Does the corporate media want war with Iran?
Hmmm, just who owns the media anyway?
Same corporations that build war toys, for the most part. Can you say self serving corporate entities?
Why isn't this investigated and reported?

While on the topic of links... JibJab did a pretty funny Obama bit in the new video at JibJab.com called "Time for Some Campaigning." Hope I'm not too behind the times and this didn't come out months ago.

On the excons website...

Ted Sampley shouldn't be used as reference, the guy is a fraud and a crook. He most likely helped Rove and the Bush campaign in South Carolina in 2000. This is a guy who makes his money by bringing up the POW/MIA issues, he isn't a reputable source.

"Journalism is dead, no truth just pander"

What happened to showing the truth to America?
More Coverage on
*The Bush Admin (why he should be impeached!)
*The War
*World issues- Dar-fur, Zimbabwe
*Guantanamo
*Soldiers
*Torture
*FISA (MSM should have been more concerned about the violation of our rights, then Jessie Jackson and the "nuts"
*Yes they say Obama is the new kid but John is so called experienced but why is he the worst candidate i have seen.
If Obama had made his mistakes it would be game over

Fox on the run

"I'm struck by what I think is a double standard in the questions that particularly Karl is being asked here," [Chris] Wallace said. "I don't understand why it is that if Congress and the White House are having a fight over executive power, that should any way constrain an independent news organization's decision about whom to have on its payroll. I question whether if it were a conservative Congress that had subpoenaed James Carville, let's say, whether you'd be asking CNN why they're [employing] James Carville."

This would be funny were it not demonstrative of the contempt in which the Constitution is held by mainstream conservatives today, whether represented by the White House or Fox News. Wallace does not bother to make his case on constitutional grounds, or even to defend Rove's allegedly unlawful behavior. Notice he simply casts aspersions on Congress because of the alleged ideology of the people in control. No less offensive, however, but equally illustrative, was the anti-Semitic Photoshopping of the photos of New York Times reporters on one Fox News show.

The idea that Fox is a news network, rather than a particularly ugly propaganda network, is getting funnier and funnier among those who have either not drunk the Kool-Aid or cashed the check. Read all about it here.

Tim Russert did not think it proper to ask Scooter Libby any news-like questions when he called to complain about Chris Matthews. David Gregory thinks it fine to serve as Karl Rove's backup singer, and Ron Fournier thinks the problem with the below item is that it is overly "breezy." How about the fact that our media poohbahs apparently think it is their jobs to back up -- literally -- the right-wing zealots who deliberately mislead our nation and trash our Constitution rather than report on them? (And when you think about the backstory involving both Tillman and Lynch, it becomes particularly tragicomic ...)

Buried in the 50-page report on Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch released today by the House Oversight Committee, is a priceless quote from none other than the new head of the AP's Washington Bureau, Ron Fournier.

Straight from page 21 of the report:

Karl Rove exchanged e-mails about Pat Tillman with Associated Press reporter Ron Fournier, under the subject line "H-E-R-O." In response to Mr. Fournier's e-mail, Mr. Rove asked, "How does our country continue to produce men and women like this," to which Mr.Fournier replied, "The Lord creates men and women like this all over the world. But only the great and free countries allow them to flourish. Keep up the fight."

http://mediamatters.org/altercation/?f=h_column

john j @ 9:

...Buried in the 50-page report on Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch released today by the House Oversight Committee, is a priceless quote from none other than the new head of the AP's Washington Bureau, Ron Fournier.

Straight from page 21 of the report:

Karl Rove exchanged e-mails about Pat Tillman with Associated Press reporter Ron Fournier, under the subject line "H-E-R-O." In response to Mr. Fournier's e-mail, Mr. Rove asked, "How does our country continue to produce men and women like this," to which Mr.Fournier replied, "The Lord creates men and women like this all over the world. But only the great and free countries allow them to flourish. Keep up the fight."

http://mediamatters.org/altercation/?f=h_column

And then there's this...

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2008/03/08/911_att...

9/11 attacks harm First Amendment
March 8, 2008
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The shadow of the Sept. 11 terror attacks is eclipsing press freedom and other constitutional safeguards in the United States, Associated Press President and CEO Tom Curley said Thursday.

"What has become clear in the aftermath of 9/11 is how much expediency trumps safeguards," Curley said during the annual dinner of the Radio and Television News Directors Foundation.

"Congress steps back from its constitutional role of executive oversight. Civilian oversight of the military wanes. A Justice Department interprets laws in ways that extend police powers. More drastically, prisons are established in places where government or military operatives circumvent due process or control trials," Curley said in accepting the foundation's First Amendment Leadership Award.

"It's at moments like these when a free press matters most," he said.

Curley was selected for his role in pushing for more openness in government and for emphasizing reporting on First Amendment issues. That includes efforts by the AP to establish the Sunshine in Government Initiative, a news media coalition that presses for strengthening Freedom of Information laws and for greater government openness....

Terrible @ 12:

See the thing with the The Daily Dish cartoon is that it's actually too close to accurate.

Indeed, what irony?

I read Jon Swift's piece yesterday and liked it, of course, but I agree with Mike Gerber on some of the reasons the cover ain't very effective as humor. The New Yorker has every right to run it, and yes, the reaction has been overblown, and some of the suggestions to "improve" its satire have been horrible, but I also don't blame Somerby and Digby, among others, for their concerns.

I don't trust anything the Bush Badministration does or says anymore. I'd like to think that The Shrub is looking for a real legacy in ending the stand-off that he himself caused, by trashing nearly 10 years of back-door diplomacy with his Axis of Evil garbage. Whatr's more likely is that this is just another machination and, after a false show of extending the olive branch, "negotiations" will fall apart, triggering a crisis as an October surprise. I hate to be so cynical, but eight years of living in neo-con hell tends to do that to you.

Peter G @ 18:

I'm not sure what I was supposed to get from that AIPAC thing. Beyond showing that lobby to be well organized and effective in advancing their viewpoint what was the point?

Well, I don't know about you, but I would prefer Congress focus on what is in the best interest of this country.

What everybody in this country needs to know about AIPAC is that it is an organization of bloodthirsty, war-loving neoconservatives whose "viewpoint" is that the U.S. should be permanently bogged down in Southwest Asia and the Middle East fighting idiotic wars that are in no way in our national interest on behalf of the neoconservative government of Israel, a foreign country (even though AIPAC is not required to register as a foreign lobby).

AIPAC is the organization that gives multiple standing ovations to evil characters like Pastor John "bring on the end times by nuking Iran" Hagee and Dick Cheney.

Despite the Director General of the IAEA stating recently that there is no evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapons program, and Iran as a country hasn't attacked another country in hundreds of years, AIPAC is pushing the U.S. government to attack Iran as soon as possible (in other words, launch a war of aggression, which is the supreme crime against humanity according to the Nuremberg standard).

AIPAC is also one of the main impediments to getting the U.S. out of Iraq.

AIPAC is not just another lobby, though. What other lobby is known as "the lobby" in the halls of Congress?

When Fortune magazine asked members of Congress and their staffs in 1997 to list the most powerful lobbies in Washington, AIPAC came in second behind AARP. A National Journal study in March 2005 placed AIPAC in second place (tied with AARP) in Washington's "muscle rankings."

Proof of the power of and usurpation of Congress by this foreign lobby is that AIPAC-supported measures routinely receive 400 votes of the 435 member House and up to 99 of a 100 in the Senate.

AIPAC is also just the tip of the iceberg. There are more than 300 organizations in the U.S., including several prominent Washington "think tanks", that are engaged in similar lobbying efforts on behalf of the government of Israel.

"It's almost politically suicidal...for a member of the Congress who wants to seek reelection to take any stand that might be interpreted as anti-policy of the [neo] conservative Israeli government."
–Jimmy Carter, Feb. 2007

"You can't have an Israel policy other than what AIPAC gives you around here."
–Senator Ernest Hollings (D-SC), as he was leaving office in 2004

"If you are a candidate and you get the pro-Israel label from AIPAC, the money will start coming in from contributors all over the country."
–Steven Weiss, Center for Responsive Politics

"There will be some Democratic chairmen who may not share all of my views...on Israel....They will not be chairing committees dealing with Israel and the Middle East."
–Henry Waxmen (D-CA), after the 2006 election.

"My colleagues think AIPAC is a very, very powerful organization that is ruthless, and very, very alert. Eighty percent of the senators here roll their eyes on some of the votes. They know that what they're doing isn't what they really believe is right, but why fight on a situation where they're liable to get beat up on?"
–A senator to a Washington Post reporter in 1991, speaking on condition of anonymity.