Media Sentry

Help Wanted: Human Shields. Immediate openings exist for Human Shields in Iraq to protect Iraqi's, Iraqi infrastructure (water, oil pipelines, hospitals), UN personnel, and UN facilities. The ideal candidate for these openings previously served as Human Shields in Iraq prior to the war to protect Iraqi's, Iraqi infrastructure (water, oil piplines, hospitals) from the Americans coming to liberate them. These Human Shields can be immediately deployed to all infrastructure facilities and co-deploy with UN and Coalition forces to protect them from attack by cowardly ideologues who will murder Iraqi's and UN forces at will in order to return the Iraqi population to slavery. These former Human Shields who were disappointed when Americans did not target the infrastructure or innocent Iraqi's will not be disappointed again! This time, murderous foreigners from many nations have rallied to the al Qaeda call to come to Iraq and destroy and murder at will. We are certain that the Human Shields, whose only agenda was the protection of Iraqi's and the infrastructure, will be eager to pick up their banner and continue their quest by placing themselves between Iraqi's and several thousand hatefilled, intolerant, murdering terrorists! Don't wait! Join now!

((Hey, MAJOR MEDIA! Why don't ya drum up a few of the former Human Shields and bounce this idea off them!?!?!?!?))

HEADLINE: Federal Judge Takes Over California Electoral Process. It's time to throw out some more election laws as a Federal Judge in California has wrested control of the recall election from the Legislature. It's essentially the same scenario that unfolded in New Jersey when the Democrats replaced their losing candidate on the ballot in violation of state election law and in Florida in 2000 when they attempted to circumvent the recount provisions of those laws. It appears we now have a Federal Judge in California that won't let things like "law" or the "will of the people as expressed through their legislature" get in the way of a good election.

HEY MAJOR MEDIA! WHY DON'T YOU GET OFF YOUR DUFF AND EXPOSE THIS JUDICIAL ACTIVISM!?!?! This is nothing more than an infringement by the Judiciary into the Legislative branch!!!!

Bush and the Power Grid: I believe a quick look at President Bush's Engery Plan that he submitted to Congress in May 2001 will reveal that he specifically addressed the decaying power grid in his initiatives. Seems that the Democrats in Congress have bottle the Energy Bill up for well over 2 years now. A bit of research on the part of the media would shed some... oh, wait, I forgot. Our major media doesn't engage in research or investigative journalism anymore. The exception that statement of course is NBC who rigged fuel tank tests to ensure explosiong on impact and sent sent an "investigative journalist" into a food processing facility to plant evidence and then report it. But I digress....

Perspectives: Expectations. Now that "Arnold" has declared his candidacy for governor of California, people expect him to have a plan for economic recovery for the state. They expect Gov. Davis to "go negative", get nasty, be combative, and so forth.

People expect Pres. Bush to come up with plans for Iraq, for the deficit, for the continued economic recovery, to protect the country from terrorist attack. They expect the democrats to continue to probe Bush for weakness and attack him where he is vulnerable. They expect democrats to challenge Bush on honesty and ability.

People expect the Republican Congress to produce budgets and manage health care, social security, defense spending, and taxes. They expect democrats to continue to block Federal Judicial appointees in committee and on the Senate floor.

Seems like the public has pretty clear expectations for each party. One is- in the mind of the public- a party from which they expect plans and programs, the other a party from which they expect obstruction, mud slinging, and name calling, but apparently there is no expectation of ideas, plans, or programs.

Seems like the battle lines are pretty well defined.

Standards of Success Not "Standard". Lots of talk about Iraq being a failure or a quagmire. Let's look at some standards and see if "The Media" is applying an equal standard to President Bush.

1. Haiti- Clinton sends in troops to restore democracy and rebuild the nation. How long did it take before free and fair elections, let me rephrase that- successful free and fair elections were held? How long before they had a new, non-corrupt government in place? How long before an efficient police force was on duty and protecting the country? How long before the Haitian economy was stable and unemployment dropped to a level equal to "full employment" (in this country that's about 3%)? This was on an island nation that required very few troops- comparatively- and small scale operations. Yet we're supposed to believe, according to "the media" that in a nation the size of Iraq, that required force on force combat and an integrated air campaign, we should have achieved all of these things a mere 90 days after the cessation of major combat?

2. Afghan, Iraqi, and Sudanese bombing campaigns- Clinton fires missiles at three countries presumptively to destroy al-Qaeda facilities and Iraqi WMD programs. Successful? How about a look at the flawed intel or the motives of then-President Clinton?

3. Bosnia- We introduce NATO forces implement a peace plan in December 1995. We're told one year and one year ONLY. How long have we been there? (answer 8 years and counting...) How long before they had free and fair elections? How long before they had a thriving economy? How long before there was a fielded police force to protect the populace? Again, we're up to 8 years and counting, yet somehow, Bush is expected to have achieved all this in less than 90 days! Bosnia?

4. Kosovo- 78-day air campaign in 1999. How long did it take for Kosovo to stabilize? How long before their first elections? How long did it take their economy to stabilize? How long have our troops been there? (answer 4 years and counting...) Again, Bush is maligned for not accomplishing these things in 90 days.

The media is definitely working off of a skewed standard, expecting Bush to have accomplished in 90 days what has not yet been accomplished by ANY of President Clinton and Al Gore's military operations.

Political Mythology; Wise Budget Policy Caused The Clinton Surplus. One of the most oft repeated myths in the media today is that Clinton/Gore were wise budgeters whose diligence and superb handling of the economy generated a huge budget surplus. Wrong. Here's how that particular slight of hand was accomplished:

1. In 1993, Clinton/Gore inflicted HUGE tax increases on the economy sucking out enourmous amounts of capital
2. Also in 1993 (maybe '94, but I think '93) Clinton/Gore refinanced the entire national debt with short term notes. This DID lower the debt service allowing up-front cash savings, but it risked bankrupting the country if interest rates went up (remember when New York went belly up?). This also explains Alan Greenspan's near paranoia over inflation.
3. Clinton/Gore spent their first six years in office looting the Pentagon budget
4. They road the .com bubble which artificially inflated the markets, but did produce income for the federal treasury

The problem is that around about '97 or so, they realized the money they were sucking out of the economy through taxes was going to start impacting the economy so they attempted some late-term tax cuts to slow the impact. But the .com bubble burst before any tax cuts could take effect. By March of 2000, the economy was in full decline and the so-called "surplus" was going to have to be spent.

The adults came into office in January 2001 and were faced with an economy in decline and then 9/11. Money had to be spent on the Defense Department, Homeland Defense, and stimulous initiatives to get the economy going again. The so-called "surplus" was a sham. Wouldn't it be terrific if the media would investigate this and report on it rather than just parrot the old stale "Clinton surplus" canard?

Haiti. Has any enterprising journalist been to Haiti lately? Just wondering if it is now the bastion of democracy and paradise that was to be created out of President Clinton's invasion in the early 90's. I'm sure all the corruption is gone and it's a real, democratic model! Isn't it....? How 'bout a quick look by someone in the "major media" to see if the Clinton/Gore plan for reconstruction of Haiti is on track and successful!?

Judging by the remarks lately by Clinton supporters, there must have been a newly elected government and pure democracy 30 days after the invasion! And I'm sure that after 60 days, they had a fully functioning judiciary! By the 90 day mark, I'm guessing the tourists had returned and the Haitian economy was riding higher than ever and unemployment had dipped to 0%!

Hey! CNN! How about a look see at Haiti!!!!

Missing- 100,000 Cops. Be on the lookout (BOLO) for the 100,000 cops President Clinton funded with our tax dollars! It would be nice if some enterprising journalist- an investigative journalist to be exact- would investigate exactly where those 100,000 cops are that Bill Clinton boasted as one of his premier programs.

*How many cops were actually hired?
*How many were actually funded beyond training?
*How many are still on the street today?
*What has the impact been on crime in the areas where these cops were hired?
*How many tax dollars actually went to this program?
*How were the tax dollars spent?

HEY MEDIA- why not take some time and look into this????? Some of us tax payers would like to know!

Partisanship vs. Foreign Policy. Remember the old days when the political adage was "partisanship ends at the water's edge"? Guess it's not true when it's a Republican administration. Seems like an energetic journalist might do some research on when it was "proper" in the past to show the world a united front and at what point it became okay to shred your country's leader in the middle of a war.

Pre-emptive Wars, War on Terror: A question of history. I have a question for the major news media; a couple actually. When President Clinton attacked the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan and the the training camps in Afghanistan, didn't he proclaim the attacks to be pre-emptive? It seems to me that President Clinton launched those attacks and told the public that it was a pre-emptive strike and the first blows in a war on terrorism.

I'm admittedly a bit fuzzy on the exact wording, but if I am remembering those events correctly, then President Bush's war on Iraq is NOT the first pre-emptive strike by the U.S. as is commonly accepted in the media today.

Also, it would be interesting to see what nuggets might be unearthed regarding the quality of the intel President Clinton used when he attacked the factory. If The President was going to launch a pre-emptive strike against terrorism, then the intelligence must- as we now know- be absolutely pristine and unambiguous. Or, was President Clinton so eager perhaps to launch the attack that he hyped some questionable intelligence in order to justify his attack on a sovereign nation- Sudan?

Inquiring minds want to know....

Iraqi War: Lost Points. In all of the hub-bub about the pretext for the Iraqi War, there seems to be at least one significant point that has been lost in the shuffle. The point being that for the last 2-3 years, the Iraqi military was regualarly firing Surface to Air Missiles and Anti-Aircraft Artillery at our air and naval forces flying over northern and southern Iraq. Why were those forces there? Because when they weren't patrolliing, Hussein was using his military to murder Iraqi's in the south and Kurds in the north.

The fact is, Iraq posed a direct and continuing threat to U.S. and allied forces by attempting to shoot down allied forces participating in Operations Northern and Southern Watch. The Iraqi military engaged allied forces in military engagements time after time in both No Fly Zones. Some will contend that the No Fly Zones were not recognized by the U.N. or other bodies, but the fact is that by flying the patrols, the U.S. and their allies saved the lives of Iraqi's and Kurds.

I challenge the major media to do a little historic research and remind their viewers and readers that in addition to the pre-emption issues surrounding the Iraqi war, there were also reasons having to do with military responses involved in going to war. I'd point out that, in my humble view, when someone fires a surface to air missile at your forces, the issue of "pre-emption" is pretty much moot.

I've finally had my fill of inaccurate and inadequate reporting on major news events. I will use this Blog to document and comment on those failings by the media industry. This blog will have a distinctly political emphasis, but I will comment on poor coverage and under reporting on other cultural issues as well.

Having said that, I am not seeking debate or pro/con discussions on the items I post. I get enough of that at work and within my own social realm. I simply want to use this Blog to point to specific issues and the failing of the major media in covering them.

For the record, what I write here reflects my own views and opinions and not that of my employer nor any organization to which I belong. For that reason, I am writing under a pen name to ensure my writings and opinions remain attributed to me and me alone.

Now that the Blog is created, I will, at my leisure, begin to post some items that have particularly iritated me in recent months and years. Could be today; probably by the end of the week; definitely by the end of the month! Some readers will enjoy and agree, and some will not. Isn't that a great thing?