Media Watch

I've suggested divisive infighting has been a useful distraction that enables corporatism.  Much evidence of that in social conversations I read on facebook. There's plenty of common ground among the wage earners, but folks in the cheap seats are paired into political and social subsets, provoked to attack each other instead of directing their energy at restraining Washington. We're the useful idiots perpetuating the crime by doing...nothing but bickering and name-calling. The political parties have become bastardized versions of their former selves, directed by operatives who have but one common interest: to suck from the enormous teet of the federal government. OWS and Teaparty movements are symptomatic of common unrest by the populous, yet the perception is sold to us that their forces oppose one another. Seeing a thread here? We're never allowed to forget the fights. The black/white issue keeps popping up in the media. But ask yourself who is advancing

I have a hard time understanding how such large numbers of citizens of this country don't understand what it means that states are sovereign entities.  That means the federal government is restricted to power specifically enumerated in the Constitution, and all other powers of governance belong to the states and citizens.  Put another way, it is required by law to stay out of the business of drug policy, marriage, education, abortion and host of other issues because these are not under the purview of the job of President of the United States, and candidates for the office thereof. Many think of the US as a single assemblage of people under one governing body and that the President is sort of like a King commanding an army.  I imagine some are just used to the fact that the federal government often comes along and tries to impose laws on all of us, even though our state-run schools are charged with the responsibility of teaching this stuff to every kid. It is this very misgu

It seems like everyone has an endorsement proclamation to share, so I decided I wanted one too. Mine is simple and based on something rational, for a change, like the rule of law.  And in order to restore the rule of law, we need leaders focused on limiting government to only the powers permitted under this nation's charter. We have been drawn so far from these core American values that they seem radical, naive, dangerous and idealistic by today's standards. But returning to these standards must be our aim if we are to preserve this republic. Foreign Policy It was never the founders' conception that the US government would intervene in matters of other sovereign nations.  We know that doing so causes unintended blowback.  One example came to us in 1967 during the six day war, when Israel blasted the USS Liberty, a ship sent to the Sinai  Peninsula on a listening mission.  Candidates who demonize non-interventionism, characterizing it as isolationism, either don't

One of the reasons I enjoy working in the media is the perks.  At a large outdoor concert we put on, members of the staff and clients were shielded from long lines and the general filth that the "regular" goers endured.  We were treated to a better class of faire and impressive access backstage and the performers. It's all perfectly legal, but if I were a standard ticketholder, I might not have the same appreciation for such perks, especially as I'm being herded like cattle. The Wall Street Journal reported numerous examples where members of Congress, their staff, friends and family were able to enrich themselves through insider trading.  This elite class of folks can come to Washington with only a few bucks, but leave with millions more. Is that fair?  Is it true that Congress is exempt from insider trading rules imposed on us "regular" folk? Ron Paul recently spoke on the issue after 60 Minutes did an expose on how Nancy Pelosi and others were get

I'm often insulted when I see in the media that the most important issues are brushed under the rug and petty bickering makes the headlines. On MSNBC's Martin Bashir program Friday (Oct. 27), Democratic analyst Karen Finney said of the white Republican base, "They think [Cain is] a black man who knows his place." A cohort of mine subsequently shared a link to a Weekly Standard web page featuring the exchange and remarked, "Left wing racism rears it's ugly head again. Disgusting!" Putting aside for a moment his misuse of the contraction, my friend uses circular reasoning to arrive at a conclusion that the Democratic analyst is racist for accusing the white Republican base of holding a racist viewpoint. This is also a classic example of feigning dismay in order to arouse the right-wing base and distract them from the truly important issues of the day, like the poor economy and the high unemployment.  Anyone that's paying attention should re

In this rant: Why I dislike Spotify. It's spyware and malware and junkware all wrapped up in one cute package.  Plus it incessantly announces to which song certain friends are listening, further advancing the wholesale distribution of useless information. Join me next time as I rail against multiple entities reposting the same information to dozens of walls.

Michele Bachmann, John Huntsman and Sarah Palin are all saying how they'd help businesses create new jobs by lowering or eliminating corporate taxes, which would shift more of the federal revenue burden on the individuals.  They all mention a fundamental restructuring of the tax code.  I agree. But how is shifting the responsibility for generating government revenue to the individuals good for the American people? I'm running for president and I have my own plan.  It comes in two easy steps. Individual income tax came about within the last century and it's resulted in a power and wealth shift toward big business and an explosive growth of government. The fact is, the earners in this country that have the biggest need and the most to gain from lowering the federal overhead, but are the ones with the least power to influence a change, which creates a fundamental (some say fatal) flaw in the system. Money flows in a circular fashion, from manufacturers to individuals