"Chavez did not elaborate, but said some broadcasters and newspapers are conspiring to spark unrest..."

Yeah, cause shutting down one station sure as hell made things super-peaceful.

and yes......chavez is also now trying to censure cnn........hey maybe this guy aint so bad afterall.....

according to bloomberg news........the information minister from venezuela has asked for an investigation about lies about chavez and the demonstrations last week as well as something about possible alqaida conncections.....they even have said that the 1981 attempt to kill the pope when they ran scenes from......constituted an effort to incite people against chavez......someone will have to explain how that one works to me, but the point is........just by looking at the people that libs put on pedastals is enough to reject them in any election......chavez, castro, kerry, edwards.......

"just by looking at the people that libs put on pedastals is enough to reject them in any election......chavez, castro, kerry, edwards......."


Don't forget the dismembered fetuses who cannot vote Dem now. The main reason they want the illegals here is to replace all the voters they killed.

If they really did try to have him killed then obviously he should shut the station down.

"if"

DOGMAN

Sarvkov is Niceville?

"Information Minister Willian Lara on Monday accused Globovision of encouraging an attempt on Chavez's life by broadcasting the chorus of a salsa tune -- "Have faith, this doesn't end here" -- along with footage of the 1981 assassination attempt against Pope John Paul II."

Yeah, I'm sure these rightwingers around here wouldn't have any problem if CBS did this to Bush.

"Sarvkov is Niceville?"

Yes. No matter who many times he's banned, he keeps sneaking in with a different ID. The guy needs to get a life.

Didn't Chavez try to overthrow the govt himself in the early 1990s when he was just a loser Colonel? Now he talks about democratically elected govts as if he were Thomas Jefferson or something. Give me a break.

Because we don't support our CIA murdering Chavez or helping to overthrow the democratically elected president of a sovereign nation then we libs are guilty of putting people on "pedestals."
Gee, I wonder where the outrage from all these righties was when the wealthy ran Venezuela as a feudal nation??
Their selective outrage feels good to them because it takes attention away from the illegal invasion of another sovereign nation and the disaster that has resulted. It is just too funny to watch righties worry about Chavez while King Bush conducts his illegal war for profit. Oh, but they will say...."gotta fighte em over there so we don't have to fight em over here"....never being smart enough to question the logic of that stupid statement.

He can shut down CNN Clinton news network

"Sarvkov is Niceville?"

Yes. No matter who many times he's banned, he keeps sneaking in with a different ID. The guy needs to get a life."

Baby Jesus will shut him down once He figures out Gnubsy's clever plan.

Gnubsy has Him fooled at the moment, you know, breaking rules that any good atheist wouldn't think of dishonoring.

"Yeah, I'm sure these rightwingers around here wouldn't have any problem if CBS did this to Bush."


You have no problem with Chavez doing it. So are you accusing them of being like you?

You're right.

Close CNN, the liers are killing troops

He can shut down CNN Clinton news network

Posted by jjdj1187 at 2007-05-30 10:06 AM | Reply


in that case we may have to reevaluate this chavez guy....

]
and danni weighs in with her.....beaten down by 'the man' rhetoric and its the wealthy....blah blah blah.....damn girl,....there has to be a boat or two making its way for your shangrila of socialism........thought about getting a ticket and you wont have to be so UNHAPPY LIVING HERE......( see other site.)....
and just look at the crawfishin goin on with the lefties when a hero of theirs shows who he really is.........and they accuse us of hypocracy......
sometimes this shit is just TOO EASY.....yuk yuk

Bill, I think you need to speak for yourself, yet again. For someone that posts from midnight until 920 PM (over 19 hours), getting a life has new meaning. With your onsensical whining.....go bother Lisa. She adores the attention.


Posted by Bill_OReilly at 2007-05-29 12:08 AM


Posted by Bill_OReilly at 2007-05-29 09:20 PM









BTW, GO GATORS!

Sorry, cannot use the N word here.

()onsensical.

Hey Niceville, you obsessive psycho, a few one liners during the course of a day when I check in on Drudge does not amount to posting for 19 hours.

Actually, any good atheist would be embarrassed to be found breaking the rules of a Membership once he had been thrown out.

They generally have more integrity than that, and are less willing to be widely known as a hypocrite and liar.

Much less the embarrassment of actually NEEDING to post here, lol!

He's such a nice man.... and he can spot the devil just like that.

"Now he talks about democratically elected govts as if he were Thomas Jefferson or something. "

Yeah, but unlike Jefferson, Chavez doesn't own slaves.

Chavez doesn't own slaves.

No, but Nicey does have that after-school job as his Cabana Boy.

Chavez is paranoid. The Russians are the same way, accusing any foreigner they don't like of being spies for the west. Same goes for Iran.

Chavez has taken advantage of a real event, an attempted coup, to blow things out of proportion, kind of like Bush with 9/11, a real event is used to gain political power at the expense of individual freedom.

You Liberals are inconsistent, you criticize Bush and yet applaud Chavez for doing similar things. It seems to me Liberals are not so concerned about individual rights, they just want to be the ones in charge of denying them, like in the "good old days" of FDR and the Japanese concentration camps.

It's funny how the Left which embraces Chavez, also regularly supports censorship in our media -- and would fully support the shitting sown talk radio, FOX news if they could.

It's funny how the Left which embraces Chavez, also regularly supports censorship in our media -- and would fully support the shutting down talk radio, FOX news if they could.

Yes Bowa, these are the wonderful people that brought such nice things as the "fairness doctrine." They would support shtting down Fox News, but I am sure they would get mad if the NYT was shut down for treason.

"Chavez is paranoid."

Yeah, he didn't really get kidnapped by the military and held for 2 days. It was just a dream.

If someone commits treason or other crimes via their broadcasted network, why not aggressively prosecute those involved and leave it at that? Why take over the TV station and replace it with one run by the government? The people who committed the so-called threatening acts could just go work at another station, so how does this adequately address the problem?

Joe, I think you hit the nail right on the head here. I doubt Liberals will understand the concept you are trying to express though, the rule of law.

"Yeah, he didn't really get kidnapped by the military and held for 2 days. It was just a dream."

So he is psychologically traumatized by what happened to him, ok, fine.

You see, this is why Rudy Giulliana should not be president, as we saw in the debate, he is alwo traumatized and would do all kinds of crazy things while in power, just like Chavez. He needs profesional help.

"The people who committed the so-called threatening acts could just go work at another station, so how does this adequately address the problem?"

Because every other station is now on notice that he'll shut them down if they piss him off. So they will not only avoid hiring trouble makers, they'll be purging their own ranks of anyone who could be perceived as offensive to Chavez.

Chavez knows what he's doing. Anyone who says "its just one station" is pretending that these things happen in a vacuum. They don't. Chavez put the media on notice to get with the program or find another line of work.

""You Liberals are inconsistent, you criticize Bush and yet applaud Chavez for doing similar things.""

Er...when did Chavez involve himself in a coup in the United STates???
Us libs are sick and tired of right wing presidents using the CIA to overthrow governments, murder, kidnap, etc. in S. America. Hugo Chavez was democratically elected, it is none of our business and it is none of the Bush adminstration's business either.

"The people who committed the so-called threatening acts could just go work at another station, so how does this adequately address the problem?"

Yeah, why didn't Chavez think of that. Those RCTV employees can just go across the street, take over another station, install new management, change the editorial policy to RCTV's, etc.

Er...when did Chavez involve himself in a coup in the United STates???
Us libs are sick and tired of right wing presidents using the CIA to overthrow governments, murder, kidnap, etc. in S. America. Hugo Chavez was democratically elected, it is none of our business and it is none of the Bush adminstration's business either.

Posted by danni at 2007-05-30 11:00 AM | Reply | Flag


apologize apologize...apologize......

fact is....you would be thrilled if chavez were here shutting down fox and any other media outlet that got in his way.....

and yet just read your indictments of bush and haliburton....and whats the difference? thats easy.....the confalulted vision of a world that is a people based on thier needs...or whatever that socialist manifesto says.......and lets see...just how are those socialists lands of honey doing these days......I must have missed the news when it talked about how happy all those cubans are and they just got lost on a good swim when they keep getting picked up outside of miami.

"Those RCTV employees can just go across the street, take over another station, install new management"

Blah, blah, blah. They could apply for jobs somewhere else, just like when any company you work for gets shut down. The point was that the response doesn't fit the crime, and probably has more to do with government censorship than addressing the incident.

If there was a 911 payback for every time the u.s. has fucked another country causing deaths, ruination, etc, through purely self-serving covert activities, the country would be left in smoldering ruins and that would be the right's legacy.

"If there was a 911 payback for every time the u.s. has fucked another country causing deaths, ruination, etc, through purely self-serving covert activities, the country would be left in smoldering ruins and that would be the right's legacy."

You can say that about all but the poorest countries.

""I must have missed the news when it talked about how happy all those cubans are and they just got lost on a good swim when they keep getting picked up outside of miami.""

Oh, and those millions of Mexicans....are they oppressed by Socialists???? How abot the Haitians???
No BL, yu love to pretend Cubans are fleeing Communism but it is pretty obvious that they are exactly the same as refugees from any other poor country...they just want jobs.

"You can say that about all but the poorest countries."

But at least some of us don't need to live in a patriotic dream world where the US is always good and generous and never does anything evil. Or that even when we do something evil it is somehow justified.

"But at least some of us don't need to live in a patriotic dream world where the US is always good and generous and never does anything evil. Or that even when we do something evil it is somehow justified."

No, but some live in a dream world where the US is always wrong and anyone who oppposes the US, no matter how bad their own behavior or how selfish their motives, is a hero.

I find both groups delusional. But being an American, and not into self loathing or suicide, I have to say it is easier to get along with the group who wants to pretend that everything we do is just great. At least they don't act as advocates for people who would murder me over my ethnicity, given the chance.

"""You can say that about all but the poorest countries. """

Can't argue that. Then folks should be informed enough to just not act so surprised, stupid and naive when someone leaves a turd at the front door: you want to piss in someones bowl of soup, you just might get it behind the head.

I find both groups delusional. But being an American, and not into self loathing or suicide, I have to say it is easier to get along with the group who wants to pretend that everything we do is just great. At least they don't act as advocates for people who would murder me over my ethnicity, given the chance.

Posted by Sully

well put sully. no extreme is good.

panch, once again, ur a piece of shit for advocating that the deaths of innocent civilians is justified because of covert shit done by our gov.

on top of that, you justify the shutting down of media centers by chavez because the 'tv stations MUST be a mouthpiece for the cia'. chavez is really just a fair ruler who is simply squashing foreign control in his country. all those people protesting are simply confused by the US CIA, right?

""But being an American, and not into self loathing or suicide, I have to say it is easier to get along with the group who wants to pretend that everything we do is just great.""

I would just have to say that I find it easier to deal with those who are willing to confront the truth and act accordingly. Dealing with dilusional people, even if they seem easy to get along with, seems a bit dangerous to me.

but in the sentiment of sully, panch, your points are slightly, slightly valid. but you then go to the extreme, and don't look at the entire picture objectively because you believe so strongly in these convictions that the CIA has disrupted the world and is the root cause for anything bad that happens.

we aren't 100% innocent for the shit our gov has done in the past.... but we SURE AS HELL aren't 100% guilty for every bad thing that happens in the world. INCLUDING psycho dictators that want to squash freedom of expression in their countries.

come on man, look at the situation for what it is. its a power hungry man who is rooting out and political opposition. now the cia may deserve some blame for the man being paranoid, but that doesn't justify the squashing of freedom of expression.

danni, i think its great that there are people like you looking for the 'truth' and trying to find the bad things in our country that otherwise may go unnoticed. it makes for a good balance... but at the same time i think you fail to recognize the good in this country and what it has done for the world.

its good to see the bad and make it public etc, in order to 'act accordingly', as you put it. but its also important to see the good and be able to 'act accordingly' and make it even better and more prevalent.

"all those people protesting are simply confused by the US CIA, right?"

So what? The oligarchy has its base of supporters. The oligarchy has ruled Venezuela for decades, and isn't going to give up its power and privileges without a fight, as it has amply demonstrated.

"" but at the same time i think you fail to recognize the good in this country and what it has done for the world.""

I know what you mean but we do happen to be in a war sold on lies with people dying, crony capitalists profiteering, outsourcing of American jobs, illegal immigration...etc. etc. So, it becomes a little difficult for me to concern myself with the inner workings of a S. American nation with a democratically elected leader. Many on the right focus on the shortcomings of Chavez while ignoring the criminal behavior of our own elected?? officials. I think we should get our own house in order before we go overthrowing democratically elected leaders, especially when the news we receive about Venezuela is so full of propaganda. Honestly, most Americans do not really even have a way of knowing what the truth is about Chavez or Venezuela. We only know what we are told by media owned by people who are very much opposed to any form of socialism and thus Chavez.
Funny thing, Daniel Orgega is back in spite of the millions our CIA spent opposing him.

but danni, weren't you one of the ones voicing your opinion and 'converning yourself with the inner workings of a s american nation', in support of chavez when he nationalized the oil companies and others? me and other (happen to be) righties here saw the direction this was going. now that our fears have been proven correct, and we were right all along that these were bad moves, you claim that we shouldn't bother concerning ourselves with it.

i understand your paranoia about the media, but the overall picture gets through: chavez is shutting down opposing political opinions and turning his country FROM a democracy to one of tyranny.

do you understand how much our 'crony capitalists profiteering', which goes along with our unstoppable purchasing power/consumerism, has been a benefit to third world nations? do you see how our outsourcing has been a huge befit to developing nations? (see india and china). bottom line is you don't think capatilism is the best form of society, i think, like democracy, that its the worst... aside from all the rest.

other than that, your post is pretty fairly put.

"I would just have to say that I find it easier to deal with those who are willing to confront the truth and act accordingly. Dealing with dilusional people, even if they seem easy to get along with, seems a bit dangerous to me."

Most people are delluded on some level.

Shut all the damn stations down, they are nothing but propaganda machines on for the repo neocons.

shut em down, prevent the spread of the neocons.

"shitting sown talk radio, FOX news"

Is this a typo or an example of truth will out in spite of yourself?

Is it really a tv station or is it a mouthpiece for those fucks at the cia and rightwing nuts pulling their strings that organized the coup, the assassination, etc?

Posted by panchovilla at 2007-05-30 11:50 AM

Gee, I think the good people at Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Reporters without Borders and Committee to Protect Journalists would be shocked to find out that RCTV and Globovision were run by the CIA!! Do you think that would change their denunciations of Chavez' stifling free speech through his taking over the last two television stations with national coverage left in Venezuela?

Why are Canucks sooo angry?

"""chavez is really just a fair ruler who is simply squashing foreign control in his country. all those people protesting are simply confused by the US CIA, right?"""

Yes and possibly. Remember the "celebration" you saw in iraq when those "thousands of iraqis" tore down SH's statue? It's make believe to get good photo ops for reuters or AP, nothing less than bullshit. Take a good look at the last 20 years in venezuela, the climb to power via popular vote and motions on the part of Chavez to reclaim what is rightfully his country's. If you look at the opposition, it is funded and organized among others by your gov't's covert actions serving (of course) the best interests of american oil companies and other multinationals.


"""we aren't 100% innocent for the shit our gov has done in the past.... but we SURE AS HELL aren't 100% guilty for every bad thing that happens in the world. INCLUDING psycho dictators that want to squash freedom of expression in their countries."""

the point is: most americans are unaware of what their gov't does and seems surprised when the shit hits the fan. what makes this worse is that they gobble up the shit they are served by mainstream media, which broadcasts a very controlled message. Controlled by who? I'll let you guess.

The simple fact that you tag chavez as a dictator speaks volumes on your own take on reality: the u.s. is right, the media i'm exposed to is the truth. In a international poll a few months ago, bush was identified as the most dangerous terrorist or disruptive element on the planet. To most, he is the psycho dictator, who has proven his mental illness by killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in an unprovoked, undefendable war.

"""come on man, look at the situation for what it is. its a power hungry man who is rooting out and political opposition. now the cia may deserve some blame for the man being paranoid, but that doesn't justify the squashing of freedom of expression."""

Again, I invite you to take a good, long hard look at the last 10-20 years of history in venezuela, especially the years leading up to the chavez revolution, the u.s. backed coup, his re-election, and his subsequent efforts to take back what belongs to his countrymen.

Viewed from the outside, it's more the u.s. that is behaving erratically, boderline psychotic when dealing with smaller players.

"I challenge you to actually read this:"

Nice try, Pancho, but these idiots aren't interested in facts. The liberals see an attack on Chavez as a "freebie" to prove their "objectivity", while the rightwingers have never seen a rightwing coup they didn't like, if it is against a leftwing government.

And Righto provides a perfect example of liberals, i.e., self-appointed human rights groups, trying to prove they are "objective", "independent", "non-partisan", etc. I'm not sure who is worse, rightwingers who openly applaud rightwing coups, or liberals like Dodd, Obama, and Clinton trying to embellish their hawkish credentials by carrying water for the right.

"but to actually take over the stations instead of prosecuting the people in charge"

Yeah, like it was just a few "bad apples" rather than the entire media outlet itself.

Yeah, like it was just a few "bad apples" rather than the entire media outlet itself.

Posted by Bill_OReilly at 2007-05-30 03:25 PM | Reply


Dan Rather and Mary Mapes worked there too?

Its funny how you "righties" can go from supporting the bombing of Al Jazeera to knocking chavez for shutting down a news station. How about some consistency? As long as the news station isn't calling for our death its ok right?

That being said, we all should be troubled by this.

The liberals see an attack on Chavez as a "freebie" to prove their "objectivity"

Is that the latest commondreamszmaghuffington.etc "progressive" talking point?

It is really interesting to see how much the denunciation of Chavez from the left for seizing these stations really chaps your ass.

Why is Bush AGAIN butting into the business of yet another country????

Why can't Bush MIND HIS OWN BUSINESS -- unless of course Bushie has an underlying motive for wanting to help that tv station promote insurrection and unrest throughout Venezuela.

"Its funny how you "righties" can go from supporting the bombing of Al Jazeera to knocking chavez for shutting down a news station"

Not so much funny, as entirely predictable. Their newly professed love of freedom of the press is just heart rending.

"It is really interesting to see how much the denunciation of Chavez from the left for seizing these stations really chaps your ass."

Chavez does seem to have a devoted following that sees him as a minor diety. Several members of this religion's clergy post here. They don't acknowledge that he's human and therefore prone to certain mistakes or lapses in moral judgement. And if you accuse him of intentional wrongdoing, forget it.

Therefore, intimidation of the press by a national leader is now a good thing.

From my link at 3:50 p.m.

In keeping with the media script that has bad guy Chvez brutishly silencing good guys in the democratic opposition, all these articles skimmed lightly over RCTV's history, the Venezuelan government's explanation for the license denial and the process that led to it.

RCTV and other commercial TV stations were key players in the [BUSH-BACKED] April 2002 coup that briefly ousted Chvez's democratically elected government.

During the short-lived insurrection, coup leaders took to commercial TV airwaves to thank the networks. "I must thank Venevisin and RCTV," one grateful leader remarked in an appearance captured in the Irish film The Revolution Will Not Be Televised

The film documents the networks' participation in the short-lived coup, in which stations put themselves to service as bulletin boards for the coup-hosting coup leaders, silencing government voices and rallying the opposition to a march on the Presidential Palace that was part of the coup plotters strategy.

On April 11, 2002, the day of the coup, when military and civilian opposition leaders held press conferences calling for Chavez's ouster, RCTV hosted top coup plotter Carlos Ortega, who rallied demonstrators to the march on the presidential palace.

On the same day, after the anti-democratic overthrow appeared to have succeeded, another coup leader, Vice-Admiral Victor Ramrez Prez, told a Venevisin reporter (4/11/02): "We had a deadly weapon: the media. And now that I have the opportunity, let me congratulate you."

That commercial TV outlets including RCTV participated in the coup is not at question; even mainstream outlets have acknowledged as much.

As reporter Juan Forero, Jackson Diehl's colleague at the Washington Post, explained (1/18/07), "RCTV, like three other major private television stations, encouraged the protests," resulting in the coup, "and, once Chvez was ousted, cheered his removal." The conservative British newspaper the Financial Times reported (5/21/07), "[Venezuelan] officials argue with some justification that RCTV actively supported the 2002 coup attempt against Mr. Chavez."

"Do you blame Chavez for not renewing RCTV's license???"

Yes. He's not punishing specific people for their actions related to the illegal coup.

Rather, he's shutting down the whole station. Why? Because it sends a clear message to the rest of the media that he can take away their soapbox at any time. Collective punishment is always meant to intimidate.

""Therefore, intimidation of the press by a national leader is now a good thing.""

It is certainly no worse that demonization of a democratically elected president because of the fear that his socialistic ideas will spread to other nations...Mexico comes to mind.
Funny thing, if Chavez's socialism were to infect Mexico it could have a major effect on illegal immigration here because the poor peasants would be in a position to share in the wealth that Mexico has for the first time.
I think it is funny watching the righties jump up and down, upset with illegal immigrants while the rich aristocracy hoards the wealth of Mexico and you guys defend that right because property rights are so important that you are even willing to allow your own country to be invaded rather than demand that Mexico compromise those rights and share the wealth.
I haven't noticed too awful many poor Venezuelans invading the US but I sure see a lot of Mexicans.

"Chavez does seem to have a devoted following that sees him as a minor diety. "

I don't see him as a minor deity, Sully. I'm just setting out the facts against a sea of disinformation. If you don't think George Bush would've done as much, if not more, after being kidnapped by the American military, you're really naive. No corporation has the right to use the public airwaves to attempt to shred their nation's constitution.

Censorship is never a good thing, however, that said, it's his country and they do not have our constitution. Makes me happy to be living here rather than there.

However, there are those here that are proponents for Chavez. I wonder if they would enjoy living in his 'free' country.

""No corporation has the right to use the public airwaves to attempt to shred their nation's constitution.""

Unless it is Haliburton or Blackwater.

"Rather, he's shutting down the whole station. "

He refused to renew their license, as any democracy is entitled to. Using the public airwaves is a privilege, not a right.

""I wonder if they would enjoy living in his 'free' country.""

Really you would have to indicate how we would live...as part of the moneyed elite pre-Chavez or as part of the peasant majority pre-Chavez or
as a member of either group post Chavez.
The majority of Venezuelans think they are better off under Chavez. Those who used to enjoy the benefits of the oil money don't like Chavez. Pretty obvious class war down there.

"If you don't think George Bush would've done as much, if not more, after being kidnapped by the American military, you're really naive."

I think certain individuals would be in jail for life, if not executed. I don't think Bush would ever shut down CBS, for example. He wouldn't allowed anyway. He doesn't have the power here that Chavez has at home.

"I haven't noticed too awful many poor Venezuelans invading the US but I sure see a lot of Mexicans."

Danni - buy a map. Poor people can walk into the US from Mexico. Furthermore, when South Americans enter Mexico in an attempt to reach the US, the Mexicans arrest and deport them. Mexico has a zero tolerance policy towards illegal immigration. Look it up.

"Chavez's socialism were to infect Mexico it could have a major effect on illegal immigration here because the poor peasants would be in a position to share in the wealth that Mexico has for the first time."

Mexico is among the most corrupt countries on the planet. Collectivist governments fail due to corruption. Granting Mexican politicians greater control over the Mexican economy would result in a consolodation of wealth, not a distribution of it. I can't think of a worst candidate than Mexico for this type of government. It would be a disaster.

"I don't think Bush would ever shut down CBS, for example"

After being kidnapped in a coup attempt? Is this the same George "patriot act/gitmo" Bush we're talking about? Yeah, his respect for civil liberties is legendary. You're naive.

"I think certain individuals would be in jail for life, if not executed."

So if Chavez had executed members of RCTV it would've been okay, but not renewing their license makes him a dictator !?!?!

Give me a break. If Chavez had jailed or executed members of the media people like you would've been squealing like stuck pigs.

"Yeah, like it was just a few "bad apples" rather than the entire media outlet itself."

Sure Bill. When a media outlet decides to become a service outlet for a coup, the guys holding the teleprompters and boom mics are just as responsible as the network president, right?

If they don't like the policies of their corporation, they're free to find employment elsewhere, Joe. Isn't that what you always say to American workers?

Wars are not only fought on battle fields.

Wars are also fought in the media.

Chaves is just trying to stop the Venezuelan MSM into turning into wot the American MSM already has.

ie a corporate means of effectively maintaining the status quo by disseminating propaganda, stifling debate, and generally molding the debate by ignoring or under-reporting significant news in order to bring you the sound bytes du jour wrapped around info-tainment fluff pieces, human interest stories and ads disguised as news.

Now in Venezuela the RCTV were actually trying to bring about a coup but they were doing it in a effort to make Venezuela another nation run by crony capitolism.

Chavez was right to shut them down.

Be Well.

I never said they were stuck working there, I said they weren't as professionally or legally responsible for the network becoming an outlet for the coup. This was in response to your argument that the "people in charge" weren't the only bad apples and that taking over the network was the only proper solution. Try to stay on topic.

Maybe you ought to learn something in law school about media law and the obligation of corporations to act in the public interest in exchange for their use of the public airwaves.

Spud wishes somebody would bring down the propagandists at FOX like this.

Be Well.

CBS should be closed down for airing the false story in order to effect the outcome of an election.
Sincerely,
The Hugo Bunch

This has been an interestig thread.


Applying the standard used in the US, a 'free press' is the best check we have against a government running amok. A 'free press' holds government accountable.

Abolishment of a news entity by the government here would cause the Lefties to go apeshit - unless of course the news entity was even remotely conservative, and then they'd cheer.

Yet, when good ol' Hugo shuts down an entire media outlet, he's showered with applause from the left.

It's very strange.

In fact, the whole love affair the left has with Chavez is strange.

Maybe you ought to learn something in law school about media law and the obligation of corporations to act in the public interest in exchange for their use of the public airwaves.

Posted by Bill_OReilly

Who gets to define public interest?

"Maybe you ought to learn something in law school about media law and the obligation of corporations to act in the public interest in exchange"

Sorry Bill, I learn about American laws since that's where I'll be practicing. What do you know about Venezuelan law? Are you stating an American principle or one of theirs?

Further, I've said all along that if what this station did was against the law, those involved should be prosecuted. You playing dumb and pretending that's impossible, and that the only proper solution is to take over the network, is hilarious to watch.

Once we have a Democrat in the White House, the government should appropriate and nationalize ALL private oil companies stationed in the US.

Sincerely,

The Hugobunch

This thread really needs Professorbates to weigh in.

Some try to compare chavez's shutting of the station with bush shutting down cbs. What they fail or refuse to understand is that the situation is not the same. There was a coup, backed by the station, that goes without question. There are interests at home and abroad (read: u.s. and multinationals) that want to destabilize the country, that want a return to the raping and pillaging of the country's ressources. Considering the turbulent atmosphere, you should not act surprised if some measures, such as shutting down a virulent and disruptive media outlet that is an obvious mouthpiece, serving the interests of the elite and foreigners.

The people have spoken, and they want chavez. It's nice to see a leader not kow towing to big business and actually representing the interests of the people. Might seem a little bit of a foreign concept to most of us.

"Are you stating an American principle or one of theirs?"

I'm stating a principle that is common to most democratic countries. In virtually every law, corporations that use the public airwaves are required to act in the public interest. Sorry your myopic little mind can't get a handle on that.

Spud wishes somebody would bring down the propagandists at FOX like this.

Be Well.

Posted by dethspud at 2007-05-30 04:45 PM

Leave it to Spud to say what BillO, Chris and Danni were afraid to say.

So much for freedom of the press, if you don't like someone's political agenda, shut them down.

Nice.

"and that the only proper solution is to take over the network, is hilarious to watch."

Give me a break. If Chavez had actually jailed these "journalists", you and the rest of the rightwing would be screaming until you choked.

Don't put words in my mouth, Righto. I don't agree with Spud. There's no justification for shutting down Fox.

"""Who gets to define public interest?"""

The public: they voted, the elite and multinationals lost.

Wot the old soviet Pravda was to truth last century
FOX news is to truth this century.

ROC thinks the MSM is on his side.

Especially FOX.

Wotta moron.

Be Well.

So much for freedom of the press, if you don't like someone's political agenda, shut them down.

Code word: "The Fairness Doctrine"

Wot the old soviet Pravda was to truth last century
FOX news is to truth this century.

ROC thinks the MSM is on his side.

Especially FOX.

Wotta moron.


You're calling ROC a maroon and in the very same breath are drawing complete equivalence between Fox and Pravda?


Too funny!

"CBS should be closed down..."

Karl Rove should be investigated for getting that "document" to Rather in the first place.

Be Well.

Karl Rove should be investigated for getting that "document" to Rather in the first place.


Wait a minute...

I thought the talking point was that the 'document' was never 'proven' to be fake. Now, it's a Rove plant?

Sheesh.

You libs sure have a hard time keeping your spin straight.

"You're calling ROC a maroon and in the very same breath are drawing complete equivalence between Fox and Pravda?"

Jeff, he took a breath :)

But it was only half a breath, Loony.

"Karl Rove should be investigated for getting that "document" to Rather in the first place."

If that "document" came from Rove, Rather deserved to lose his job for trusting him as a source in the first place.

"But it was only half a breath, Loony"

Really? He does think as if he doesn't get enough air.

OH! come on now, Spud! It's only a joke. (pre-empting the tsunami of criticism expected)

Be well.

"Give me a break. If Chavez had actually jailed these "journalists", you and the rest of the rightwing would be screaming until you choked."

Not if what they did was a crime. I have no problem with people being punished for their crimes. That you would use such a straw man is utterly ridiculous, though not unexpected.

All you seem to have in this thread is "if Bush did this, if Chavez did that." It appears as though you're incapable of addressing this particular issue on its own merits. Why is that?

The bottom line is that jailing the journalisits for any crimes they committed would be a lot more appropriate of a response than the government taking over the entire network, especially given the other interesting motivations Chavez may have had for shutting down the station, including his disdain for their soap operas he claimed "promoted capitalism." But go ahead and be deliberately ignorant, it's all you can do to keep cheerleading for a socialist you worship.

"You're calling ROC a maroon and in the very same breath are drawing complete equivalence between Fox and Pravda?"

Yes, Jeff, Spud is.

FOX certainly uses more sophisticated propaganda methods than Pravda did in theior day but at the end of the day it's still all just propaganda.

As someone who at that time was trying to plant hard line anti-Soviet rhetoric into western newspapers I have first hand knowledge why the editors were often reluctant to print it. Smart people explained to me that most of the media was leaning to the left and did not want to go too tough on the socialist experiment. In addition, some editors believed that it is not a good idea to make Soviet bear mad since it has plenty of nukes and it is better not to get on it's nerves and try to avoid dangerous confrontations.

Suddenly, things changed dramatically. "Pravda" is out of business and the new Russian mainstream media became quite civilized, never mind the yellow press. Needless to say that many articles are still very critical of US but the language used by Russian journalists is pretty professional and no longer resembles the one from communist times.

The irony is that in this zero sum game, there are some of the western newspapers that picked up the old Soviet style and use the tone and expressions closely resembling Pravda vocabulary. The leader in this Soviet-American linguistic exchange is obviously the Washington Post. Read the articles on Russia and if you had any nostalgia for agitprop be my guest.

Tater,

THAT is your 'proof'?


Um, OK.

I guess Fox is no different than Pravda. It's all 'tow the party line' with absolutely ZERO opposition viewpoint allowed. Ever.

I take it you've never watched Fox.

"It appears as though you're incapable of addressing this particular issue on its own merits. Why is that?"

You're full of shit, Joe. I've addressed every issue that has been raised in detail. You just keep raising the same stupid non-points over and over. At least Sully and RightoCenter can make arguments. You're just a screechy little windbag.

"drawing complete equivalence between Fox and Pravda"

You're talking to someone who spends hours comparing Bush to Hitler. Hell, he even calls Rob a Nazi. Analogies aren't exactly his strong point.

"You libs sure have a hard time keeping your spin straight."

That aint liberal spin, Jeff.

Nothing that Spud writes is liberal spin.

It's all just Spud's opinion.

The fact that this document ended up on Rathers desk and ended up being a huge coup for the right does tend to make one think it was no mere coincidence that it was disputed so quickly and taken up as a cause by the right so swiftly. In hindsight, to Spud anyway, it looks orchestrated.

Spud has no proof for any of this, of course.

Spud just imagines if someone did dig up a connection between Karl and the document that everybody would just sorta smack their foreheads collectively altogether and say "Of course, it makes nothing but sense!"

Be Well.

Bill-

They aren't non-points, you just refuse to answer them and turn to insults. That's fine, but don't go to step 4 and pretend you've won anything.

BillO-

Sorry, we have discussed this enough that I should have known better.

Spud, I don't watch Fox, and really never have...CNN and MSNBC are streamed to my computer at work if I need to watch the MSM, but mostly I read the NYT, LAT, WSJ and the Economist.

Don't let that get in the way of your endless streams of inanity, however.

"I've addressed every issue that has been raised in detail."

Hilarious. All you've done is talk about "if Bush shut down CBS," "if Chavez jailed the journalists" - anything but what he actually did. According to you, that's "addressing the issues in detail." If detail includes deflecting, then your arguments have been loaded with details.

You're talking to someone who spends hours comparing Bush to Hitler. Hell, he even calls Rob a Nazi. Analogies aren't exactly his strong point.


Agreed.

However, in fairness he really is a smart guy and does occasionally put together some pretty strong posts.

The starchy one has a tendency to over-exaggerate and over-state his position IMO. It's easy to fixate on that and thus filter out some of his better material.

Spud,

Actually, I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that the infamous 'document' DID come from Rove.

Even if that speculation was true, that's only half of the battle. The other half being Rather using it as evidence without properly vetting it. Had he and his team done their jobs correctly, the memo never would have made it to the screen.

oh and Tater....


For the most part, the media in the US sucks, big time.


That goes for Fox, talk radio, the other TV networks and much of print media.

"Analogies aren't exactly his strong point."

Analogies, similes, metaphors, fables, parables and politics are all fortes of Spud's.

btw, Spud luffed the "complete equivilance" shit!

Too Funny.

If I can find one way in which the analogy is not completely perfect then Spud argument is shit!

Spud clue to Jeffbot and Wob and Joebot.

No analogy is perfect.

In case yer a little hard of thinking Spud'll repeat that.

No analogy is perfect.

Get that?

To say that something is like something else is not to say that is that something else.

Spud don't know which is dumber.

Yer ridiculous absolutist arguments and yer falsely constructed either/or scenarios.

ie Yer either with us or agin' us.
Yer either for the terrorists or yer for the US.
Yer either for Israel or yer a Hamas Hugger.
(That last one's fer GZ obviously)

Are you really all that simple in the head?

Seriously?

Sad. :(

Be Well.

"Yer either for the terrorists or yer for the US."

Not sure if that was directed at me due to the silly language you use, but if it was, I'd love to see proof that I've ever made that argument.

JJ, if a Dem president declared that he was going to take Fox off the air, you're right--the lefties would applaud. They're all for free speech, as long as they agree with it.