-right take on things, his blustery presentation will often make you guffaw like you will at politically incorrect or sick jokes. The same mentality that keeps the National Enquirer rolling in dough, pumps him up and those like him. It’s in us folks. Last night on nationally syndicated radio shows Sean Hinainity said that Joe McCarthy had it right, while over on another channel Michael Savage splattered spittle all over his microphone ranting about Susan Sarandon and her ilk being filthy communists. Neal Bortz, successful right wing radio talk show personality in Atlanta, with multiple homes and his own jet, and who is a very entertaining fellow, says almost every day that the whining of the poor is just wealth envy and nothing more, and they deserve what they get, just like him. Each one of these guys call what they do free speech,  and each one of them has a button in front of them with which they can allow someone to speak or shut them down, which they use quite effectively when they don’t like what someone is saying. The bottom line is, and we say it over and over again, you can’t argue with success. You want to have a say like them, get your own radio show these men would tell us. It’s a free country isn’t it? In a capitalist free market system the best and brightest just naturally rise to the top, don’t they?

Rush will rattle his papers and make his chair sqeak with exhuberance while openly telling us that giving play to the valid points on both sides of an issue is boring radio. And he can prove it. After twenty some years in the biz he’s a very wealthy man, hobnobs with people like oh, the Vice President of the United States, and is the only talk show host in the world who’s on United States Armed Forces Radio every day in Iraq. He must be right.

The Phil Donahue show that was cancelled while getting top ratings, is not something the Limbaughs, Hinainitys, Michael Savages and Bortzs of the world would care to engage in overmuch, or allow some caller to get very far into before shutting them down and going to break, then going into a pinko communist rant about the Donahues and the Sarandons of the world. They will however cry “free speech” all day long if someone has the temerity to suggest they might should be taken off the air for their selective muckraking and one-way spin politics. Joe Wilson saying “hey, there was no yellowcake”, is another one they like to breeze by, changing the topic of discussion to Islamo facists wanting to kill us or support the troops or some other practiced talking point, and skitter quickly away from a subject of vindictive torpedoing of peoples’s careers for political reasons, ratings or market forces or the truth be damned.

Sometimes the good guys win, but more often than not they’d rather do something else than fight with assholes, even if they’re entertaining assholes, and sadly when the assholes are let to run they get it in mind they’re right and ought to run everything, and then they treat people as if everyone is just like them and we got a problem.

Report this

By still confused, October 26, 2007 at 6:04 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I’m totally with you amysdad. I love this site! I couldn’t live without my daily truthdig, counterpunch, frontpage.whatever, and townhall.com.

Report this

By hippy pam, October 26, 2007 at 5:21 am Link to this comment

AND I SEE ANTI-WAR T-SHIRTS ARE BANNED IN SOME STATES-there are so many “sheep” just grazing along and one day they will wake up and ALL FREEDOM WILL BE GONE.The few of us who DO have an opinion,are THE MINORITY AND[I’m afraid] will-one day- be HUNTED DOWN and SILENCED-

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, October 26, 2007 at 1:27 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

amysdad on 10/25 at 9:06 pm
(2 comments total)

Ummm, you know, not buying something because you think the people that created it are offensive cretins, ummm, that’s not actually censorship. That’s just, you know, not buying something.  College speech codes, well that’s censorship. Funny how most of the pinheads on this site will happily favor college speech codes while ranting against “censorship” that appears only in their fever dreams and not actually in reality.

Geeze you people make me giggle.

So tell us, Chuckles, where do death threats against the Dixie Chicks come in under “freedom of speech”? 

What about publishing Michael Moore’s address so people could threaten him and his family in his own home?

And I guess you feel that blacklisting and coercing people into going along with that blacklist by threatening their jobs for their political beliefs is also OK?

But when the “freedom of speech” of Clear Channel is used to cut off the freedom of speech of MONEY-MAKING broadcasters, that’s not freedom of speech at all.  I find Howard Stern offensive: Nuts and Sluts is what he does.  But he’s right: the MOMENT he criticized President Mussolini, he was gone, not all the other stuff—criticizing George W. Bush.

And what did the Dixie Chicks do that was so bad? Apologized that President Shithead came from Texas. For that they received death threats and an ORGANIZED effort to blacklist and destroy their careers.

So keep giggling, Chuckles.  But when you realize all your precious freedoms are gone and you LET them go, cheering all the way, you’ll stop laughing.  And it will be too late for you and me and all of America as Mad King George takes on absolute dictatorial power.

You don’t want to buy someone’s product? Fine! I won’t buy Michael Jackson’s (the singer) or Mel Gibson’s products ever.  You don’t have to buy the Dixie Chicks.

Report this

By amysdad, October 25, 2007 at 10:06 pm Link to this comment

Ummm, you know, not buying something because you think the people that created it are offensive cretins, ummm, that’s not actually censorship. That’s just, you know, not buying something.  College speech codes, well that’s censorship. Funny how most of the pinheads on this site will happily favor college speech codes while ranting against “censorship” that appears only in their fever dreams and not actually in reality.

Geeze you people make me giggle.

Report this

By cann4ing, October 25, 2007 at 8:00 pm Link to this comment

It is not a new McCarthyism but a continuation of it.  Richard Nixon parlayed the Red Scare into his initial election to Congress, moved into a key role at HUAC and created his enemies list as President.  Many key players in the present Bush administration, served in Nixon’s COINTEL generating White House, then served in the Ford, Reagan and Bush I administrations.

Report this

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.