Politics Thread

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

One thing I miss, by refusing to post on the old site, was the political discussions with polite, informed people.

I say let's start one here, all within the rules of course 

Anyone else interested in haveing a go?

[beagle]

Excellent idea in my opinion, unless Sir F thinks otherwise.  You'd better start it off though. If I do it will be something too UK parochial about Blair/Brown.

[Sibling Chatty]

Ummm...in Current Events, Gov. Mitt Romney of Michigan declared a Fox News Day for his state.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/top10/261

In this very partisan and prejudiced site, please refer to article # 10.

[beagle]

Interesting. If one of our UK politicians was seen to promote one commercial tv channel over another there would be "questions asked".  On the other hand we don't really have any equivalent of a state governor, except maybe Lord Lieutenant of a County, and their main job is to greet the Queen at the foot of her helicopter on visits.

Will the other channels complain? Or do they have to lump it?

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Interesting. If one of our UK politicians was seen to promote one commercial tv channel over another there would be "questions asked".  On the other hand we don't really have any equivalent of a state governor, except maybe Lord Lieutenant of a County, and their main job is to greet the Queen at the foot of her helicopter on visits.

Will the other channels complain? Or do they have to lump it?

Over here, it's a "feeding frenzy" with each channel pretty much left to it's own abilities to get as much of the viewer-pie as they can - and pretty much anything goes, it seems.

Back in the day of the "Big Three", there was an implicit understanding that in exchange for all that lovely radio-frequency bandwidth (rightfully the property of the people of the US), that each of the broadcasters would always include stuff "in the public interest".

This was usually translated as news.  And it was pretty good news, too:  pretty fair, as unbiased as humans are capable of being, serious, and so on.  It had some ads, but in those days, it was a rare event when the news people allowed the ads to dictate - in fact it was scandalous, if that took place, and was discovered.  They considered themselves journalists on par with the newspapers.

...

Along comes cable TV, which initially was immune from the "unspoken rules" about the "public interest".  (And, I suppose still is).  The Big Three were fearful for their survival (they'd had a 3-way monopoly for soooo long ... kindof like GM/Ford/Chrysler... <heh>)

And, thus the evolvement of news-for-fun-and-profit .... which is what we have today.

Gone are the journalists.  Gone is the integrity.  And MOST importantly:  gone is "In The Public Interest".  It's ALL about this week's bottom line.  And ONLY about that.

...

So, a public figure endorsing a particular flavor of news-pablum?  For most, it's "So What?"

We haven't had any news with journalistic integrity over here for years ... (with a very few notable exceptions)

[Outis the Unready]

Ummm...in Current Events, Gov. Mitt Romney of Michigan declared a Fox News Day for his state.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/top10/261

In this very partisan and prejudiced site, please refer to article # 10.

Mass, not Mich.
This is one reason why this guy is not running for reelection...he couldn't win.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

On the subject of Faux News Clinton calls them "Conservative Hitshow". Curiously, not many mentions of the incident in US news (although I heard it on NPR).

[Teripie]

Oh Joy! Politics! 
I am sooooo there!

[Vita Curator]

On the subject of Faux News Clinton calls them "Conservative Hitshow". Curiously, not many mentions of the incident in US news (although I heard it on NPR).

I've seen snippets of the interview several times now, Clinton really held his own and made Chris Wallace look like a fool.  Wallace actually looked like a deer caught in the headlights.  I'll roam around and see if I can find a video of it for those that have not had the pleasure of hearing and seeing their animated exchange.

[Sibling Chatty]

I've only read it...Wanna seeeeee!!

Kat, thanks for the correction. (DD is to never try to read with her old glasses on. It makes her guess at too many words.)

In local politics, the Democratic candidate for County Judge in Burleson County got told today that either HE wrote my phone script to call a thousand voters, or I did...but if HE wrote it, he'd better write it all. Then Dan and I showed him how to write a phone script and prepare for all the eventualities of answers. Engineers are smart people, but don't let them handle words.

Our current County Judge's daughter was stopped by a constable with some of the opposing party's signs in the back of iher truck...illegal, you know. when she did it last election, all she had to do was apologize to the homeowners, not the candidates. Some people never learn.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Ya gotta Looove Jon Stewart (today's show).  His top/lead story was Clinton's interview on Faux News.

I do not watch Faux, no matter what, so I had not seen the interview previously - but, I must say, I was proud of Clinton and what I heard him say.

And, I was reminded just how much I miss having an eloquent, smart speaker in the Whitehouse. 

[beagle]

Back in the day of the "Big Three", there was an implicit understanding that in exchange for all that lovely radio-frequency bandwidth (rightfully the property of the people of the US), that each of the broadcasters would always include stuff "in the public interest".

Same here when there were three or four  channels, in fact it was (and still is I believe) a requirement of winning a broadcast franchise license.  It's all got more complicated with all the special interest channels on digital, and now with internet TV which is exempt from the rules.   We're now likely to get more explicitly political internet channels, but we haven't  quite   got to the point where a politician would win points by saying "BBC good, ITV bad" or vice versa.

[Calico Jack]

Of course the advantage of having a multitude of TV Channels is that a politician cannot do or say anything now without someone picking it up.  Or in yesterday's case a politicians wife who may have permanently ended Gordon Brown's chances of becoming the next PM.

[beagle]

Yep, it's so easy for a reporter to accidentally mishear "That's so true" as "That's a lie".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5379166.stm

Of course if Tone really wanted to sink Gordon then allowing this row to fester on, and having his verbally very competent QC wife make such an accidental  gaffe to drown out the content of his speech wouldn't be that inconvenient.

[Vita Curator]

Here is a link Chatty:

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/24/clinton-video/

Enjoy.