Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Gatekeepers: Why even (phony) "left" media silent on stolen election.

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 » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
Amaryllis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-05 09:37 AM
Original message
Gatekeepers: Why even (phony) "left" media silent on stolen election.
Edited on Sun May-08-05 09:39 AM by Amaryllis

Originally posted by Gettysberg.

This explains more about the silence of even supposedly "left" media and orgs such as MoveOn (note where Soros fits in here). I don't know the source of the info on this chart,or how accurate it is. Anyone else know? If it is accurate, it would explain a lot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-05 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
1. as I recall, the last thread that discussed this reality . . .
got tombstoned . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Amaryllis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-05 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. What caused it to get tombstoned, and I'm not sure what you mean by
"this reality." Please clarify.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-05 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. I have no idea why it was tombstoned . . .
all I know is that there was a thread discussing this article . . .

Regulated Resistance: Pt. 2 - The Gatekeepers of the So-Called Left

that I responded to . . . when I went to check my posts, the entire thread had been removed . . . fyi, my contribution was to point out that there was a Part One to the article, i.e. . .

Regulated Resistance: Is it possible to change the system when you are the system?

what I mean by "this reality" is best summed up in the opening passage of the first article I cited above . . . the bold emphasis is mine . . .

"Last February United for Peace and Justice, the largest representative coalition within the American "anti-war movement", emerged from their second annual Assembly with a 2005 "action plan" that effectively caged the "anti-war" debate exclusively within the Iraq conflict to achieve partisan ends on behalf of the pro-war Democratic Party and their Neoliberal corporate benefactors. Their "action plan" refused to address any of the core issues of US Foreign and Defense policy, which are the root causes of a pervading culture of war and militarism that has taken over the nation in the years since WWII.

"These decisions are part of a larger pattern of "regulated resistance", a system by which dissent is carefully managed and constrained by self, overt, or covert censorship; denial-based-psychology; fear of personal or professional criticism and reprisal; and pressure from powers above including elected officials and those establishment foundations which flood millions into the not-for-profit activist sector.

This establishment money, and the access it grants, has caused many ostensible resistance leaders to suddenly and dramatically abandon long-held ideological positions and shift their behavior towards doing what can clearly be seen as the bidding of those in power whose views and values are in direct contravention to the established mores of peace and justice movements throughout history.

"These "resistance leaders" of the "Left" act as "Gatekeepers"influential "progressive" figures who use their resources and visibility to regulate the debate, tactics, and rhetoric of the "anti-war" and other "progressive" movements."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Stanchetalarooni Donating Member (838 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-05 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
2. So this is what Nader was talking about in comparing the Dems and Repugs.
Dems and Repugs do share many common goals some of which are incideous and hideous. They share many of the same sources of cash flow which makes their machines possible.
This helps me to understand the pendulum metaphor whereby the real power brokers are always on top. The angle of the arc is the same at the top of the pendulum as well as at the bottom however, the distance traveled is minute at the top whereas at the bottom it is so terribly great.
Viewing th swing of the pendulum from left to right or right to left change appears so terribly massive at the bottom of the pendulum whereas at the top it appears as if there is no difference at all.
The beauty of a two party system is that the swing of the pendulum is so very predictable. So much so that the entities at the top can literally BANK on it. Those at the bottom at the mercy of it. Perhaps this can not be helped as it is the way that the species is made....
.........we have not a tri-cameral or quad-cameral brains. We have bi-cameral brains. All issues are reduced to either this or that using one side of the brain or the other, whichever the individual is dominant in. Very apparent to some. Oblivious to most
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-05 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. I get it - I know what you mean
Fact is, power is in the hands of the republicans and the democrats. Those are the facts. If you want to make any difference, you need to be in one of those parties. Yes, the dems have some shady shit happening. Power corrupts. Sucks but until we get IRV, that is simply the case. Please check out Let's rock the boat!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-05 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
3. Edward Bernays, father of PR, said we can't handle too much choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-05 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
4. How do you go after pivot of pendulum?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FreepFryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-05 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Remove the overwhelming stink of money in campaigns/administrations.
The problem as I see it is the capitalization of the pendulum.

We need to reduce the role of big business in the electoral process, from top to bottom.

And I think we all know the degree of challenge and endurance required for the people to wrest control back from big-business and the 'upper class' in favor of health and safety for all Americans.

We're in it for the long haul.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-05 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
7. yep, they're all in on it
Amy Goodman, Z Magazine, Howard Zinn they're all just Carlyle Group stooges.

the only people we can trust are Bev Harris, seventhson, and Wayne Madsen.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Blue Shark Donating Member (225 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-09-05 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #7
14. Too Bad our guys...
...are all lunatics...

...Calling Jeff Fisher...Anybody?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
pgh_dem Donating Member (584 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-09-05 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #7
15. Don't forget your sarcasm smiley =)
These 'connections' are not determinative.

However, such crazy ideas gain credibility by the indisputable fact that *in public*, the above progressive organizations (MoveOn, TrueMajority, DFA) have truly been silent on the issue of election fraud. I'm sure it can be argued they're all 'working behind the scenes', or 'getting their ducks in a row', or 'waiting for some concrete evidence to come in'.

Unfortunately, the simplest explanation is that they don't know or don't care about election fraud in 2004. Suggesting that they are complicit is not only unsubstantiated, it is counterproductive.

Folks who believe the election was fraudulent should aim their fire at the people they think did the stealing. I count those progressive organizations out as 'uninterested', and am just happy they don't actively oppose investigation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
GettysbergII Donating Member (664 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-10-05 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #15
16.  The 'crazy idea' is to believe that the ruling class is not trying to
Edited on Tue May-10-05 01:45 AM by GettysbergII
coopt/control any 'progressive' organizations or media for their own purposes. To not take a good hard look at where any orgnization gets its funding is sheer naivity in my estimation.

Let's for example take George Soros. He's a major player in the Council on Foreign Relations which is the premier ruling class stealth organization in the county but the progressive community views him as a friend in the sense that he's a 'enemy of our enemy'(the Bush Administration and the Neo-Cons.) But that doesn't mean he isn't a big time promoter of globalization and the third-worldization of the American working class. He's just a kinder gentler plantation owner as far as I'm concerned. He's a major funder of and many other 'progressive' organizations and while I wouldn't say he 'owns' those organizations, I have no doubt that he's quite capable of applying all kinds of direct and indirect pressure to all manner of 'progressive' organizations whenever he desires just as he can influence all manner of other organizations he's involved with. As Bob Dylan said, "Money don't talk, it swears".

According to Wikidepia
Soros vs. Bush

For many years, Soros did not involve himself greatly in US politics, but that changed under President George W. Bush. In an interview with The Washington Post on November 11, 2003, Soros said that removing Bush from office was the "central focus of my life" and "a matter of life and death" for which he would willingly sacrifice his entire fortune. Soros gave $3 million to the Center for American Progress, committed $5 million to, while he and his friend Peter Lewis each gave America Coming Together $10 million. (All were groups that worked to support Democrats in the 2004 election.) On September 28, 2004 he dedicated more money to the campaign and kicked off his own multi-state tour with a speech: Why We Must Not Re-elect President Bush ( delivered at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, during the 2003-2004 election cycle, Soros donated $23,581,000 to various 527 Groups dedicated to defeating President George Bush. Bush was subsequently reelected to a second term as president on November 2, 2004.

Soros has been criticized for his large donations, as he also pushed for the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 which was intended to ban "soft money" contributions to federal election campaigns. Soros has responded that his donations to unaffiliated organizations do not raise the same corruption issues as donations directly to the candidates or political parties.

Ironically, Soros's Harken Energy bailed out Bush in 1986 by buying his ailing oil venture, Spectrum 7.

His most recent book, The Bubble of American Supremacy, was published in January 2004 ( <5> (

The Phoenix Group

On the weekend of April 16, 2005, Soros met with 70 likeminded millionaires and billionaires to discuss strategy for the creation of left-leaning thinktanks to compete with conservative institutions such as the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute and the Leadership Institute. Former Bill Clinton Commerce Department official Rob Stein's Democracy Alliance will act as a clearinghouse and channel funds to organizations new and old, like David Brock's Media Matters for America and John Podesta's Center for American Progress.

Participants in the meeting in Scottsdale, Arizona have begun to refer to themselves as the Phoenix Group. <6>

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
GettysbergII Donating Member (664 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-05 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
8. I believe Bob Feldman's work is the predominant source for the chart
Edited on Sun May-08-05 06:07 PM by GettysbergII
Here's some of his articles.

Keep in mind that all he is charting is the flow of money. There are many other kinds of influence as well. I imagine most people working in the leftist media never realize they're on a leash. I'm sure George Soros actually thinks of himself as 'progressive' as well in comparison to the rest of the plantation owners. But three issues I believe the entire ruling class are unified on are: 1)Democracy, other than as a flea circus, is not for everyone. 2)The Oil Wars must go on 3)The masses must be controlled through the Patriot Act and other acts that strip our political rights.

Two of the best recent articles I've read that delineate the way the elite control our democradcy are written by Laurance Shoup, a roundly recognized and respected scholar on the CFR, for Z Magazine:

Bush, Kerry, and the CFR

Behind the Bipartisan Drive Toward War

Oh by the way, did you know that both Katherine Harris and J. Kenneth Blackwell are members of the Council on Foreign Relations. So is Jesse Jackson, by the way, which always made me wonder if he was on a leash too leading the challenge to the electoral vote.

I think we have to realize that no movement in modern times is going to be able to escape all connection to the elite money, organizations and influence. But we need to be very intentional in not allowing the elite to dominant or subvert our movements, or our organizations, or our political parties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jen4clark Donating Member (812 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-05 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
9. Some good news
One of the links from the home page of Left Gatekeepers is to "links" to "true left" media sites! Not many of them, but so happy to see Consortium News on there! I just heard yesterday that General Clark has agreed to do a fundraiser for them! I don't have any details of what he's doing but I was thrilled to see them on this list!

I've had doubts about a lot of the "activist" websites for a while now. Their silence on the stolen election, on the 9/11 lies, on so many things is just deafening! If you go to the homepage of Left Gatekeepers, there's lots of good articles linked there as well.

Thanks for this post Amarylis! Disturbing, but also reassuring to know I'm not as nuts as everyone (my family!) thinks I am! At least I guess that's reassuring? Maybe it would have been better that I was just nuts! :crazy:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-09-05 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Where is this one?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Amaryllis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-09-05 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. Thanks, Jen.
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 Sat Jul 20th 2024, 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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