Rove’s Missing E-mails the Smoking Guns of the Stolen 2004 Election?

Watching a puppy chase his tail is amusing. Seeing an old dog doing it is pathetic.

Yes, watching bush chase his tail is pathetic.

No, watching trolls chasing their tails for over six years is pathetic. As coon dogs they'd never make it. They've bayed up a tree with possums, and not a raccoon in sight.

The "coon dogs" learned well from the previous pack of crotch sniffers. Investigate everything - eventually something will come up. If it don't - you may embarrass and discredit someone. Either way - its politics as practiced by both parties.

As the article shows there is plenty of evidence to show serious irregularities in the voting. Besides the purging of the voter roles of eligible voters there were numerous dirty tricks yet despite this there were still enough votes for Kerry to win. I watched election coverage all day and Kerry was ahead until suddenly Bush was declared the winner.

What is not believable is the lame excuses given by the Bush supporters.

I usually don't respond to pba's cries for help, but this one is especially weird.

When you have the emails incriminating Rove, and you can prove they are from his computer, and you have triangulating evidence from other computers and emails, you might have something.

What you have here is a lack of something. Lack of evidence is not evidence.

That dog won't hunt.

DF

There is evidence of irregularities as well as behavior and conflicts of interest that lead to questions, especially after the outcome.

There is such a thing as circumstantial evidence. What many are saying is that a real investigation is needed. The original voting records have been order ordered to be preserved by court order. Roves e-mails may also have the answers.

You should read the evidence.

I'll be happy to read the evidence. Please provide it.

By the way, leftist blogs and agenda-driven organizations (e.g. Moveon.org) don't count. I want to see independent, objective evidence of election tampering. Say the Federal Elections Committee or the Ohio Elections Committee.

DF

As I said, besides the shortage of machines and broken machines in democratic districts and Blackwell putting out confusing and contradicting voting information, there is evidence of irregularities, like the exit polls not matching the results and cases of where Bush received more votes then people in the district and Bush's name being recorded in electronic voting machines when the voter pushed Kerry's name.

There is also the sudden terrorist alert effectively barring reporters and observers from a vote count. One case had election workers in machines after the voting was finished. Besides the conflicts of interest of republicans controlling the vote and voting machines, etc. There is a list which can be found in the Free Press site. It is run by credible journalists that complied evidence from the news sources. I have some in my files but don't have access to my home computer at the moment.

Also, some blogs are opinion but others, like columnists back up their opinions with facts.

Mark Crispin Miller researched the facts and compiled them in a book. I heard him speak about it on the radio but do not own the book. Still this article does give more evidence of irregularities.

There were enough irregularities and circumstantial evidence to convince a judge to stop the destruction of the voting records.

The Free Press -- Independent News Media - Election 2004

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1383

None dare call it stolen - Ohio, the election, and America's servile press
by Mark Crispin Miller, summarized by Mary Anne Saucier, Columbus, Ohio
July 24, 2005

Pogo,

Puh-leeze. The Free Press? That is hardly an objective source. As a matter of fact, it's a Socialist "alternative" newspaper. From the website you linked:

quote:

Look for the Free Press/Democratic Socialists of Central Ohio wine booth at the Community Festival each year during the last weekend in June.

Socialists/Commies will gladly lie to advance their positions. They always have. Theirs is a dishonest philosophy that breeds dishonest social discourse.

DF

DeepFat

Pogo,

Puh-leeze. The Free Press? That is hardly an objective source. As a matter of fact, it's a Socialist "alternative" newspaper. From the website you linked:
quote:
Look for the Free Press/Democratic Socialists of Central Ohio wine booth at the Community Festival each year during the last weekend in June.


Socialists/Commies will gladly lie to advance their positions. They always have. Theirs is a dishonest philosophy that breeds dishonest social discourse.

DF

There is nothing worse than ignorance with conviction.--Old E Clampus Vitus Saying

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Oh God, what nonsense.

That's the best you can do?

It is the corporate media who have continually lied to promote corporate and US corporate interests of greed and exploitation. I have read the independent press since the late 1960's and have found them to always be accurate. They were right about Iraq and continue to report what's really happening in America today instead of the "Rosy Scenario" of the millionaire corporate pundits.

Wasserman and Fitrakis are legitimate journalists. Fitrakes is also a Political Science Professor and Wasserman is an activists. They have complied their sources from the mainstream media.

They are not the only ones to write and document the irregularities and the problems with electronic voting. A few States like, NY, Maryland, California and others have removed electronic voting machines until they can be verified safe from hacking, which they are not.

The fact that the you hear nothing from the corporate media shows who's interests they really serve. But just like all stories that are first reported in the independent press, first the corporate media ignores it, then try to dicredit it but after time and the damage has passed report it as a "known fact."

The Free Press -- Independent News Media

About
The Free Press

The original Columbus Free Press grew out of the anti-war movement on the campus of Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio in October 1970. Inspired by the activism against the Vietnam War and the senseless killings at Kent State, the underground paper was published for a 25-year tumultuous history (1970-1995). Like other underground alternative publications around the country, the Free Press went through many changes through the years. It served as the voice of the students in the early 70's, reporting on social justice issues such as sexism, racism, peace activism, corporate misdeeds, politics and the counterculture. Constantly struggling to survive on a shoestring budget, it encountered opposition from without and within. Internal ideological struggles were compounded, for example, when police arrested four of the editors in 1971 for "inciting riot."

The Free Press founders grew older, less militant, got jobs but the paper survived. Changing faces on the editorial staff show different politics and policies through the years. The Columbus Institute for Contemporary Journalism 501(c)3 nonprofit organization was founded in 1986 as the sponsor of the Free Press newspaper.Finally, after floundering through the Reagan-Bush '80's and hampered by a lack of an activist movement in the city, the Free Press faced so much competition in the "alternative" newspaper marketplace in Columbus that revenues dried up. It published its 25th Anniversary issue in October 1995, only with dollars donated from then-Columbus Guardian publisher Ron Williams; and ceased publication temporarily. The Free Press was resurrected as a website in early 1996 courtesy of longtime volunteer and activist Tim Wagner. The website developed during the next two years and the printed publication emerged as a quarterly journal in the Winter of 1998. A new Board of Directors formed and gradually the Free Press is back up and running in Central Ohio.



Columns
Harvey Wasserman

Free Press Senior Editor and "Superpower of Peace" columnist Harvey Wasserman is also senior advisor to Greenpeace USA and the Nuclear Information & Resource Service. He is author or co-author of a dozen books, including SOLARTOPIA! OUR GREEN-POWERED EARTH, A.D. 2030 and HARVEY WASSERMAN'S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES.

Harvey and co-author Bob Fitrakis have been called "the Woodward & Bernstein of the 2004 election" by Rev. Jesse Jackson. Their HOW THE GOP STOLE AMERICA'S 2004 ELECTION & IS RIGGING 2008, published by the Columbus Institute of Contemporary Journalism, is the definitive digest on the theft of George W. Bush's second term. Their WHAT HAPPENED IN OHIO? (co-authored with Steve Rosenfeld) is the leading document book, published by New Press.

Harvey's journalistic writings and columns have appeared in major newspapers and magazines worldwide since 1967. He and Fitrakis co-host Radio FreePress.Org, and have appeared on Lou Dobbs, Democracy Now! and other major US media.

Columns
Bob Fitrakis

Bob Fitrakis is a Political Science Professor in the Social and Behavioral Sciences department at Columbus State Community College, where he won the Distinguished Teaching Award in 1991. He was a Ford Foundation Fellow to the Michigan State legislature in 1975 and studied at the University of Sarejevo on scholarship in 1978. Fitrakis earned a J.D. from the Ohio State Univeristy Mortitz College of Law in 2002. His Ph.D is in Political Science from Wayne State University in Detroit, Michigan. He has also taught political theory at the University of Michigan-Dearborn and political science at Wayne State University and Oakland Community College.
He is the author of five Fitrakis Files books: Spooks, Nukes & Nazis, Free Byrd & Other Cries for Justice, A Schoolhouse Divided, The Brothers Voinovich and the Ohiogate Scandal and Star Wars, Weather Mods and Full Spectrum Dominance. compilations of his writings at the Free Press and Columbus Alive. Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman co-wrote Did George W. Bush Steal America's 2004 Election? Essential Documentsand What Happened in Ohio? A documentary record of theft and fraud in the 2004 election (New Press 2006) (with Steve Rosenfeld) and How the GOP Stole America's 2004 Election & Is Rigging 2008, George W. Bush vs. The SuperPower of Peace in 2003 and Imprison Bush in 2004-2005. Fitrakis also wrote The Idea of Democratic Socialism in America and the Decline of the Socialist Party (Garland Publishers 1993). Dr. Fitrakis is a frequent speaker on political, labor and social policy issues at national academic and political conferences.
Fitrakis serves as the Ohio Chancellor and was voted the National Vice Chancellor in 2005 of the International Association of Educators for World Peace, an NGO in over 100 nations working to promote human rights and world peace.

Pogo,

You just keep making my point. Thanks.

One has to consider the source of information. The Free Press is a sterling example of an agenda-based excuse for journalism. I, too, have read alternative news for a long time, and I take it with a large scoop of salt. They play connnect-the-dots with information to spin wild conspiracies. They accept accusations as facts. They don't mind lying to you if it will further their agenda.

Let me back up a few posts. Where is the concrete evidence that the Bush Machine deliberately conspired to rig the election in Ohio? Mistakes happen, they always have, but they tend to even out. The Free Press and its ilk use those mistakes as "evidence". Rubbish. They conveniently ignore such "evidence" when it goes their way.

The Democrats have Congress now. If there is real, concrete, demonstrable evidence of election rigging in Ohio, they will impeach W.

Where is it? If it exists, why isn't Dennis Kucinich for chrissakes demanding impeachment for election fraud?

He can't, that's why. There's no evidence of it. None.

DF

________________________________________________
DeepFat:

Pogo,

You just keep making my point. Thanks.

One has to consider the source of information. The Free Press is a sterling example of an agenda-based excuse for journalism. I, too, have read alternative news for a long time, and I take it with a large scoop of salt. They play connnect-the-dots with information to spin wild conspiracies. They accept accusations as facts. They don't mind lying to you if it will further their agenda.

Let me back up a few posts. Where is the concrete evidence that the Bush Machine deliberately conspired to rig the election in Ohio? Mistakes happen, they always have, but they tend to even out. The Free Press and its ilk use those mistakes as "evidence". Rubbish. They conveniently ignore such "evidence" when it goes their way.

The Democrats have Congress now. If there is real, concrete, demonstrable evidence of election rigging in Ohio, they will impeach W.

Where is it? If it exists, why isn't Dennis Kucinich for chrissakes demanding impeachment for election fraud?

He can't, that's why. There's no evidence of it. None.

DF

There is nothing worse than ignorance with conviction.--Old E Clampus Vitus Saying


________________________________________________

You don't have much of a point other then "Red Baiting," although what you describe about conspiracy theories and lies are a general tactic of the Nazi's, White Supremacists and extremists.

As I stated there are a few groups that have exposed the mistakes and unreliability of electronic voting. Questions about electronic voting not being secure has also caused a few states to suspend it's use.

Mark Quspin Miller also investigated and wrote about it and there is enough evidence of foul play to have a judge prevent the destruction of the records.

If you read the site and examine the evidence you will find it is taken from mainstream media reports and sworn affidavits.

We will see what congress will do about investigating the 2004 election. I believe it was Barbara Boxer who did put forth a offical objection in Congress constesting the results after the election.

And if you want to talk about who will foster "conspiracy theories" and tell you anything to get their agenda through let's look at the real liars, the Bush administration and the corporate media's claim of Iraq's WMD and Saddam's ties to al Qaeda.

Pogo,

Are we having fun yet?

The article you cite is from Commondreams.org. "Breaking News and Views for the Progressive Community". Read "progressive" as leftist.

It is hardly an objective source. It is, however, a perfect example of how an agenda-driven propaganda engine connects dots to create a fantastic story that is, very very likely, untrue.

In the first paragraph, they show their conclusion that the election was stolen. THEN they admit that MISSING emails are the evidence for that. It's insane! They are using lack of evidence as evidence!

The rest of the story reads like an account of Krystallnacht.

quote:

GOP focused on massive voter disenfranchisement

quote:

the GOP focussed on voter intimidation

quote:

GOP strategy focussed on subverting a statewide recount.

quote:

Ultimately, however, it is the GOP’s computerized control of the vote count that may have been decisive. And here is where Rove’s e-mails, and the wee hours of the morning after the election, are crucial.

Nonsense! Demented ramblings! Political fiction for the gullible, at best.

The Ohio election was filtered, fine-combed, and colonoscoped half to death by major newspapers and broadcast news agencies across the country, most of which are not friendly to Bush. They got nothing.

The left in this country has discredited itself twice now, by falsely claiming election rigging that did not happen. The Left should be ashamed of itself.

DF

DeepFat

Pogo,

Are we having fun yet?

The article you cite is from Commondreams.org. "Breaking News and Views for the Progressive Community". Read "progressive" as leftist.

It is hardly an objective source. It is, however, a perfect example of how an agenda-driven propaganda engine connects dots to create a fantastic story that is, very very likely, untrue.

In the first paragraph, they show their conclusion that the election was stolen. THEN they admit that MISSING emails are the evidence for that. It's insane! They are using lack of evidence as evidence!

The rest of the story reads like an account of Krystallnacht.
quote:
GOP focused on massive voter disenfranchisement


quote:
the GOP focussed on voter intimidation


quote:
GOP strategy focussed on subverting a statewide recount.


quote:
Ultimately, however, it is the GOP’s computerized control of the vote count that may have been decisive. And here is where Rove’s e-mails, and the wee hours of the morning after the election, are crucial.


Nonsense! Demented ramblings! Political fiction for the gullible, at best.

The Ohio election was filtered, fine-combed, and colonoscoped half to death by major newspapers and broadcast news agencies across the country, most of which are not friendly to Bush. They got nothing.

The left in this country has discredited itself twice now, by falsely claiming election rigging that did not happen. The Left should be ashamed of itself.

DF

There is nothing worse than ignorance with conviction.--Old E Clampus Vitus Saying


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Common Dreams is a site that reprints articles from other sources. That they are progressive doesn't negate the evidence.

The Ohio voting roles were purged of eligible democratic voters, this was investigated by BBC investigative reporter Greg Palast.

And yes, the Ohio election was covered by the mainstream media and if you watched and read there were numerous reports of long lines in traditionally democratic districts where people waited hours to vote, some even waited 6 to 8 hours. A number of Democratic Districts, especially in inner cities, did not have enough machines and a number malfunctioned. As I stated in previous posts Blackwell also put out misleading and contradicting information causing people to go the wrong polling station to vote as well as the usual dirty tricks.

There are sworn affidavits on vote tampering and irregularities. It has been documented by the mainstream media. Again, as I have stated a number of times, there is enough evidence to cause a judge to rule that the records be preserved and not destroyed.

Despite the dirty tricks there was still enough votes for Kerry to win. Kerry has also now come out and stated he believes the election was stolen. Now that the democrats have control of congress we will see if what they will do. So far they haven't really done much except some token steps.

That the corporate media pays little attention is no surpise and it not the first story they missed the ball on.

The article by Wasserman and Friktas point out that among Rove's missing e-mails are ones from the "wee hours" of the morning after election night. Maybe the emails are related to the election, it would seem that would be the subject they were speaking about on the night of the election but who knows, maybe they are embarrassing about a private matter. The article is just pointing out facts to be investigated.

Do we see the mainstream media saying anything?
They are too busy with the full time coverage of the Anna Nicol Smith case and what Brittney's in and out of rehab habits.

The evidence is there for anyone with an open mind and sense of justice to see. There are numerous examples complied in books and articles, based on facts reported by the mainstream, media and court cases.

Seek and you shall find.

Pogo, do you have any idea how difficult it is to set up for 90 Million Americans to vote? Mistakes happen everywhere. Machines malfunction, volunteers are inadequately trained, communications break down, ballots are misplaced. The (almost always bipartisan) local elections commission locates voting booths in predicted quantities, using the last major election as a guideline. But voting patterns change, and people are inconvenienced. Voting rolls are purged and filtered to remove the dead, the felonious, the illegal aliens, and the insane. Sometimes they get the wrong Jack Smith. It just happens, but its not a collection of "dirty tricks", just maintenance.

The glitches that happened in Ohio happened everywhere else, too, they just didn't get the microscoping Ohio did. To turn normal, predictable mistakes into an airtight conspiracy is simply paranoia.

If W could engineer such a successful conspiracy, he could win in Iraq next week. It just didn't happen. The Free Press is connecting dots to paint a picture only the scared and angry can see.

DF

quote:

Originally posted by interventor:
Watching a puppy chase his tail is amusing. Seeing an old dog doing it is pathetic.

LOL, inverventor!!!

Amazing to me how our very own FBI can take ANYONE's computer and retrieve anything deleted.... why can't they do that to the gov't computers?

________________________________________________

DeepFat:

Pogo, do you have any idea how difficult it is to set up for 90 Million Americans to vote? Mistakes happen everywhere. Machines malfunction, volunteers are inadequately trained, communications break down, ballots are misplaced. The (almost always bipartisan) local elections commission locates voting booths in predicted quantities, using the last major election as a guideline. But voting patterns change, and people are inconvenienced. Voting rolls are purged and filtered to remove the dead, the felonious, the illegal aliens, and the insane. Sometimes they get the wrong Jack Smith. It just happens, but its not a collection of "dirty tricks", just maintenance.

The glitches that happened in Ohio happened everywhere else, too, they just didn't get the microscoping Ohio did. To turn normal, predictable mistakes into an airtight conspiracy is simply paranoia.

If W could engineer such a successful conspiracy, he could win in Iraq next week. It just didn't happen. The Free Press is connecting dots to paint a picture only the scared and angry can see.

DF

There is nothing worse than ignorance with conviction.--Old E Clampus Vitus Saying


________________________________________________

The evidence of voter suppression and all the dirty tricks are documented and there for those to examine and more and more people are.

The 1960 Presidential election was also said to be stolen by then Mayor Daley and his political machine in Chicago. This is not the first time.

The odds of so many things going wrong, all favoring republicans, and the exit polls all wrong, again, all favoring Bush, in so many states, (Ohio was not the only one) has never happened before.

I forget the odds but they are somehting like a million to one.

People need to examine the evidence for themseleves.

Pogo wrote

quote:

The odds of so many things going wrong, all favoring republicans, and the exit polls all wrong, again, all favoring Bush, in so many states, (Ohio was not the only one) has never happened before.

That is a conclusion from bias. All favoring Republicans? And assuming it DID happen, which I won't, it's never happened before? Even after you cite 1960?

http://www.politicalgateway.com/main/columns/read.html?col=434

The above is not necessarily the gospel truth, but it's a demonstration that one can find any erudite-looking point of view on the internet one wants to.

The big problem with this unending lie about Republican election theft is that it undermines confidence in our democratic system. When it becomes an article of faith that the winner cheated, the loser will cheat the next time, and so it goes until elections are an exercise in Machiavellianism. Election fraud is taken very seriously in America. Once again, I ask you why Dennis Forchrissakes Kucinich is NOT pursuing impeachment for election fraud if there is concrete evidence for it. He could do so with impugnity in the Democratic Congress.

But, he can't answer this question: Where's the beef?

DF

DeepFat:

Pogo wrote
quote:
The odds of so many things going wrong, all favoring republicans, and the exit polls all wrong, again, all favoring Bush, in so many states, (Ohio was not the only one) has never happened before.


________________________________________________

That is a conclusion from bias. All favoring Republicans? And assuming it DID happen, which I won't, it's never happened before? Even after you cite 1960?

http://www.politicalgateway.com/main/columns/read.html?col=434

The above is not necessarily the gospel truth, but it's a demonstration that one can find any erudite-looking point of view on the internet one wants to.

The big problem with this unending lie about Republican election theft is that it undermines confidence in our democratic system. When it becomes an article of faith that the winner cheated, the loser will cheat the next time, and so it goes until elections are an exercise in Machiavellianism. Election fraud is taken very seriously in America. Once again, I ask you why Dennis Forchrissakes Kucinich is NOT pursuing impeachment for election fraud if there is concrete evidence for it. He could do so with impugnity in the Democratic Congress.

But, he can't answer this question: Where's the beef?

DF

There is nothing worse than ignorance with conviction.--Old E Clampus Vitus Saying

____________________________________________________________________________

The conclusion is based on facts. If you bother to read the reports you would know that. And this is not the onky account. There are other organziations that have monitored and show problems with hacking electronic voting machines. It's well known it can be done.

There is no doubt that there is a lot of nonsense on the net but there are legitimate sites also. The facts are documented and your denial and double talk do not negate them. If you refuse to examine the evidence then you do not have much of a valubale opinion on the subject.

Your conclusions come from a preconcieved bias, which you accuse others that have investigated the subject of having.

I have followed both the corporate media and the independent progressive media for over 35 years. I have found the independent press to be very reliable and the corporate media to be highly unreliable and to miss many a story. Especially the slaughter by US allies and US complicity in Central America in the 1980's. There are many other incidences.

There is a saying that if it's not covered by the mainstream media then it didn't happen.

I think the grandest conspiracy theory of them all was promoted all over the mainstream media night and day, Saddam's supposed WMD. It was the left press that was exposing the lie all along, as it continues too.

Why Kucinich has not raised it for impeachment could be a number of reasons. Look at all the trouble he has for getting support for impeachment of Bush and Cheney. Not much, not because of lack of evidence but because the majority of democrats are mostly corporate and haven't the backbone to do anything without seeing what pollsters, their advisors and corporate contributors say first.

Karl Rove's "missing" emails do NOT prove that the 2004 election was stolen. Period.

I, too, read the "progressive" alternative media. I have read the LA Weekly and the Pasadena Weekly for 20 years, and others before that, including The Great Speckled Bird from Atlanta. Our opinions differ as to the liklihood of their veracity on any given issue.

Matter of fact, they are biased in their reporting by the very nature that they are "progressive" (way left). It's fairly undeniable.

And! And they are MORE corporate than your afternoon newspaper, simply because they depend on advertising for all of their expenses. The alternative papers are full of advertising, much of it from media giants such as Viacom and Time Warner. Oh, and the "full body hands-free massage" girls.

I read them, but I seldom believe them.

DF

Karl Rove's "missing" emails do NOT prove that the 2004 election was stolen. Period.

I, too, read the "progressive" alternative media. I have read the LA Weekly and the Pasadena Weekly for 20 years, and others before that, including The Great Speckled Bird from Atlanta. Our opinions differ as to the liklihood of their veracity on any given issue.

Matter of fact, they are biased in their reporting by the very nature that they are "progressive" (way left). It's fairly undeniable.

And! And they are MORE corporate than your afternoon newspaper, simply because they depend on advertising for all of their expenses. The alternative papers are full of advertising, much of it from media giants such as Viacom and Time Warner. Oh, and the "full body hands-free massage" girls.

I read them, but I seldom believe them.

DF

________________________________________________


I don't know what you consider
"independent progressive" publications but
the independent progressive media takes no corporate advertizing and most take no advertizing at all. They rely on reader support.

They are biased towrd the truth and expose the lies and crimes of govenrment and corporations.
They have always been relaible and accurate.

When I was younger and a little more liberal in my opinions, I got a job at WVNA working the Limbaugh show. It's part of the reason I can't stand him today. This was when Clinton was in office, so for 3 hours straight it was a Clinton hate-fest. His staff was crooked, his friends were crooked, he was crooked, and the rest of the Democrats were crooked. It was pure torture for me to have to listen to the blowhard, but people actually listened to him and believed every word he said thinking that they were getting the real truth the corporate media doesn't tell.

That's the exact same thing I'm seeing today with these blogs and websites. Just look at the list of topics on these boards. Bush this, Cheney that, Republicans are crooked, blah blah blah. It's the exact same thing. Just like the Limbaugh fans, people believe this junk and think it's more accurate than the mainstream press.

In reality, the righty-Limbaugh-nuts and leftist-blog-tards are simply mirror images of each other. No one is actually thinking objectively or looking at things from different perspectives. Instead, they choose to let others think for them, fill their heads with crap, and regurgitate mindless propaganda.

Think for yourself. Look at every side of an issue, question others, question yourself, and use your BRAIN for a change.

NashBama:

When I was younger and a little more liberal in my opinions, I got a job at WVNA working the Limbaugh show. It's part of the reason I can't stand him today. This was when Clinton was in office, so for 3 hours straight it was a Clinton hate-fest. His staff was crooked, his friends were crooked, he was crooked, and the rest of the Democrats were crooked. It was pure torture for me to have to listen to the blowhard, but people actually listened to him and believed every word he said thinking that they were getting the real truth the corporate media doesn't tell.

That's the exact same thing I'm seeing today with these blogs and websites. Just look at the list of topics on these boards. Bush this, Cheney that, Republicans are crooked, blah blah blah. It's the exact same thing. Just like the Limbaugh fans, people believe this junk and think it's more accurate than the mainstream press.

In reality, the righty-Limbaugh-nuts and leftist-blog-tards are simply mirror images of each other. No one is actually thinking objectively or looking at things from different perspectives. Instead, they choose to let others think for them, fill their heads with crap, and regurgitate mindless propaganda.

Think for yourself. Look at every side of an issue, question others, question yourself, and use your BRAIN for a change.

________________________________________________

There are plenty of legtimate sites on the webb. There are plenty of bugus ones also. You have to read them to see. I have found the independent porgressive press tyo be very reliable and accurate, more accurate then the mainstream corporate media. There are at least two books exposing Limbaugh's lies and misinformation.

Blogs are opinions, just like columnists and
op-ed pieces. They offer insight and opinion but when they state facts they have reliable sources to back them up. If they don't then you keep that in mind.

Blogs are the greatest boom to breaking the blockade of the corporate media which has controled informaiton and peoples access to informaiton for decades. But again, it is the readers responsility to see where their facts come from.

If you read the Free press site you will see the sources are documented. They take their evidence from mainstream sources and reports. As they state there is enough evidence to have a judge order tta the records not be destroyed.

Wasserman is a familiar writer and I have seen other articles by him in the past.

To make up your own mind and decide for yourself you have to examine the evidence.

Rejecting it out of hand becasue it is from a computer site is ot thinking for yourself.

There are also a number of publications like The Nation, the Progressive, In These Times, Counterpunch and Z Magazine that are independent and progressive that expose stories that never make it to the corporate media.

quote:

There are plenty of legtimate sites on the webb. There are plenty of bugus ones also. You have to read them to see. I have found the independent porgressive press tyo be very reliable and accurate, more accurate then the mainstream corporate media. There are at least two books exposing Limbaugh's lies and misinformation.

Blogs are opinions, just like columnists and
op-ed pieces. They offer insight and opinion but when they state facts they have reliable sources to back them up. If they don't then you keep that in mind.

Blogs are the greatest boom to breaking the blockade of the corporate media which has controled informaiton and peoples access to informaiton for decades. But again, it is the readers responsility to see where their facts come from.

If you read the Free press site you will see the sources are documented. They take their evidence from mainstream sources and reports. As they state there is enough evidence to have a judge order tta the records not be destroyed.

Wasserman is a familiar writer and I have seen other articles by him in the past.

To make up your own mind and decide for yourself you have to examine the evidence.

Rejecting it out of hand becasue it is from a computer site is ot thinking for yourself.

There are also a number of publications like The Nation, the Progressive, In These Times, Counterpunch and Z Magazine that are independent and progressive that expose stories that never make it to the corporate media.

I don't reject information simply because it's on the internet. Internet sites should be filtered and scrutinized more thoroughly because anyone can post anything and make it look believable. Besides, the sites you listed are no different than Worldnetdaily or the rantings of Limbaugh. Progressive is simply a code word for left wing bias and if you limit your information to one side, you aren't truly informing yourself. You're an example of what I was talking about. I suggest you try and find more objective sources of information.

NashBama:


I don't reject information simply because it's on the internet. Internet sites should be filtered and scrutinized more thoroughly because anyone can post anything and make it look believable. Besides, the sites you listed are no different than Worldnetdaily or the rantings of Limbaugh. Progressive is simply a code word for left wing bias and if you limit your information to one side, you aren't truly informing yourself. You're an example of what I was talking about. I suggest you try and find more objective sources of information.

________________________________________________

First of all I do read and follow the mainstream media, which I find pretty lame. They nothing much more then propagandists and apologists for corporate power. They never really get to the heart of issues.

The Talk Shows are either "food fights" or as the media watch group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting say, "the right wing debating people who are not really on left but play liberals on TV."

The sites I listed are accurate, respected and reliable. Progressive means progressive and also means left, there is no hidden code word.
Progressive is left.

When you say the sites are biased what is the bias. What was the bias when they presented evidence that there were no WMD and the idea that Saddam was allied with bin Laden was not believable? The corporate media continually parroted the administration and never questioned these lies. They filled the airwaves with right wing pundits, generals and ex generals who supported the war. They never held him accountable for his lies either.

What's their bias when they tell the truth about the war and the deaths and what's really happening as opposed to the US corporate "in bed with the military reporters" who seemed to miss all those dead civilians and most of the major stories?

Or even the stolen election. They gather information and present alternative perspectives. John Conyers held hearings on them and found the evidence to be credible. he can't get any support from the democratic leadership who will not oppose corporate power.

They are biased toward the truth, toward justice and for the people.

You are limiting your information to what you want to hear. If you go to extreme left sites like the ones you've mentioned, you should also go to extreme right sites as well to get the counter point. I seriously doubt you do, so this means your information is one sided. When everything you hear is from only one side, you're not completely informed. Like I said before, it's time you started thinking for yourself.

NashBama

You are limiting your information to what you want to hear. If you go to extreme left sites like the ones you've mentioned, you should also go to extreme right sites as well to get the counter point. I seriously doubt you do, so this means your information is one sided. When everything you hear is from only one side, you're not completely informed. Like I said before, it's time you started thinking for yourself.

________________________________________________

I have monitored the right wing but not as much as I use too. They dominate the airwaves and print newspapers, there's no need to go searching all that far. I just need to turn on the TV, they donminate every channel.

The progress Left independent press is not the "Extreme Left," but they do criticize and expose Capitalism and promote socialism. The mainstream media, as well as our whole culture, continually promotes Capitalism.

The problem is our media and culture distorts socialism and what it means and the true effects of Capitalism. Socialism is incorporated in many countries around the world, including Europe.

I suggest you expand your sources also as well.

quote:

I have monitored the right wing but not as much as I use too. They dominate the airwaves and print newspapers, there's no need to go searching all that far. I just need to turn on the TV, they donminate every channel.

The progress Left independent press is not the "Extreme Left," but they do criticize and expose Capitalism and promote socialism. The mainstream media, as well as our whole culture, continually promotes Capitalism.

The problem is our media and culture distorts socialism and what it means and the true effects of Capitalism. Socialism is incorporated in many countries around the world, including Europe.

I suggest you expand your sources also as well.

Again, you've proved my point. The far right says the mainstream media is run by the left wing liberals. You say it's run by the right wing conservatives. As I said earlier, both sides are mirror images of each other and neither side is fully informed. Your distorted views of socialism and capitalism is proof of that.

It's a capitalist society that offers the opportunity for the working class to move up and have money. Just look at how many small business owners became successful in this country. They did because they had the freedom to do so. How many rags to riches stories do you hear about in socialist societies? I can't think of a one. The common worker has more opportunity to make his/her own way in life in a capitalist society rather than socialist. You can't see that because you have your blinders on.

If the far left says the mainstream media is too right and the far right says it's too left, then I would say that's proof of it being somewhat balanced.

quote:

Originally posted by NashBama:

quote:

I have monitored the right wing but not as much as I use too. They dominate the airwaves and print newspapers, there's no need to go searching all that far. I just need to turn on the TV, they donminate every channel.

The progress Left independent press is not the "Extreme Left," but they do criticize and expose Capitalism and promote socialism. The mainstream media, as well as our whole culture, continually promotes Capitalism.

The problem is our media and culture distorts socialism and what it means and the true effects of Capitalism. Socialism is incorporated in many countries around the world, including Europe.

I suggest you expand your sources also as well.

Again, you've proved my point. The far right says the mainstream media is run by the left wing liberals. You say it's run by the right wing conservatives. As I said earlier, both sides are mirror images of each other and neither side is fully informed. Your distorted views of socialism and capitalism is proof of that.

It's a capitalist society that offers the opportunity for the working class to move up and have money. Just look at how many small business owners became successful in this country. They did because they had the freedom to do so. How many rags to riches stories do you hear about in socialist societies? I can't think of a one. The common worker has more opportunity to make his/her own way in life in a capitalist society rather than socialist. You can't see that because you have your blinders on.

If the far left says the mainstream media is too right and the far right says it's too left, then I would say that's proof of it being somewhat balanced.

Show me a capitalist who helps his employees or his comptitors prosper, and I will show you A LIBERAL CAPITALIST. You are so tight in the rear about LABELS you cannot see the difference between a Liberal Capitalist and a Conservative Capitalist, and THEN you say the Conservative Capitalist is JUST LIKE the Liberal Capitalist, and then you try to make George Soros into a communist. NashBama. YOU AND I AGREE ON EVERYTHING EXCEPT ONE ISSUE. You think you know what you are talking about.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

NashBama:

Again, you've proved my point. The far right says the mainstream media is run by the left wing liberals. You say it's run by the right wing conservatives. As I said earlier, both sides are mirror images of each other and neither side is fully informed. Your distorted views of socialism and capitalism is proof of that.

It's a capitalist society that offers the opportunity for the working class to move up and have money. Just look at how many small business owners became successful in this country. They did because they had the freedom to do so. How many rags to riches stories do you hear about in socialist societies? I can't think of a one. The common worker has more opportunity to make his/her own way in life in a capitalist society rather than socialist. You can't see that because you have your blinders on.

If the far left says the mainstream media is too right and the far right says it's too left, then I would say that's proof of it being somewhat balanced.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Your pretty funny, always declaring victory, as if that's going to somehow win your argument.

I don't need anyone to tell me the mainstream media is dominated by conservatives, as I say, all you have to do is turn on your TV. It's one right winger after another.

But the media watch group Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting does do studies where they monitor the number of shows, hosts and guests and conservatives overwhelm the airwaves.

Print is heavily dominated but does have more of a balance but we never really see the real left. Just more middle of the road to liberal.

I have read and followed both mainstream and independent since 1970. I saw it myself long before FAIR even formed. I have found it to provide insights and facts that are not mentioned on the mainstream media. The mainstream media are huge corporations that report the news as how it effects them. Corporate interests and the interests of average Americans are not always the same.

The left had only had a few people on, Jeff Cohen, Bill Moyers and Phil Donahue. Donahue was canned because he opposed the war. He stated he was in constant tension with MSNBC heads over his anti corporate and liberal views and was told he had to have two conservative guests for every one liberal.

Moyers left PBS so he could speak openly and criticize how Ken Tomilson was purging any independent thought from PBS and swinging way to the right. Moyers has now returned.

Jeff Cohen left after a number of years of frustration and has written a book on his experiences. I haven't read the book but the site Truthout carried experts and a few chapters from it.

And actually you prove my point with your distorted view of Socialism. Most Scandinavian countries are socialist and the average person enjoys a better standard of living then Americans. Better health care, free education and social services. Many industrialized Nations have some socialist programs that give their citizens better services then the majority of Americans who rank lower in over all health and quality of life. Our GNP may be higher but not everyone is benefiting from it.

When capitalist defend capitalism they point to riches but leave out the great poverty that is hidden in ghettos and rural areas. They blame the poor for their own plight. But people are poor either because they are not capable of "playing the game" so to speak. But it is the governments responsibility to see that they also benefit from society. In capitalism they are left to the wolves who exploit them.

Others are poor because they are under paid. They don't get their fair share of the pie. Captalism just allows those who are smarter to take advantage of those who are not.

Capitalist also leave out the fact that America's history has been one of imperialism, colonialism, conquest and expansion, by the power of the gun. It continues to exploit and steal the resources and wealth of poorer nation to this day.

Socialism does not mean no opportunity and no private ownership. It means the government provides certain services that all citizens are entitled to and a safety net.

This countries greatest economic expansion where the middle class benefited the most was under the mixture of capitalism and government assistance under Keneysian economics.

quote:

Show me a capitalist who helps his employees or his comptitors prosper, and I will show you A LIBERAL CAPITALIST. You are so tight in the rear about LABELS you cannot see the difference between a Liberal Capitalist and a Conservative Capitalist, and THEN you say the Conservative Capitalist is JUST LIKE the Liberal Capitalist, and then you try to make George Soros into a communist. NashBama. YOU AND I AGREE ON EVERYTHING EXCEPT ONE ISSUE. You think you know what you are talking about.

I've never said a word about George Soros, his name hasn't even come up in this conversation, nor have I used the phrases "conservative capitalist" or "liberal capitalist". That post makes no sense and has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of independent thinking verses relying on biased sources for information. Please, try to keep up with the conversation. Once you understand what's going on, then maybe you can contribute something intelligible.

quote:

I don't need anyone to tell me the mainstream media is dominated by conservatives, as I say, all you have to do is turn on your TV. It's one right winger after another.

Are you not understanding my posts? What you are saying is exactly what the right has been saying. They accuse the media of being dominated by far left liberals. You say it's dominated by the right. There is no difference between you and some Limbaugh fan, you're both relying on biased information as the truth.

If you want the truth, you have to look at both sides and figure it out yourself. You also have to filter out the garbage from radio talk show hosts and wacky socialist websites.

______________________________________________________________________

NashBama:
[]
(Pogo) quote:
I don't need anyone to tell me the mainstream media is dominated by conservatives, as I say, all you have to do is turn on your TV. It's one right winger after another.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Are you not understanding my posts? What you are saying is exactly what the right has been saying. They accuse the media of being dominated by far left liberals. You say it's dominated by the right. There is no difference between you and some Limbaugh fan, you're both relying on biased information as the truth.

If you want the truth, you have to look at both sides and figure it out yourself. You also have to filter out the garbage from radio talk show hosts and wacky socialist websites.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Maybe your not understanding my posts. I don't care what Limbaugh says or any right winger. I don't need the progressive media to tell me the mainstream media is nonsense. I see it with my own eyes.

I have been following the news since the middle 1960's when I relied only on Mainstream media. Around 1970 I became familiar with the independent left press.

The sources I listed are well repected and not "socialist sites" They are progressive and believe in a fairer system based on socialism.
Socialism is not a dirty word as your perception, which is basd on Mainstrem media's distortion, is based.
I have followed both since and I have found that the alternative press to be informative and offer deeper insights and facts that are left out of the Mainstream Media. I have found mainstream media to be nonsense and spin. I look for these alternative views on mainstream media but they are not there. I don't see any or just one or two, from the real left. They are not there. Just wishy washy centrists and apologists.

The Iraq War is a good example. The alternative press kept presenting alternative opinions, evidence and experts that questioned Bush's lies. I didn't see any of the that in the Mainstream media and the media watch group FAIR can document it. They monitored the pre war run up in the media and pro war "experts" out numbered those who had alternative views by over 90%. It was a constant drum beat.

Before FAIR the media used to just brush off critics by saying our "perception" was slanted but it's not.

The corporate media are just huge corporations. They present the news as it effects their interests, not the interests of the average American.

The Mainstream media never really questioned Bush's lie and many have apologized.
But I have been around long enough to now it's bull.

Now they wring their hands and say, "Oh, if we could only leave and how to we leave and we can't just abandon them." The media is dominated with conservatives, just turn on your TV. Even the so called "Liberals" just argue over tactics and strategy. They never say, "The war is illegal, it was launched on lies and the Iraqi people want us to leave. We are there for the oil. We need to leave, help Iraq rebuild through the UN, impeach the Bush administration, along with the democratic leadership that backed the lies and hand them, over to the Hague to be tried as the War Criminals they are.

The media continues to lie and lead the American people around in circles.

quote:

Maybe your not understanding my posts. I don't care what Limbaugh says or any right winger. I don't need the progressive media to tell me the mainstream media is nonsense. I see it with my own eyes.

I have been following the news since the middle 1960's when I relied only on Mainstream media. Around 1970 I became familiar with the independent left press.

The sources I listed are well repected and not "socialist sites" They are progressive and believe in a fairer system based on socialism.
Socialism is not a dirty word as your perception, which is basd on Mainstrem media's distortion, is based.
I have followed both since and I have found that the alternative press to be informative and offer deeper insights and facts that are left out of the Mainstream Media. I have found mainstream media to be nonsense and spin. I look for these alternative views on mainstream media but they are not there. I don't see any or just one or two, from the real left. They are not there. Just wishy washy centrists and apologists.

The Iraq War is a good example. The alternative press kept presenting alternative opinions, evidence and experts that questioned Bush's lies. I didn't see any of the that in the Mainstream media and the media watch group FAIR can document it. They monitored the pre war run up in the media and pro war "experts" out numbered those who had alternative views by over 90%. It was a constant drum beat.

Before FAIR the media used to just brush off critics by saying our "perception" was slanted but it's not.

The corporate media are just huge corporations. They present the news as it effects their interests, not the interests of the average American.

The Mainstream media never really questioned Bush's lie and many have apologized.
But I have been around long enough to now it's bull.

Now they wring their hands and say, "Oh, if we could only leave and how to we leave and we can't just abandon them." The media is dominated with conservatives, just turn on your TV. Even the so called "Liberals" just argue over tactics and strategy. They never say, "The war is illegal, it was launched on lies and the Iraqi people want us to leave. We are there for the oil. We need to leave, help Iraq rebuild through the UN, impeach the Bush administration, along with the democratic leadership that backed the lies and hand them, over to the Hague to be tried as the War Criminals they are.

The media continues to lie and lead the American people around in circles.

I guess the old saying is true, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think.

You're just as ill informed as someone who only gets their information from whatever their preacher or favorite radio show host says. Regardless of what you say, you are not thinking independently, you blindly accept whatever you alternative press feeds you without question. Your incorrect statements about the status of the middle class proves this.

Question everything and think for yourself. Until you can learn to do this you'll just be another blind follower.

The Iraq was based on lies, knowingly, it is illegal and Bush and bunch are War Criminals.

They attacked a country on lies.

They have killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's as well as over 3,000 Americans and thousands more wounded and/or maimed.

They authorized kidnappings, secret prisons and torture.

The war is controlling the region and the oil.

They are War Criminals.

quote:

The Iraq was based on lies, knowingly, it is illegal and Bush and bunch are War Criminals.

They attacked a country on lies.

They have killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's as well as over 3,000 Americans and thousands more wounded and/or maimed.

They authorized kidnappings, secret prisons and torture.

The war is controlling the region and the oil.

They are War Criminals.

That's exactly what happens when you fill your head with crap. You become a mindless parrot. Thanks for the good example there.

NashBama:


(Pogo) quote:
The Iraq was based on lies, knowingly, it is illegal and Bush and bunch are War Criminals.

They attacked a country on lies.

They have killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's as well as over 3,000 Americans and thousands more wounded and/or maimed.

They authorized kidnappings, secret prisons and torture.

The war is (about) controlling the region and the oil.

They are War Criminals.


________________________________________________________________________________________________

That's exactly what happens when you fill your head with crap. You become a mindless parrot. Thanks for the good example there.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

I think it is an excellent example of how the alternative media tells the truth and the corporate media spins the lies.

The only people to fill your head with "crap" is the corporate media.

You are free to "expose" any of the "crap" you claim it to be.

quote:

I think it is an excellent example of how the alternative media tells the truth and the corporate media spins the lies.

The only people to fill your head with "crap" is the corporate media.

You are free to "expose" any of the "crap" you claim it to be.

I've exposed plenty, this is going no where and it's just not worth the effort. People like you only hear what you want to hear. It doesn't take a genius to see through the spin on both sides, just a little common sense. Those "reliable" web sites talk up the global warming farce as if it's fact when anyone with a basic understanding of science can see through it. Just the other day I heard someone griping about how far left the mainstream media is and how it's run by liberals. You say the exact same thing except you replace "left" with "right". You've done exactly what I predicted you would do in my first post on this thread, mindlessly regurgitate propaganda. It's what people who listen to the raving conservative talk shows do and you've done the exact same thing.

You've simply proven my original point in the first place. The far left and the far right are exact mirror images of each other. They all think they know the real truth when they're only getting half truths and lots of spin. When you can look at both sides, use you brain and filter fact from fiction, then you'll find the truth. To do this would require you to actually think independently and you've shown by your responses you are either unable or unwilling to do so. I'll prove it, ask yourself if you have ever come across a story in one of your "progressive" sites that made you stop and say "Now wait a second, that doesn't sound right." I'm guessing you haven't.

Like I said before, question everything, think on your own, and then you'll find the truth. Until then, you're just another sheep following your herd.