Here is a quote from the Washington Times

[ljb]

A senior Republican senator said, "The message coming out of the White House is that we'll fix Social Security by raising your taxes and cutting your retirement benefits and, to get something passed, we'll forget about the personal retirement accounts we promised."

The senator said that is like telling voters, "Never vote for Republicans again -- we lie."
Youch they are turning on their masters!

[Tom]

Did the Times hire that liar reporter back? Or has Uncle Dan gotten a retirement job????

[boxcar]

While on the topic of Social(ist) (In)Security, Chuck Hagel recently has [seriously] proposed "fixing" the sytem's problem's by raising the retirement age by one year. Clueless as they come... :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[ljb]

While on the topic of Social(ist) (In)Security, Chuck Hagel recently has [seriously] proposed "fixing" the sytem's problem's by raising the retirement age by one year. Clueless as they come... :rolleyes:

Boxcar
Easy does it Boxcar, I have heard rumors that Bushco may just opt for a similiar type salvation of the social security program.
This line is just filler to avoid the dreaded one line smart ass remark category.
Ps.
I think Tom has one of them in this thread.

[boxcar]

ljb wrote:

Easy does it Boxcar, I have heard rumors that Bushco may just opt for a similiar type salvation of the social security program.

So...what are you getting at? Have you so soon forgotten that I'm not a Bush groupie? :rolleyes:

This line is just filler to avoid the dreaded one line smart ass remark category.

Why are you telling me this? I've never accused you of being smart, and come to think of it... an ass either. :lol:

I think Tom has one of them in this thread.

Keeping score, are we? Looking for PA to appoint you as co-moderator?
:lol:

Boxcar

[ljb]

ljb wrote:

Easy does it Boxcar, I have heard rumors that Bushco may just opt for a similiar type salvation of the social security program.

So...what are you getting at? Have you so soon forgotten that I'm not a Bush groupie? :rolleyes:

This line is just filler to avoid the dreaded one line smart ass remark category.

Why are you telling me this? I've never accused you of being smart, and come to think of it... an ass either. :lol:

I think Tom has one of them in this thread.

Keeping score, are we? Looking for PA to appoint you as co-moderator?
:lol:

Boxcar

Boxcar,
Glad to hear you are not a supporter of Bush. I actually expected this as his support is waning fast amongst those who think for themselves. The smart ass remark has to do with a criteria i think the board administrator his implemented. You don't have to worry about this rule as you couldn't say good morning in less the 18 paragraphs.
Keeping score ? No is just like to highlight the board administrators bias as often as possible.

[boxcar]

ljb wrote:

Glad to hear you are not a supporter of Bush. I actually expected this as his support is waning fast amongst those who think for themselves.

You're a wee bit behind the curve, sir. I was pretty critical of Bush early on during his first term; for I have been thinking for myself for quite some time now.

The smart ass remark has to do with a criteria i think the board administrator his implemented.

What do you have against civility?

You don't have to worry about this rule as you couldn't say good morning in less the 18 paragraphs.

Got that right, since it is already 1:03 P.M. where I am.

Keeping score ? No is just like to highlight the board administrators bias as often as possible.

Yeah sure. PA is the most unfair person to ever come down the 'pike. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[hcap]

Not Necessarily the News

http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/21493/

"The people like Karen Ryan, the public relations professionals who usually, by the way, come out of journalism and go into P.R. because there's a lot more money to be made, say, "Hey, you know, we're P.R. people. Of course, we produce these. It's up to the news directors and producers to label them as provided footage."

[hcap]

All time high by bush on government propaganda.
Yes, even more than Clinton. A lot MORE.
(just in case the inevitable "yeah so did clinton" comment is churned up).

http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/21485/

An ironic twist...

"Office of B.S.: The Office of Broadcasting Services is a branch of the State Department "

"President Bush took office, the White House has spent at least $254 million on these fake segments and other public relations ploys to spread positive propaganda about his policies."

"In a now-infamous segment by the Department of Health and Human Services, a PR official named Karen Ryan posed as a reporter interviewing then-Secretary Tommy Thompson. (Her role in the well-rehearsed spot was to give Thompson "better, snappier answers" to her pre-approved questions.) The Government Accountability Office found the agency "designed and executed" her segments "to be indistinguishable from news stories produced by private sector television news organizations."

[PaceAdvantage]

Hmmmmm, this begs the question....."Why, if past administrations also produced these 'fake news' segments, are we only hearing about this sort of tactic now?"

[hcap]

PaceAdvantage: Hmmmmm, this begs the question....."Why, if past administrations also produced these 'fake news' segments, are we only hearing about this sort of tactic now?"No question past administrations practiced propaganda. My posts about the spanish american war and the philipine american war illustrate this. The problem is the level of sophistication.

When Orwell wrote "1984", I believe he accurately predicted the how the media would be enlisted. "2004" is the new working title. And things will only get worse. The manipulation of public "will" is becoming more of a science and less of an art. In fact, the justification of propaganda is more insidious than its practice. The ends justifies the means is the road to buying in to the party line.

"It is only a matter of presenting the truth to people in a way that they will be able to understand. A propaganda that lies proves that it has a bad cause. It cannot be successful in the long run. A good propaganda will always come along that serves a good cause. But propaganda is still necessary if a good cause is to succeed. A good idea does not win simply because it is good. It must be presented properly if it is to win. But a good idea is itself the best propaganda. Such propaganda is successful without being obnoxious. It depends on its nature, not its methods. It works without being noticed. Its goals are inherent in its nature. Since it is almost invisible, it is effective and powerful. A good cause will lose to a bad one if it depends only on its rightness, while the other side uses the methods of influencing the masses. We are for example convinced that we fought the war for a good cause, but that was not enough. The world should also have known that our cause was good."

...Goebbels at Nuremberg — 1934 by Joseph Goebbels

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb59.htm

[sq764]

All time high by bush on government propaganda.
Yes, even more than Clinton. A lot MORE.
(just in case the inevitable "yeah so did clinton" comment is churned up).

http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/21485/

An ironic twist...

"Office of B.S.: The Office of Broadcasting Services is a branch of the State Department "

"President Bush took office, the White House has spent at least $254 million on these fake segments and other public relations ploys to spread positive propaganda about his policies."

"In a now-infamous segment by the Department of Health and Human Services, a PR official named Karen Ryan posed as a reporter interviewing then-Secretary Tommy Thompson. (Her role in the well-rehearsed spot was to give Thompson "better, snappier answers" to her pre-approved questions.) The Government Accountability Office found the agency "designed and executed" her segments "to be indistinguishable from news stories produced by private sector television news organizations."
Maybe if you stopped stuffing yuor head with crap from Altersnet.com, you would see what the rest of the world does..

Open up your mind for once.

[ljb]

Unfortunately we have reached a point where the media cannot be trusted. With the press in bed with the troops in Iraq and the pr being put out by our government the only hope for any knowledge is searching out the truth on the internet and that is near impossible.
Only when the media accepts the fact that their real responsibility is to the public will they gain public respect.