If you hanker after the good old days when things were simpler, times when we knew who are enemies were, you still have a home. It's the folks at Accuracy in Media, a conservative group dedicated to the principle that no amount of disinformation is too patriotic. They are now exercised about the "media reform movement," described as an insidious attempt to muzzle conservatives by resurrecting the Fairness Doctrine, a doctrine designed to "force conservative media to incorporate 'progressive' views into shows like the O'Reilly Factor on cable news and the Rush Limbaugh program on radio." Who's behind it? al-Qaeda? Iraqi terrorists or Baathists? Not a chance. All viciously anti-communist. And they know it's The Communist Conspiracy:
"Having previously reported on the participation of Revolutionary Communist Party members at the 'National Conference on Media Reform,'" [AIM's Cliff] Kincaid says, "I can now confirm that members of the old Soviet-line Communist Party USA were there, too. But it gets even more interesting. It turns out that one of the founders of the group sponsoring the conference is personally rubbing elbows with identified communists in a broader movement designed to impeach President Bush and force a U.S. defeat in Iraq." (Accuracy in Media press release)
The Good Old Days. So much simpler. But at least there are still simple people around to remind us.
- Log in to post comments
Well, no wonder. The red scare must have been one of the most successful population brainwashing exercises in history. It still holds its grip on American population, so why not use it? Also, lets not forget that they are all atheists too ! ;)
PS. Im not ignoring communist atrocities (especially USSR, China, Cambodia). I am not defending communism, It is just the degree to which these atrocities are the only thing conjured up in the American psyche when the word "communist" is mentioned, that it has masked a much more complicated reality and history beneath it and, more importantly, it has become an accuse to commit/support similar atrocities.
The cup is half full, too. We have here de facto confirmation that the Muslim Scare is not working out.
Maybe i am too cynical, but most times I see the name of a political organization, I form an idear of what it is about by inverting the sense of it's name. So in Australia, our "Liberal Party" is the political equivalent of US Republican party. Our "Labour Party" has more in common with big business (and unionists) than with labourers or small businessmen.
If I saw a "free trade organization", I would bet it was concerned with restricting trade, "life choice" is probably about interfering with your choices, etc. etc...
So you can imagine my response, even though I have never before heard of them, when I see you refer to an organization that calls itself "accuracy in media" or the "fairness doctrine"
I've heard Rush. We have equivalents (John Laws, Alan Jones) over here in Oz. Funny how conservatives seem to dominate interactive talkback media, and liberals seem to dominate non-interactive print.
revere: were you sarcastic or serious with this line?: But at least there are still simple people around to remind us.
Lea: Simple minded. As in mentally retarded.
I must be one of the retarded ones, because when I read statements out of groups like this I just get confused.
Didn't communist bashing go out of style in the late 1950's/early 60's? I thought we were doing moslems and drug lords now.
Lisa: Since I've heard my fill of this crap it doesn't confuse me. These guys went through my highschool library in the late fifties and removed The Saturday Review of Literature because they thought Norman Cousins was a commie. People lost their jobs and careers. I was being kind when I called them simple minded. These people are brain damaged.
In the past when I've pointed out inequities in our society I have been called a communist. I can't figure this out. If I choose to point out where we, as a country, could do better, I am immediately labeled either a socialist or a communist. Neither is true. I don't look at our faults and think "at least we're better than those guys". Our standards should be higher and the policies of our government should reflect that. These weird, conservative fringe groups that label those of us who are dissatisfied with the present administration "communists" should remember that the political climate of the fifties led to the revolution of the 1960's. The pendulum swings this way and that-most Americans prefer the middle. Any other place is, in the end, political suicide. The current administration is struggling for it's last breathe. The communist thing is their version of CPR. Hopefully, we are too smart to resusitate these fools.
Can't visit the AIM site (blocked from here) but I did learn something about the Fairness Doctrine:
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/F/htmlF/fairnessdoct/fairnessdoct.htm
The idea was that since the government/the people gave the spectrum for free, the license holders were obligated to present both sides of various issues. Supposedly this had the effect of squelching coverage of controversial subjects, as the stations did not want to burn the extra air time. So, it was repealed during Reagan/Bush times. Probably the motivation to resurrect it is driven by the chance to get free air time on talk radio, which is for better or worse dominated by "conservatives". Bully to those who can get it, I say. I have to point out that the bottom end of the FM band is just as polarized, only in the "liberal" sense. So Rush gets to be on NPR if it goes through. Weee!!! Fresh Air meets Hot Air, that's gonna be a damn good matchup.
BTW I hate the labels conservative and liberal, but I use them for brevity. Persons of different political viewpoints?
For what it is worth - the rationale behind repeal of the fairness doctrine (beyond the usual evil conservative conspiracy crap) is that the original rationale had been outpaced by technology. There was only so much room during the early television / radio age and the argument was that both sides should have a chance to be heard. With the advent of cable (and accelerating that trend) satelite and internet the bandwidth limitation argument lost water. Conservative dominance on radio drove liberals nuts because the (when I was an undergrad) so-called "gatekeeper" function of media was undermined. The gatekeeper function essentially meant that if CBS/NBC/ABC/NYT/WP did not report on it then it was not news. That stranglehold was broken by the new media technologies and old media have yet to get over it. They still presume, with an arrogance only exceeded by their liberal bias, that they should dominate communications medium because they can determine what is "credible." In fact they have no more of a monopoly on credibility than old media. New media, at least the conservative variety, is clear about their point of view they don't try to pretend to be objective when they are not (BTW I have listened to NPR since high school and they are actually pretty good about presenting both sides nowdays).
There aren't two sides anymore. Best I can see is:
neofascists: aka neocons and tax cuts for the rich people - funded originally by Adolph Coors and Richard Mellon Scaife - creators of the right-wing propaganda machine AKA The Mighty Wurlitzer (fox news etc.)
old conservatives: goldwater/rockefeller/nixon now known as "liberal" conservatives AKA commies
old lefties: 60's-imprinted as opposed to really old lefties who were 30's-imprinted
new lefties: people who get angry when listening to the Mighty Wurlitzer and march on the weekends - we know we're not getting a penny from Social Security and it is thus a massively regressive tax
The 'red scare' is that there are only three red states left as of June 2006: Utah, Wyoming, and Idaho. Even President Cheney's home state (Montana) turned on him :) (BTW, those three states have the largest concentrations of Mormons in the country.)
Cheney was from Wyoming (I lived there when he was a U.S. Representative from that state). He claimed Texas for political reasons at one point. Where did Montana come from and what do Mormons have to do with it?
Ground Zero Homeboy: Don't discount South Dakota as a red state. We lived there for 10 years and they're diehard Republicans.
The Mormons are prevalent in the red states. Romney running for President and all that jazz.
They also have a great deal of wealth within the church as well as the riches of their members.
The power and stranglehold they have over their members would blow anyone's mind. All this manifesting from one 14 year old boy with a "vision".
So, the red states get more warning to prepare locally for a panflu year? States with large obdiently brainwashed church congregations?
Romney came out of Utah, changed his tune, got to be Gov. of MA, (was hardly here at all), sure got messages out to the public trying to get elected but did not make any such effort to tell us we're in a pandemic alert period and families to stock up; supposed to be getting ready to survive as long as it ever takes to find a vaccine and make enough. Not after 0ct. 2005, nor after the state summit Feb.2006; never warned the public. ("Washing hands and staying home if you're sick" sent the wrong -"no big deal"- "flu" message. And, only trying to order ventilators was stupid; no prepared staff, no PPE, and, millions of people would die, even with a handful more ventilators.) Now, he's saying how wicked conservative and anti-abortion he is again so he can run for Prez -he would not have been elected if he hadn't sung MA a different tune.
Now, Leavitt was just warning the Utah state legislature about pandemic again, and that any community expecting outside help would be tragically wrong, but, not Massachusetts? (A few minutes on the Charlie Rose show wasn't exactly going to get the word out to MA residents.)
Impeach Bush and Cheney, get the troops home and really try and fix all the broken ones -that will take our grandchildrens money but society benefits in the long run, and, get households and communities more self-reliant before pandemic makes survivors learn how the hardest way.
Yes, bar;
the words of these wizards stand on their heads; help means ruin, and saving means slaying... "Accuracy in Media" ...communisits and terrorists under every bed... give up all your rights without a fuss... or you must be one of them.
Well, I'm way behind the curve with this one, but I've been otherwise occupied. Still, I have to weigh in with one comment.
I hate to tell you, but "The Rushman" was on NPR a couple of weeks ago. They devoted a segment in each of their "news magazine" programs to the theme of "coming together" every day for a week. They interviewed people from many sides of the political spectrum about how we could all "come together" to make a better Nation. Care to guess the one single person who had exactly zero interest in coming together? You guessed it. The fat moron druggie from Swamp East Misery. (For those who don't know, "Swamp East" is homespeak for Southeastern Missouri.) What the Dixie Chicks said about "W" goes double for me and Limpbough.