Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Al Gore’s Rolling Stone Article – How The Corporate Media Turns The Left Against Democrats

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:13 PM
Original message
Al Gore’s Rolling Stone Article – How The Corporate Media Turns The Left Against Democrats
Edited on Wed Jun-22-11 10:20 PM by TomCADem
I am sure you have heard about Al Gore’s recent article in Rolling Stone. The corporate media coverage of Gore’s article perfectly illustrates how the left is being manipulated by the corporate media into blaming Democrats and giving Republicans a free pass. The articles have the following headlines:

“Al Gore slams Obama on climate change.”
“Gore Blasts Obama for Not Fighting Climate Change.”
“Gore: Obama Has 'Failed to Stand Up' on Global Warming.”
“Gore: On global warming, Obama has changed little.”
“Gore Faults Obama on Global Warming.”
“Gore faults Obama on global warming.”
“Gore: Obama has 'failed'”

Wow! That must be some can of whoop ass the Al Gore opened on President Obama! This then leads Politico to follow-up with this story, “Gore voices left's climate grumbling,” which describes the now familiar narrative that the left feels abandoned and uninspired about supporting President Obama in 2012.

So, most DUers are probably now thinking that Al Gore must have written a treatise on the failures of President Obama. Indeed, President Obama must be the single greatest impediment to confronting climate change. You have to wonder whether the title of Al Gore’s Rolling Stone article is “Barrack Hussien Obama: Climate Change Anti-Christ?” I guess we should all stay at home on election night in 2012, right?
Well, you would be surprised to find out that the actual title of Al Gore’s Rolling Stone article is: “Climate of Denial: Can science and the truth withstand the merchants of poison?"

What? Merchants of Poison? Where is President Obama in the title to Al Gore’s article? If you then proceed to actually read Gore's article, rather than the propaganda masquarading as journalism that pollutes the media, you will find some critiques of President Obama, but you will also find that a large portion of the article reviews the facts behind climate change, which most of the stories discussing Gore’s article ignore. In addition, you will also find the following passages, which are are ignored in the above referenced articles:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/climate-of-de...


To sell their false narrative, the Polluters and Ideologues have found it essential to undermine the public's respect for Science and Reason by attacking the integrity of the climate scientists. That is why the scientists are regularly accused of falsifying evidence and exaggerating its implications in a greedy effort to win more research grants, or secretly pursuing a hidden political agenda to expand the power of government. Such slanderous insults are deeply ironic: extremist ideologues — many financed or employed by carbon polluters — accusing scientists of being greedy extremist ideologues.
***
Unlike access to the "public square" of early America, access to television requires large amounts of money. Thomas Paine could walk out of his front door in Philadelphia and find a dozen competing, low-cost print shops within blocks of his home. Today, if he traveled to the nearest TV station, or to the headquarters of nearby Comcast — the dominant television provider in America — and tried to deliver his new ideas to the American people, he would be laughed off the premises. The public square that used to be a commons has been refeudalized, and the gatekeepers charge large rents for the privilege of communicating to the American people over the only medium that really affects their thinking. "Citizens" are now referred to more commonly as "consumers" or "the audience."
***
In the new ecology of political discourse, special-interest contributors of the large sums of money now required for the privilege of addressing voters on a wholesale basis are not squeamish about asking for the quo they expect in return for their quid. Politicians who don't acquiesce don't get the money they need to be elected and re-elected. And the impact is doubled when special interests make clear — usually bluntly — that the money they are withholding will go instead to opponents who are more than happy to pledge the desired quo. Politicians have been racing to the bottom for some time, and are presently tunneling to new depths. It is now commonplace for congressmen and senators first elected decades ago — as I was — to comment in private that the whole process has become unbelievably crass, degrading and horribly destructive to the core values of American democracy.
Largely as a result, the concerns of the wealthiest individuals and corporations routinely trump the concerns of average Americans and small businesses. There are a ridiculously large number of examples: eliminating the inheritance tax paid by the wealthiest one percent of families is considered a much higher priority than addressing the suffering of the millions of long-term unemployed; Wall Street's interest in legalizing gambling in trillions of dollars of "derivatives" was considered way more important than protecting the integrity of the financial system and the interests of middle-income home buyers. It's a long list.


What? Did anyone else see this sharp critique of the news media in any of the news media articles covering Al Gore’s story? I didn’t. Oh, and what does Al Gore think of President Obama? I guess the corporate media must have missed the following prominent passages:


First of all, anyone who honestly examines the incredible challenges confronting President Obama when he took office has to feel enormous empathy for him: the Great Recession, with the high unemployment and the enormous public and private indebtedness it produced; two seemingly interminable wars; an intractable political opposition whose true leaders — entertainers masquerading as pundits — openly declared that their objective was to ensure that the new president failed; a badly broken Senate that is almost completely paralyzed by the threat of filibuster and is controlled lock, stock and barrel by the oil and coal industries; a contingent of nominal supporters in Congress who are indentured servants of the same special interests that control most of the Republican Party; and a ferocious, well-financed and dishonest campaign poised to vilify anyone who dares offer leadership for the reduction of global-warming pollution.

In spite of these obstacles, President Obama included significant climate-friendly initiatives in the economic stimulus package he presented to Congress during his first month in office. With the skillful leadership of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and committee chairmen Henry Waxman and Ed Markey, he helped secure passage of a cap-and-trade measure in the House a few months later. He implemented historic improvements in fuel-efficiency standards for automobiles, and instructed the Environmental Protection Agency to move forward on the regulation of global-warming pollution under the Clean Air Act. He appointed many excellent men and women to key positions, and they, in turn, have made hundreds of changes in environmental and energy policy that have helped move the country forward slightly on the climate issue. During his first six months, he clearly articulated the link between environmental security, economic security and national security — making the case that a national commitment to renewable energy could simultaneously reduce unemployment, dependence on foreign oil and vulnerability to the disruption of oil markets dominated by the Persian Gulf reserves. And more recently, as the issue of long-term debt has forced discussion of new revenue, he proposed the elimination of unnecessary and expensive subsidies for oil and gas.


It would seem that the corporate news media read an entirely different article than the one Gore actually wrote. Or, they were simply reading the script that their corporate masters told them to publish: Blame Democrats and Give Republicans a Free Pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks for posting.
Very interesting.

Sam
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllTooEasy Donating Member (540 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
30. Bottom Line; We Dems have to be smarter ...

...with regard to anything we say about other Dems, including Barack. Otherwise, the Right Wing Media will use it and blow it up to their advantage. Repukes have better control of their public msg, unless we do the same, we are finished in 2012.

Gore may have been correct in everything he said, but he and every other Dems still have to reconsider the strategic political impact of their statements. Gore is not free of blame.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FirstLight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. Let's keep this info out there
the media wants to bury the real story here because they are at fault and they know it...they have buried climate change for decades and Gore knows it too...


gah! :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
3. K/R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Electric Monk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:43 PM
Response to Original message
4. I gave your identical OP in GD a rec, but it's still at 0. I also gave this one, up to +13 now.
Interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #4
16. That says a lot. Some people really like the "Obama failed" meme and push it as often and hard as
Edited on Thu Jun-23-11 08:30 AM by Pirate Smile
Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #16
75. That's because they're...
...Rape-Publicans.

Please don't take the kind of bait that the OP highlights and insinuate things about your fellow DUers.

NGU.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #4
52. I damn sure rec'd it. Because it's true
Between the corporate media, the group of "liberals" who make excellent $$$ rousing and pretending to represent "disgruntled liberals" and other liberals who just ain't happy unless they're miserable, this article is nothing but the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ozymanithrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:43 PM
Response to Original message
5. Fortunatly, Corporate media don't appear here.
to suggest that obama is worse than Bush, and criticize everything. Here, we can criticize the bad and still support the good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Eagle 718 Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #5
79. Well said nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:55 PM
Response to Original message
6. +1
Thanks, that was great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
7. EXCELLENT
post! :toast: K, B and R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 01:38 AM
Response to Original message
8. The media ain't our friend.......
and it looks like they won't be for a long fucking time!

Plus, many folks just don't even read anymore, they just like to claim they do!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #8
35. ++1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
politicasista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #35
78. +2 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 02:04 AM
Response to Original message
9. Well it's like the day Weiner resigne, and the media shut off Pelosi's press conference because...
Edited on Thu Jun-23-11 02:04 AM by Armstead
..she wanted to talk about boring stuff like jobs and the economy, rather than Weiner's weiner.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StarsInHerHair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 02:32 AM
Response to Original message
10. I blame Dem leaders & wealthy Dem citizens for failing to commit to creating
a platform to communicate to the public, they act like it should just magically happen, instead of pooling resources & be willing to operate in the red for years-like Fox "News" did.


I guess the TRUTH isn't important enough to have its' own outlet
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tblue37 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #10
21. You mean like Current TV? Go to their website and send an email
to your cable provider if they do not have Current yet. Mine doesn't, so I sent an email. All you have to do is enter your email adress and name and click "send," so it takes no time at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StarsInHerHair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #21
62. what does a small tv channel not easily available do but underline how the
Left has chosen to 'fail' their now alleged mission? If you can't find it as easily as Faux News, then you're not reaching people & have no chance of changing their minds
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 02:37 AM
Response to Original message
11. K&R Thanks! Very well-written article from Al Gore. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Denzil_DC Donating Member (268 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 04:41 AM
Response to Original message
12. K&R for abiding truth n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 06:42 AM
Response to Original message
13. While the media does play a part in trying to pit the left versus Democrats...
Dems do a pretty damn good job by siding with or capitulating to Republicans and their corporate benefactors so often. And when Obama and his crew always seem to come out more forcefully against the Left than they do the Right, whom they are eager to compromise with at every turn (while we can just STFU), then it's not just the media's fault that Obama has lost appeal to many on the left.

And don't spout some non-scientific strawpolls from Netroots Nation saying 87% of Liberals support Obama because that's hogwash. Kos has been an ardent supporter of Obama to the point that he goes after any critics of Obama from the left mostly in the same way that his loyalists do here: attack the messenger and ignore the message (or attempt to demean it).

Reality is Obama has moved very slowly on LGBT issues. Completely dismissed the left during the HCR debate which if he had started on the left and negotiated backward he would have gotten so much more as an actual "compromise" than he did by starting where Republicans demands initially were and then negotiating away most of the valuable stuff to try to pick up two lousy votes. He does this every time. He's like the worst car buyer ever hitting up the lot of an extremely polished and shady car salesman. Instead of starting at everything he wishes he could have and negotiating to what he can actually get, he starts at what he should actually get and negotiates back to whatever the fuck the GOP decides to give him. Just enough crumbs to keep their rabid base believing Obama got what he wanted and is dismantling the country so they can win the next election cycle out of misinformed anger and rage.

As for the troop drawdowns, neither Iraq nor Afghanistan's numbers are sufficient. We were engaged in much greater numbers in Vietnam and managed to pull all of our troops out in approx. 2 years. There's no need for us to keep 50,000 troops in Iraq. No need to maintain 60-70,000 in Afghanistan. Especially until 2014. We went to war to get Osama Bin Laden not to rid the universe of every terrorist ever. That would be the most impossible task ever and the greatest waste of human life and financial resources known to man. We need complete withdrawal of all troops from both countries in 2 years. If we can do it in Vietnam when we were still fighting large scale battles towards the end, then we can do it in Iraq where we're basically just policing the joint and Afghanistan where we're running individual search and destroy missions. There's absolutely no reason to keep troops engaged indefinitely.

Obama's been a major disappointment because of his unwillingness to fight the GOP as hard as the Left and because on many occasions he has been just as bad as the GOP about kissing corporate asses. He deserves a LOT of the criticism he receives here and elsewhere.

The media may sensationalize his actions in a way that makes it appear Obama is picking fights with us, but in many ways yeah they have regardless of media spin. Robert Gibbs coming out and making insulting remarks... Obama himself taking shots proves it's not just the media causing these issues. I know Gore wants harmony on our side but honestly, that goes both ways and good luck.

Since after all if the left asks the President for anything his supporters call us whiners and throw the pony comment around or try to lump us in with Teabaggers. We're a constituency as well. Just because we're covered in the media in a degrading light while teabaggers are made to be heroes doesn't mean our causes are somehow invalid and unworthy of listening to. Obama runs that "make me do things" meme out there often so we speak out and say what we want... and are roundly ignored practically every time out. Does Al Gore believe that the media makes Obama ignore us? Do they twist his arm and control his Presidency?

I think not.

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
great white snark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Why do the most prolific criticizers curl up in the fetal position when criticized?
You're not above that.

Nobody tells you to STFU, least of all meanie Obama.

BTW, 80% approval from Dems and 85% from Liberals is Gallup. You not being able to accept it does not make it untrue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. I don't curl up in the fetal position, I get louder.
Which of course only pisses off those locked into the Obama-can-do-no-wrong camp and gets them circling the wagons.

Yes, basically by not even allowing us a seat at the table on most occasions we have been told to STFU and when our criticism is demeaned or dismissed as the "professional left" or whatever Gibbs and Obama want to call it, you can try to pretty it up all you want but they are saying in a nutshell: STFU.

And I don't trust the gallup polls because I don't think they tell the entire story. Most Dems are in this sort of crazy dance where they have no choice but lesser evil because the other sides' evil is so much more evil. Hence Obama looks amazing when compared to Bachmann or Santorum or Palin. Of course Dems and yes liberals are going to say they support Obama in the face of that. But if you ask these polled liberals questions on an issue by issue basis, then that support erodes dramatically. And ultimately I doubt a full 80-90% of liberals are going to be at the polls for Obama unless a) the Republicans run the absolute worst of the worst extremist that makes them have to vote for the lesser evil, hence the poll numbers... or b) Obama plays this serious pretend liberal card to trick people like the whole Hope And Change song and dance did. He needs liberals to believe that second term with no electoral consequences, he'll be the liberal president they voted for in 2008. He needs everyone else to believe he is a moderate. So it will be interesting if he chooses to play himself off as a Progressive to win back the base that has serious doubts about his credentials or if casts them as the bad guys like he has in the past few years to try to win over Independents and Moderate Republicans (who never vote for him anyway but he sure does kiss their ass at every turn).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #15
56. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #56
60. You can keep trying to cram those numbers down everyone's throats all day long.
Ironically you'll probably be amongst the same crew of people that doubt poll numbers that somehow say people disapprove of Obama's job performance or those during the campaign cycle that come out and show him not doing as well as your overconfident belief of how great he is places him in your mind.

The problem is liberals don't want to take the chance of letting a Bachmann or Palin winning so it's Obama or nothing. That's the political reality of the thing right now. Whether or not we have a viable alternative or not doesn't mean we have no right to be dissatisfied with Obama. You're lumping a broken political system where there are no real threats of a serious third party run or even a real primary against a party's incumbent as some sort of proof that liberals would rather just have Obama than an alternative. While he would never have the financial support of the same party elite or corporate sponsors that Obama has, a Bernie Sanders would at least erode some support away from Obama. I'd say the same about Russ Feingold on a national level especially since in WI there's massive buyer's remorse about allowing Russ get swept up in an emotional anger wave election when he hadn't earned dismissal for being a status quo politician.

You don't have to care for my long-winded comments though. Amazingly enough you can skip right over it. Since on this board and in democracy as a whole (hence the message I am trying to get across to Obama as well), we have a right to voice our opinion as well. Like it or not. And clearly people like yourself and many on Obama's crew cannot handle that we're not Bush-like lockstep supporters that find nothing wrong with our dear leader.

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #13
25. I haven't read the article yet, but I just want to express my appreciation to MessiahRp
for stating his points so well. I agree 100%.

No matter what Al Gore said or didn't say, it's a catastrophically tragic fact that President Obama has chosen to let the issue of climate change flounder and sink from public view. This President, the one who wowed us with his ability to inspire and motivate in speech after speech, has chosen NOT to be a strong advocate for immediate and sustained efforts to make the American public aware of what is at stake and how we need to address the threats posed by global climate change.

The threats posed by Islamic terrorists pale in comparison to the threats posed by our rapidly changing climate systems. Yet it's as if the topic is off limits to this administration.

Someone very high up apparently thinks that this isn't worth the effort and expenditure of political capital. Is it the President? I don't know. But I do know that he IS THE President and should be leading courageously on this. Yet he's not.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xocet Donating Member (699 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #25
33. FYI: Founder and sink is the usual idiom. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #33
36. seems to me, it could go either way
especially since founder would often be read as "one who has founded", as in the founders of our country.

Surprisingly to me, though "founder" means 1. (of a ship) to fill with water and sink 2. (of a plan) fail 3. (of a horse or rider) fall to the ground, fall from lameness, stick fast in mud, etc." Oxford Desk Dictionary

fLounder, otoh, means "1. struggle in mud, or as if in mud, or when wading 2. perform a task badly or without knowledge." ibid.

so, to "flounder and sink" has the image, to me, of a swimmer thrashing about uselessly in the water and flailing their arms before going under whereas "founder and sink" has the image, to me, of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Alexander Hamilton getting into a boat and sinking as they cross the Delaware.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #36
41. Interesting, hfojvt. Thanks for that. I learned a new word meaning today!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xocet Donating Member (699 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #36
55. I suppose that you could be right: I have always thought of it as a pleonastic idiom....

founder3 (found·er)
verb


(of a ship) fill with water and sink:six drowned when the yacht foundered off the Florida coast
(of a plan or undertaking) fail or break down , typically as a result of a particular problem or setback:the talks foundered on the issue of reform
(of a hoofed animal, especially a horse or pony) succumb to laminitis.

noun

laminitis in horses, ponies, or other hoofed animals.

Origin:

Middle English (in the sense 'knock to the ground'): from Old French fondrer, esfondrer 'submerge, collapse', based on Latin fundus 'bottom, base'
Usage

It is easy to confuse the words founder and flounder, not only because they sound similar but also because the contexts in which they are used overlap. Founder means, in its general and extended use, ‘fail or come to nothing, sink out of sight’ (the scheme foundered because of lack of organizational backing). Flounder, on the other hand , means‘ struggle, move clumsily, be in a state of confusion’ (new recruits floundering about in their first week)

Source: (http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/founder--3?reg... )


founder, founders, foundered, foundering (verb forms)
1. A ship filling with water and sinking: "The ship foundered during the severe storm."
2. To become submerged; to become filled with water and to sink: "The crew escaped as the ship was foundering, but before it sank into the ocean."
3. To experience failure: "His career foundered and he had to move from job to job for many years."
4. It also has an established pleonastic sense as part of the idiomatic "founder and sink".

Source: (http://wordinfo.info/unit/869/page:4/s:fuses )
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #33
38. Leave it to a fisherman to use 'flounder' instead of 'founder'. Thanks, xocet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xocet Donating Member (699 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #38
57. No problem - just the other day someone on the internet taught me the word subnivean....
Of course, hfojvt is correct in it going both ways depending on meaning, and you are correct in your statement, since you are the final arbiter of the meaning of your statement.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:41 AM
Response to Original message
17. kicked
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
18. In the article, Gore predicts that his criticism would be taken out of context to attack Obama.
Edited on Thu Jun-23-11 08:55 AM by JoePhilly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greybnk48 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
19. Excellent article!! K&R
And thanks for posting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 10:57 AM
Response to Original message
20. K & R n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
22. Kicked and recommended.
Thanks for the thread, Tom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
23. Rec. The left and the dems united in 2012 please
Some of us are left/dems and don't see the point in being divided with so much at stake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wysimdnwyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
24. Wasn't that the point of the article?
The M$M are slaves to their corporate overlords, and voicing any opinion counter to their well-designed narrative is forbidden.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #24
47. The headlines made it appear that the article was about Gore attacking Obama.
Not about the media doing so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulkienitz Donating Member (313 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
26. I just wish it was ONLY the media that turned the left against Democrats
...rather than those Democrats who turn against the left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedEarth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
27. Very Good, Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
28. The degree of distortion is amply demonstrated by CorpoMedia's©
coverage of the article. The farther apart Gore's article and the media coverage are, the more solid the evidence of the twisting required to keep people separated, disorganized, isolated and powerless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
29. MSM also reports on conflicts within the GOP
Edited on Thu Jun-23-11 01:37 PM by Enrique
most recently, Gingrich vs. Ryan.

Gore's criticism of Obama was worth reporting, imo. They should give the whole context, I haven't read the articles but I bet many of them did give the whole context.

edit: i've looked up a couple of stories. The first two stories I found not only gave context, they added additional context, with quotes from the White House and other Clinton officials, and with facts about Obama's environmental record.

imo this OP is shoot-the-messenger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #29
45. They didn't address what the majority of this essay was about, a critique of the corporate media.
Edited on Thu Jun-23-11 04:39 PM by Uncle Joe
In this AP column, there wasn't a single word about the current dysfunctional role that the media has played re: the debate on the environment and other critical issues however that's what most of Gore's essay; is about, our dysfunctional public square.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/06/22-2

The U.S. corporate media is far more interested in selling a preconceived product or entertainment, Gore compared them to "professional wrestling referees," always looking the other way when the bad guys are doing shit and then paying attention when the good guys finally get fed up and commit the slightest infraction, rather than to promote or facilitate serious debate about critical issues.

He also said they focus on attacking the messengers instead of the pros and cons of any given issue.

Anyone that hasn't read the entire Rolling Stone essay owes themselves to do so, otherwise you will be jerked around like a puppet on a string.

An excerpt from Gore's Rolling Stone Essay in referring to the corporate media as professional wrestling referees.



That is pretty much the role now being played by most of the news media in refereeing the current wrestling match over whether global warming is "real," and whether it has any connection to the constant dumping of 90 million tons of heat-trapping emissions into the Earth's thin shell of atmosphere every 24 hours.

Admittedly, the contest over global warming is a challenge for the referee because it's a tag-team match, a real free-for-all. In one corner of the ring are Science and Reason. In the other corner: Poisonous Polluters and Right-wing Ideologues.

The referee — in this analogy, the news media — seems confused about whether he is in the news business or the entertainment business. Is he responsible for ensuring a fair match? Or is he part of the show, selling tickets and building the audience? The referee certainly seems distracted: by Donald Trump, Charlie Sheen, the latest reality show — the list of serial obsessions is too long to enumerate here.

But whatever the cause, the referee appears not to notice that the Polluters and Ideologues are trampling all over the "rules" of democratic discourse. They are financing pseudoscientists whose job is to manufacture doubt about what is true and what is false; buying elected officials wholesale with bribes that the politicians themselves have made "legal" and can now be made in secret; spending hundreds of millions of dollars each year on misleading advertisements in the mass media; hiring four anti-climate lobbyists for every member of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. (Question: Would Michael Jordan have been a star if he was covered by four defensive players every step he took on the basketball court?)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
31. If it was all just about "feelings", I might agree,
but there are real "Issues & Policy" that are the basis for my dissatisfaction
with the leadership of the New Democrat Centrist Party.
The "Media" has very little to do with my position on The Issues,
which has been consistent since I joined the Party of FDR/LBJ 44 years ago.

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

Americas own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.

For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world."---FDR, 1944



The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. I agree, bvar but this is referring specifically to the focus of their coverage of Gore's essay;
which primarily targets the corporate media but is strangely omitted in their headlines and coverage.

This is an instance where the corporate media works to divide and conquer the Democrats to enable the Republicans and Al Gore called it before they did it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kall Donating Member (130 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
34. Not really
It's the Democrats that turn the Left against the Democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KurtNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
37. SOP: Separate the candidate from their base
Highly effective. They did the same thing to Gore by claiming that him flying on airplanes means he is "phony" on global warming.

These things are easy to spot because they usually involve someone on the right suddenly criticizing a Dem FROM THE LEFT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
39. Marking to read later....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demosincebirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
40. It works here on DU. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #40
53. I bought it. I'll ba far more skeptical from now on out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
randr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
42. Lets give ourselves more credit
As the Presidential election ramps up all players are going to stir the fires of accountability. All of us on the left need to get real and start to hold Obama's feet to the causes we think are important. Instead of whining about how Obama failed to meet his promises it is time to remind him what they are and what we expect.
It is the Commander in Chief that sails the ship of state and his inaction on important issues is like a great vacuum sucking the spirit out of America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #42
48. Spoken like a good Republican. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
43. You mean corporate media did what you did with this OP?
You know. Take an interview with Al Gore about environmental destruction and put a headline on it with a spin not in the story.

Your headline conflates your premise (that the media is out to get the Democratic party) with Al Gore's article. While your premise might be easily defended, your headline suggesting that that is what the article is about is not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #43
65. +1 --
Seems we are the only two who actually read the article --

page 2 -- and page 6 especially!!


In fact, I think we probably need an OP on Page 6 --

Gore is pretty much saying -- and I read it quickly so have to recheck --

that Obama is "paralyzed" by corporate pressure --

And that Congress's schedule is actually be made around their most important work --

attending Campaign Fund Raising events -- $$$$ -- !!!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #65
68. Gore actually gives a peek behind the DC curtains.
And people just want to put their spin to it without paying attention to what he is saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nichomachus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 04:17 PM
Response to Original message
44. Well, you have to give the Democrats some credit for helping turn the left against them
The media couldn't have done it all on their own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BREMPRO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
46. great post.. this REALLY pisses me off
healines unfairly build a strawman character of Obama..one that's not green enough, and trashes Gore for sounding like an anti-obama anti-democrat sore loser... controversy,sensationalism and character assassination- the tools of the Right/ corporate media..

TOOLS...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RhodaA Donating Member (177 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 05:31 PM
Response to Original message
49. Great Post - Thank you
And don't forget about the ChamberLeaks sockpuppet scandal (ThinkProgress).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemewhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
50. Good call.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
51. Great point. They do give Republicans a free pass over and over.
Pretending sometimes that we all know they're out to lunch. We all know Republicans are crazy so we don't have to challenge them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidwparker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
54. Peeps, I for one have been an O. critic. Disappointed like a
MF. But, after him either 1) getting Osama been Forgotten or 2) ending the Osama been Forgotten (Emanuel Goldstein) mystic, I for sure will be casting my vote for him in 2012. I may have to hold my nose, but I will be voting for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
58. Evidently you missed PAGE 6, where Gore discusses Obama ...
Edited on Thu Jun-23-11 09:57 PM by defendandprotect
and considering what Gore says on Page 6, I find little or nothing to criticize

in the way the original article was presented --

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/climate-of-de...



We have to look to leadership -- as Gore notes -- and it's not happening.

For those who want to really know what's going on with what Gore calls the

'CLIMATE CRISIS' -- go to PAGE 2 --

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/climate-of-de...



Meanwhile, all this daliance which seems to be centered on trying to spare Obama's

image, has left us with a great deal of time expended on trying to once again ....

ATTACK THE MESSENGER --


The subject is truly Global Warming which as Gore relates is a 'CLIMATE CRISIS' --

and that's what we should be discussing -- that and government "paralysis" --

as noted by Gore --


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #58
59. Gore Spends Most Of Time Discussing Facts Of Climate Change and Corporate Media
Yet, article after article portrays Gore's essay as an anti-Obama attack while ignoring most of the substance of Gore said, particularly how our media is failing to educate and inform the public.

Al Gore offers some criticisms of President Obama, but also offers some very generous praise of President Obama, which is generally ignored by the media. So, his article is portrayed as a "blast" of President Obama, which is a total mischaracterization.

What is amazing is that amazing uniformity of the news articles discussing Gore's article, which is why I encourage folks to read the article in full. I read it, and was outraged at just how different the article was from how it was portrayed in the media. Worse, shortly after the articles discussing Gore appeared, then the corporate media began another round of stories discussing how Gore's alleged trashing of President Obama is the latest example of the Left's dissatisfaction with President Obama.

Imagine that! Gore was once dismissed in 2001 as a corporatist by some on the "left," now he is the heart and soul of the left.

Finally, these mischracterizations once again impair the ability of the public to hold Republicans and our corporate media accountable. The narrative has been written. Blame Democrats. Give Republicans a free pass. Rinse and repeat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #59
61. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #59
64. Gore also criticizes Obama -- which is what the original OP correctly stated ...
Edited on Fri Jun-24-11 10:17 AM by defendandprotect
Gore is mainly discussing the CORPORATE CONTROLLED system of media --

and POLITICS ... while making clear that Obama is "paralyzed" --


We need less sensitivity here to criticism of Obama -- and more concentration

on the issues --

Trying to suppress criticism of Obama isn't addressing Global Warming --

Let me add that anyone still watching MSM gets what they deserve --

I'm continually shocked by people here still reporting on various of these programs --


What is amazing is that amazing uniformity of the news articles discussing Gore's article, which is why I encourage folks to read the article in full. I read it, and was outraged at just how different the article was from how it was portrayed in the media. Worse, shortly after the articles discussing Gore appeared, then the corporate media began another round of stories discussing how Gore's alleged trashing of President Obama is the latest example of the Left's dissatisfaction with President Obama.

On and on you go with but one note -- protect Obama!


Imagine that! Gore was once dismissed in 2001 as a corporatist by some on the "left," now he is the heart and soul of the left.

We don't know what Gore is except that he was a co-founder of the Koch Bros. DLC with Clinton --

and we've had 20 years of the Koch Bros/DLC being harbored within the party.

Gore resigned from it AFTER 2000 because he realized that their advice to STOP his populist

speeches had hurt him.

Gore also played a large role with Clinton in undoing 60 years of Welfare Guarantees --

giving Clinton the nod on it.

Gore has been supported lifelong by at least one oil company -- and the family has been heavily

invested in Occidental Petroleum.

Gore -- even after the death of his sister from lung cancer -- fought to keep the word "death"

off of cigarette packaging for the tobacco industry.

Gore would have been our second Koch Bros./DLC president -- and worse yet was bringing in what

looked like a major Trojan Horse -- Joe Liebermann. Certainly Gore worked with Lieberman

long enough to know exactly who he was -- and of his right wing views -- and religious

fanatacism.

No -- I wouldn't say that Gore is the darling of the left --

But Gore did win in 2000 --


Finally, these mischracterizations once again impair the ability of the public to hold Republicans and our corporate media accountable. The narrative has been written. Blame Democrats. Give Republicans a free pass. Rinse and repeat.

If you are suggesting that people are unfairly criticizing Obama and Democrats then you are

avoiding the issues and the debate which makes clear the public's dissatisfaction with both.

This isn't just about Republicans taking corporate money -- it's also about Demcorats being

pre-owned and pre-bribed by corporate money.

In fact, if you read Gore's comments you know that he's actually saying that the work of

Congress is being adjusted to allow for their main occupation -- raising corporate money$$$!!



Perhaps we need to take Page 6 now and have an honest discussion of it --

because I see that there is still a resistance to acknowledging what Gore actually said --

including re Obama's oil drilling --

subsidies for oil and coal --




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #58
63. kr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #58
67. Obama is an individual, most of Gore's message targets our dysfunctional institutions, primarily
Edited on Fri Jun-24-11 11:59 AM by Uncle Joe
the corporate media.

Page 1 Is exclusively devoted to that.



The referee — in this analogy, the news media — seems confused about whether he is in the news business or the entertainment business. Is he responsible for ensuring a fair match? Or is he part of the show, selling tickets and building the audience? The referee certainly seems distracted: by Donald Trump, Charlie Sheen, the latest reality show — the list of serial obsessions is too long to enumerate here.



Page 2 Is devoted to reflecting evidence that man made global warming is real, that it's happening before our eyes and there are severe costs.

Page 3 Offers solutions and Gore taking the corporate media to task again, he does this with no equivocation or qualifying unlike his criticism of Obama.




Continuing on our current course would be suicidal for global civilization. But the key question is: How do we drive home that fact in a democratic society when questions of truth have been converted into questions of power? When the distinction between what is true and what is false is being attacked relentlessly, and when the referee in the contest between truth and falsehood has become an entertainer selling tickets to a phony wrestling match?



Page 4 is again devoted to critiquing the current state of the media, its' high advertising cost, example of propaganda power and dysfunctional effect on our election campaigns and American society in general.



And the "referee" — the news media — looked the other way. Some, like Fox News, were hyperactive cheerleaders. Others were intimidated into going along by the vitriol heaped on any who asked inconvenient questions. (They know it; many now acknowledge it, sheepishly and apologetically.)



Page 5 Starts off with an example of how media propaganda impaired serious deliberations in the Senate during the run-up to war with Iraq, it takes the corporate media to task again, it critiques the Congress, presents a rational for human psychological denial of global warming climate change and qualifies Gore's page 6 critique of Obama by citing the challenges facing him, stating some of Obama's accomplishments and reminding the people that Obama inherited the disastrous legacy of Bush upon taking office.




These vulnerabilities, rooted in our human nature, are being manipulated by the tag-team of Polluters and Ideologues who are trying to deceive us. And the referee — the news media — is once again distracted. As with the invasion of Iraq, some are hyperactive cheerleaders for the deception, while others are intimidated into complicity, timidity and silence by the astonishing vitriol heaped upon those who dare to present the best evidence in a professional manner. Just as TV networks who beat the drums of war prior to the Iraq invasion were rewarded with higher ratings, networks now seem reluctant to present the truth about the link between carbon pollution and global warming out of fear that conservative viewers will change the channel — and fear that they will receive a torrent of flame e-mails from deniers.



Page 6 Starts off with the only critique of Obama by name in the entire essay, it takes the media to task again along with the fossil fuel burners, presents possible solutions, a call for Presidential leadership, critiques the Citizens United Decision by inference and finishes by warning of the severe consequences of denying reality.



Those who profit from the unconstrained pollution that is the primary cause of climate change are determined to block our perception of this reality. They have help from many sides: from the private sector, which is now free to make unlimited and secret campaign contributions; from politicians who have conflated their tenures in office with the pursuit of the people's best interests; and — tragically — from the press itself, which treats deception and falsehood on the same plane as scientific fact, and calls it objective reporting of alternative opinions.



Page 7 Starts off with a call for individual/grass roots action to pressure the political leaders, encourages participation in the political process, encourages us not to give up and cites an example of how this pressure has already worked, it finishes by stating the stakes both from a climatic point of view and of our democracy's ability to use reason.

In short the vast majority of this essay criticized the corporate media, which is as it should be because that is an ongoing institution, will last far longer than Obama's career and in its' current state of dysfunction poses a major threat to our democratic republic's ability to use reason, this is the greatest danger.

I will close with a final question how much of this "fourth estate" critique; which dominates this essay did the corporate media cover?




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #67
70. Think we're going to have to have a wider discussion of Page 6 and recommend more read it !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #70
71. I don't have anything against that so long as the other six pages are read as well.
I believe that's the best way to get a good perspective of the entire essay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #71
73. Certainly everyone should read page 2 -- where Gore discusses the "climate crisis" ...
if they want to understand what he is saying specifically about Obama --

and the references in the other article to those specific comments --

then it's page 6 --


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
66. That actually says more about the "left" than the media. And he's right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #66
69. The left doesn't control the corporate media and Gore's primary criticism is against the media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #69
72. Actually, what Gore is talking about is the reality of fascism taking over our government ...
Edited on Fri Jun-24-11 04:22 PM by defendandprotect
including our press -- the "bullying" is distinctively Goebbels style as he

is reciting it --

though he is not actually using that word, it is what he is describing --


he's also making clear how fascism has undermined our experiment with democracy and

created a DYSFUNCTIONAL GOVERNMENT which is preventing elected officials from acting

in the public interest -- he comments on Obama being "paralyzed" -- and he is not only

referencing the press -- he is discussing DYSFUNCTIONAL GOVERNMENT --

AND PRIMARILY HOW CORPORATE $$$ BOUGHT CANDIDATES AND ELECTED OFFICIALS AND PUT THEM IN PLACE.

And bought pseudo-scientists -- etal.


Read it kind of quickly so don't mean that to be a direct quote --

Will re-read it again later -- and presumably resume these comments then --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #72
74. Yes but as the original title and bulk of the Rolling Stone Essay alludes to


Climate of Denial

Can science and the truth withstand the merchants of poison?



This ties in with Gore's analogy of comparing the media to "professional wrestling referees" more intent on "selling entertainment" than judging or reporting right from wrong and truth from falsehood.


He does take on the dysfunctional government but the root cause or enabler according to Al Gore is our corrupted or dysfunctional public square aka; the media.

P.S. If you've never watched professional wrestling you may not make the connection but the referees in that so called sport are the pinnacle of corruption, dysfunction or just planned incompetence, take your pick, they are always looking the wrong way when the bad guy wrestlers and/or their manager is doing shit, whether using chairs, wooden shoes or flame balls, this excites the audience and when the good guys have finally had enough and start fighting back perhaps bending the rules, the referees have eagle eyes to catch them. It's all a big soap opera.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 02:34 AM
Response to Reply #74
76. The root cause is candidates willing to sell themselves for corporate money ....
Edited on Sat Jun-25-11 02:36 AM by defendandprotect
and basically selling our government which has been going on for more than

40 years now -- which Ralph Nader, btw, was pointing out 40 years ago!


THAT led to control over our government agencies by corporations --

distorting their very purpose and intent --

and needless to say, the selling out of our Congress moved the Congress to the

corporate right -- thereby unleashing the corporate crime wave we are suffering.


Granted Nixon began the attacks on what was left of our free press -- but it

was Congress failing to enforce anti-trust laws and collusion between both parties

to deregulate capitalism and to break the tax code for the benefit of elites

which allowed the complete takeover of our press by a corporate press.



Again -- think the Gore article has a lot to contribute to discussions here and

we need to take more time with it --

Didn't have time to reread it tonight -- perhaps by tomorrow night.

It's a much neglected article, imo.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #76
82. Which would be greatly reduced if the public square weren't dysfunctional.
That's the point of Gore's essay, it's well worth reading and I hope you have done so.

The very nature of television being a mass, top down, one way form of communication and the high expense of advertising magnifies the kind of corruption, that you're referring to, essentially turning money into speech.

I believe the Internet will be the mid to long term solution and I also believe Gore feels the same way, but it's not there yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 07:27 AM
Response to Original message
77. The Democratic party doesn't need the media to turn the left against it. The Democratic party
does a fine job of doing so all by themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #77
80. "Blame Democrats and Give Republicans a Free Pass."
Edited on Sat Jun-25-11 10:16 PM by TomCADem
The narrative lives. Gore writes a fine article discussing how the corporate media poisons the debate and obscures the facts by portraying the facts of climate change as mere partisan debate and promoting a false neutrality. In his article, Gore notes that his comments will likely be taken out of context. The corporate media then happily obliges, and portrays Gore's article as a bashing of President Obama, and an example of how the left is dissatisfied with President Obama, even though that has nothing to do with the point of Gore's essay. Then, you respond to this whole thread by blaming the Democrats on DU, Democratic Underground, and giving the media a free pass.

Are you seriously suggesting that the bulk of media coverage over Gore's article does not misrepresent what his article is all about in an effort to try to push a Left is against Obama narrative?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #80
81. I can't speak for the entire left end of the spectrum, but the Democratic party left
the left end of the party decades ago. Speaking for myself, I will no longer support a candidate that doesn't take strong stances in my beliefs.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 01st 2014, 02:32 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC