shannon_a: (politics)
1. Palin doesn't like how the Republican Alaska legislature's abuse of power investigation is going.

2. Palin creates a second panel, made up of people who serve at her pleasure, to investigate herself as a result.

(I'll leave out some steps where Palin tries to get the original panel shut down, as I don't want to look them up.)

3. The original panel finds Palin guilty of abuse of power.

4. Palin's pet panel releases their results on the eve of the election.

5. Palin's pet panel finds Palin innocent.

(OK, so up to here, it just looks like another pathetic Palin abuse of power, exactly like the ones that she's already been found guilty of ... but wait, there's more.)

6. Our sad national press reports on this like it's news, and like it casts doubt on the bipartisan panel that already found Palin guilty ... and did so without trying to step on the election by releasing it in the final hours.

Our national press is utterly corrupt, so beholden to constantly chasing the newest story for ratings, that they can no longer be trusted to report the news. They should be destroyed, and will be as the internet slowly takes the power out of their dirtied, bloodied hands.

Lawless

Oct. 10th, 2008 08:31 pm
shannon_a: (politics)
I've written before that I could live with Republicans being in office if they just had differences in policy. But, it's more than that. In that earlier entry, I talked about how their constant lies offered mainly by Republicans were one of the things that set me off. But even moreso, I'm offended, disgusted and scared by the Republicans' general lawlessness. And it intertwines so tightly with their lies, that you just don't know what to do.

I think it comes out strongly in Palin's TrooperGate scandal.

We now know (as we'd suspected) that Sarah Palin abused her power as Governor of Alaska in her vendetta against her ex-brother-in-law. She continually used her governmental authority to put undue pressure on getting him fired, suspending his disability benefits, and who knows what else. (Lawless.)

And maybe you could understand that. I'm sure most of us have pursued a vendetta at some point that we shouldn't have. And maybe we could have excused her abuse of power if she'd been upfront and admitted that she made a mistake (though I'd hope it'd make you wonder at the ballot box).

But Palin's three-ring circus since is what's so scary.

First, when she discovered that the legislative review was going against her, she tried to get a new commission started that would put out a more favorable review. As far as I can tell, that's still coing on. (Lawless.)

Second, she tried to subvert the legislative system by sending a team of McCain lawyers to stop the legislature from reviewing her. (Lawless.)

Third, she or her lawyers advised many people to ignore subpoenas, apparently under the theory that no action would be taken until after the election. (Lawless.)

Fourth, when it became obvious that everything else had failed, Palin had the McCain campaign issue a report clearing her of all wrong-doing, as some type of dumb-assed attempt to muddy the waters, as if America was stupid enough to think, "Well, Palin didn't do anything wrong because she cleared herself." (Newspeak.)

Fifth, when the report came out today, she (through one of her mouthpieces) called it "a partisan-led inquiry run by Obama supporters". These "Obama" supporters, by the by, are mostly Republicans in Alaska who unanimously decided to continue with the inquiry even when the McCain campaign tried to take over their state. (Newspeak & Lawless.)

Dammit, media, do your fucking job and stop repeating the Republican lies without context.

Dammit, government, take a lesson from Alaska and take your party-uber-alles attitude and your immoral integration of politics and the judicial branch of government and shove it.
shannon_a: (Default)
I was woken up by helicopters this morning. They've been swarming our air space for five days now, on and off, since the California courts denied the final appeal that would have stopped UC Berkeley from building its new training facility next to Memorial Stadium.

This all goes back a couple of years. UC decided to build this training facility and they got a bunch of opposition. I can respect the City of Berkeley trying to use loopholes involving the Hayward Fault to stop the facility from being built. It's a classic town & gown issue, a fight that the City of Berkeley has been losing for years, but one they need to keep fighting lest the UC be allowed utterly unlimited expansion. I can also understand the NIMBYs in the local area fighting against it. I mean, I don't like the Cal football fans filling the parking around my house 6 or 7 Saturdays a year. I'm sure the people right next to the Stadium want it to be bigger even less.

It's these stupid tree-sitters that I have no respect for, however. For them, it's all about the trees in the area, most of which were planted by UC Berkeley in the first place, many of them just sixty years ago. They can't even claim that there's a true ecological basis to their protest, as the UC has promised to plant something like two new trees and one mature tree for every one they take down.

Instead, these tree-sitters just show off a disturbingly conservative attitude that unfortunately underlies a fair amount of Berkeley's supposed progressiveness. I see the same problem in the Berkeley council that names buildings of historic importance. They've run entirely amok, preserving tons of crap buildings that are still so young that people in Europe, and even on the East Coast, would laugh.

I thought the poster-boy of their idiocy was shown off a few years ago when they got this old, falling-down storefront named historical. It was covered with rusting aluminum siding and the wood was rotting away. It was an utter eyesore, but the council named it historical because it was "one of the few remaining examples of a 1940 convenience store", or something of the sort. So the people who wanted to renovate that storefront and actually build something for the local community couldn't, and the storefront continues to rot.

We similarly have these tree-sitters who have spent 2 years up in these trees, and the enormous community of grandmothers and ex-hippies who were smuggling food to them every week. To preserve some trees which are going to be replaced anyway and which are (for the most part) younger than some of those grandmothers.

I find it particularly pathetic that these people think this is the cause of their generation, their Free Speech Movement, their Peoples' Park. It's not. It's an embarrassment.

These people could instead be out trying to do genuine good for the world. They could be protesting against the fact that there are still numerous electronic voting machines out there which could easily be used to manipulate an election; that the Republicans are caging Democratic voters to try and prevent them from exercising their rights this November; that are boys are still dying in Iraq for an unjust war based on a big lie. Instead, they're up in a tree throwing poo at people who try and get them down.



Since the last appeal failed, UC has started work on their construction. They took down 41 of the 42 trees over the weekend, and tried to negotiate to get the final protesters out of their tree over the same time period. They seem prepared to go in (up?) by force now.

Doubtless those helicopters are circling hoping to get a shot of someone plunging to their death. Hey, it could win a Pulitzer. And it surely beats reporting real news. Y'know, the investigative stuff that might stop the next unjust war?

Pathetic.
shannon_a: (politics)
If we lived in a country where there were two different points of view over how things should be done, and people made an honest choice between those options, I could live with it, even if my point of view were frequently ignored--as has indeed been the case these last 8 years (and longer when you consider stuff like NAFTA under Clinton).

But one of my biggest problems with today's politics is that there isn't a chance for honest discourse in this country right now, and that's largely because of lying politicians.

It was bad enough in bygone years when the Republican party ran on campaigns of lottery dreams. There were years when they talked about lowering taxes for the rich, and you could see that their underlying message was, "Hey, you might be rich some day, blue collar worker. So wouldn't you like to make sure that taxes are low for that glorious future?" I always felt like they were fooling people, like they were convincing the average American to vote against his best interest by holding out a carrot that they'd never get to eat.

But that's nothing to what the Republicans have done in this century.

I've heard Karl Rove's technique called The Big Lie several times, using the term that originated with Hitler. I think now we can look back and see that's how we got into the war with Iraq. According to Wikipedia:


The Big Lie is a propaganda technique. It was defined by Adolf Hitler in his 1925 autobiography Mein Kampf as a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously".


But nowadays Republicans seem to be taking it to the next level. They're not just lying about the big things, they're lying about everything. McCain gets out there and offers the Big Lie of being opposed to George Bush, which might have been true 8 years ago, but hasn't been true since he prostituted himself to win the nomination. His campaign has also constantly been lying about Obama, most consistently purposefully misrepresenting his tax policies.

Palin may be even worse, as she seems to have been lying across her whole political career. She's now saying she's against earmarks, though her earmarks were so bad when she was mayor of Wassila that she made the bad-earmarks list of a certain Senator in congress three times.

(The senator? John McCain.)

She's saying she was against the infamous Alaskan Bridge to Nowhere, though she campaigned on pushing it through when she was trying to become governor of Alaska. At the convention she even claimed that Obama has never authored major legislation, a fact that's outright false (unless, I suppose you have a pretty frickin' high bar for "major").

The problem isn't just these lying politicians (and I'm sure there are some Democrats too, though among the Republicans it seems entirely endemic, and I think the contrast is most obvious in the political race), but rather than our media isn't doing anything about it.

We've started to get a little lackluster fact-checking by some of the main media, but it's still only offered secondary or tertiary attention. And, much of the fact-checking is still being done by second or third-tier media who no ones pays attention to. What happened to the media being the watchdogs of our society? They've entirely abrogated that responsibility. They should be calling politicians out when they're serial liars. That should be the big headline ("McCain's Newest Ad Once More a Big Lie!"), but instead they repeat the lies in their main stories, then list the incorrect facts back on page 33.

That's crap and they should be ashamed of themselves.

Barrack Obama today put out an ad straight-up calling the McCain campaign liars for the bullshit they've been saying (using a rare media quote that actually used the word "lie"). Hopefully it'll bring some light to peoples' eyes, but it has the unfortunate potential to backfire if he's suddenly seen as the "angry black man." But, he shouldn't even have to stick his neck out like that in the first place. The media should be doing their job, and they haven't for a long time.

March 2026

S M T W T F S
1234567
89101112 1314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Apr. 4th, 2026 08:00 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios