viable political opposition

Online NewsHour: President Bush Ends European Trip with Meeting With Russian President Vladimir Putin — February 24, 2005

Bush: “[D]emocracies have certain things in common; they have a rule of law, and protection of minorities, a free press, and a viable political opposition.”

Consortiumnews.com

Bush also portrayed himself as a good example of a political leader who can’t get away with hiding his mistakes.

“I live in a transparent country,” Bush said. “I live in a country where decisions made by government are wide open [!!!] and people are able to call people [like] me to account, which many out here do on a regular basis. … I’m perfectly comfortable in telling you, our country is one that safeguards human rights and human dignity.”

One Russian questioner challenged Bush on the issue of press freedom, apparently referring to pressure that Bush’s conservative supporters have brought to bear on U.S. news organizations to oust journalists who have criticized Bush.

“Why don’t you talk a lot about violation of rights of journalists in the United States, about the fact that some journalists have been fired?” the questioner asked.

Bush responded with a joke, which played to the U.S. journalists in the room.

“Do any of you all still have your jobs?” Bush joshed….

Greedy Capitalists Don’t Care What You Think — They Don’t Have To

Take a Walk on the Wild Side By JIM DOHERTY

Call it the grizzly test. Require all would-be developers to take it. If you want to drill for oil in the refuge, first you have to spend a couple of weeks roughing it there. No guns, no phones, no guides. Just you and the bears. Let them look into your heart. If they’re reassured by what they see, you pass; if they feel threatened, well, according to Ave Thayer, there are worse ways to go.

Those who survive the grizzly test earn the right to submit their drilling proposals to Congress. But who knows? Perhaps a solitary stint in the refuge is enough to make even the most avaricious developers think twice. Once they’ve discovered for themselves how magnificent the refuge is; once they’ve watched caribou lope across the tundra, listened to wolves howl, beheld the mesmerizing effects of light and shadow on limestone mountains riddled with caves and turreted with hoodoos – once, in short, they understand why so many folks consider the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge sacred ground, they might undergo a change of heart and decide to leave it the way it is. Which is to say, undisturbed.
—–
Jim Doherty is a former editor at Smithsonian magazine.
—–

Here we see the classic Liberal weakness: those we disagree with can be persuaded by the same things that persuade us (while they call us enemies and dismiss us with contempt — no interest in converting us). My bet: someone who is pro-drilling would come back from the Arctic wanting a condo on the spot; let’s build roads, drill and develop. Understand, I’m not saying Liberals and Conservatives can’t agree on defending ANWR (another Liberal weakness is the need to clarify and refine a point — the worst Conservatives despise that). It’s developers vs the rest of us, but Conservatives leave business free to do anything while fixating on social groups they can’t stand. Conservatives used to believe in “live and let live.” They’ve assumed power through “live as we do.” mjh

PS – similarly, I regret one of the arguments used for preserving Otero Mesa: a big, big aquifer. Just wait: that argument will be thrown back in our faces in support of gated communities; Otero will be surrounded by development and sucked dry. Preserve Otero because we need to preserve something.

Our Corporate Overlords

I don’t usually cross-post among my 5 or so blogs, but I have to ask you: Do you know who Jeff Gannon is? If not, please follow the link.

mjh’s Dump Bush weBlog: Where’s the OUTRAGE over Gannon/Guckert?

Gannon is the latest evidence that we have been taken over by amoral Enron-quality corporate executives who view everything in terms of marketing and (personal) profit. Cumulatively, this really should fuel a populist uprising — take back America from the corrupt corporations that rule us! mjh

Where’s the OUTRAGE over Gannon/Guckert?

Chicago Tribune | Check your media lap dogs, Mr. President by Clarence Page

If America’s mainstream media really were as liberal as conservatives claim we are, we would be ballyhooing the fiasco of James D. Guckert, a.k.a. Jeff Gannon, with Page 1 banner headlines and hourly bulletins.

Sure, Guckert-gate may seem like a tempest in a teapot, at first. But so did the Whitewater land-development deal. Yet conservative commentators and editorialists, aided by their allies in Congress, rode that Arkansas pony until it ended far afield from a land deal with the impeachment of a president for lying about sex.

Imagine, then, how the conservative choir would sing out at this point if a Democratic White House knocked long-tenured journalists off its press room access lists so that it could give access to a fellow like Guckert, 47, who dependably asks softball questions because he reports for a partisan Web site that supports the Bush administration.

Imagine how they would question the access given by the Secret Service and the White House press office for two years to a guy who used a driver’s license that said James Guckert to get into the White House, then switched to his alter ego of Jeff Gannon. The best explanation for this that Bush’s press secretary, Scott McClellan, could give to Editor & Publisher magazine was, “People use aliases all the time in life, from journalists to actors.”

Guckert wrote under the name Jeff Gannon for Talon News, a conservative online news outlet associated with GOPUSA, a conservative Web site based in Houston and dedicated to “spreading the conservative message throughout America.” …

Of course, every administration tries to manipulate the media. Team Bush has elevated it to a high art. Before Guckert, there was the disclosure that three conservative syndicated columnists had been paid handsomely to promote administration programs–payment they had failed to disclose to their readers.

And remember those pre-packaged, government-sponsored video news releases featuring fake reporters so local news outlets would be tempted to run them as legitimate news stories, as some did?

We have grown accustomed to those pre-screened rent-a-crowd “Ask President Bush” town-hall-style meetings during last year’s campaign and during this year’s effort by Bush to promote his proposed Social Security changes.

But I thought the last straw was the unprecedented herding of reporters covering this year’s inaugural balls into pens from which they could only venture to interview ball guests if they were escorted by “minders” in the fashion of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

Tell me again: What was that war about? Oh, yeah: freedom and democracy. Great. I’d like to see a little more of that back here at home.

Unfortunately, this administration and its supportive chorus are getting away with less accountability, more secretiveness, partly by demonizing the media. If they succeed in intimidating us from watchdogs into lap dogs, they will have succeeded where previous administrations from both parties failed.

Poynter Online – Romenesko

“Gannongate”? A better name for it would be “Nothinggate” – The New Yorker

Nothing is what’s likely to come of the Jeff Gannon/James Guckert flap, says Hendrik Hertzberg. “What all the memorable scandals of the past thirty years — real and fake alike, from Watergate to the Clinton impeachment — have had in common is that the opposition party controlled at least one house of Congress, which gave it the power to hold hearings and issue subpoenas. If Bush ends up having an easier time of it in his second term than any of his two-term predecessors since F.D.R., it won’t be because the scandals aren’t there. It’ll be because the tools to excavate them are under lock and key.”

Press Impostor

How is it that an administration that screened thousands of people for attendance at Bush campaign rallies repeatedly let a fake reporter into the sanctorum of the White House pressroom under a false name? Who was running that background check? How could a president who declares that national security is his prime concern be so ill served for nearly two years by his own security detail?

What is the public to make of the fact that legitimate protesters are kept far away from President George W. Bush while an illegitimate “journalist” who’s really working for a Republican propaganda mill is repeatedly allowed into the White House pressroom and regularly called upon by the president and the president’s press secretary to ask questions? …

Is it possible that an administration that is so careful about scripting events and managing information approved of Guckert being planted in the pressroom to ask softball questions and even to keep an eye on the real reporters working there? Isn’t that fair to ask, considering this is the same administration that used its taxpayer-funded, $250-million public relations apparatus to pay columnists to say nice things about its programs?

Who is Jeff Gannon?

LOBBING softball questions at White House press conferences is hardly a new phenomenon, but having them thrown by a pseudo-journalist with a sleazy background who mysteriously cleared security checks is. Add in the fact that reporter Jeff Gannon used a false name and his employer was a Web site called Talon News staffed almost exclusively by Republican activists and you have the whiff of a scandal. …

The idea that the White House might try to infiltrate the press corps with a shill is a chilling thought in this democracy, but this is the administration that has been caught paying “journalists” and generating its own prefabricated “news reports” to distribute to TV stations too naïve to recognize the attempt at propaganda. …

It’s hard to say which is worse: That the White House had no idea who it was allowing to be within shouting distance of the president — or that it knew exactly who Jeff Gannon was and why he was there.

News & Features | No sex, please: We’re liberals!

[I]f, say, a Gore or Kerry administration had brought in a gay hooker to act as a ringer at news conferences, it would have quickly exploded into the biggest story in the country. Fox News would devote hours upon hours to it. So would Rush Limbaugh. So would the Pat Robertsons and the Jerry Falwells and the James Dobsons. Needless to say, so would the Republican Party. And here’s where the difference between liberal and conservative sex scandals, and how the mainstream media handle them, becomes clearly visible. When there’s a scandal on the left, there is a built-in machine, already in place, to spew shock and outrage on a 24-hour-a-day basis, and the mainstream media naturally cover that. But when there’s a sex scandal on the right, there’s really no one to speak out. Do liberals really care that men are having sex with each other? Or that Jeff Gannon supposedly has been paid as much as $1200 for one weekend for the pleasure of his companionship? To ask these questions is to answer them: no, and no. …

But it’s not that Gannon is or was a gay hooker — it’s that he somehow got into the White House, and past the Secret Service, despite that. What did the White House know, and when did it know it?

—–
Google Search: Jeff Gannon [782 stories at this time]

Cruel Rural New Mexico

Let’s summarize this recent legislative activity (details below): we will continue to allow people to attach razor blades to roosters to fight to the bloody death. We will allow anyone to kill cougars indiscriminately. We will hand over public wildlife for easy slaughter and the profit of a few (including a Senator). mjh

—–
ABQjournal: 2 Cockfighting Bans May Die By Kate Nash, Journal Capitol Bureau

Sen. Phil Griego, D-San Jose, said … “To do away with cockfighting is to do away with a major part of our culture, of our Hispanic heritage,” he said. … [mjh: supporters include Ed Lowry, Ray Westall, Wilford Brimley]

Sen. Mary Jane Garcia, D-Do?a Ana, a sponsor of one of the bans, said … she doesn’t consider cockfighting part of her Hispanic culture. …

Cockfighting is already illegal in 13 of the state’s 33 counties and in 29 cities.

A fall 2004 Journal poll of 402 registered voters statewide showed that two-thirds of registered voters surveyed would support a law banning cockfighting in New Mexico. …

“There’s an undeniable link between children who witness violence and their participation in it later in life,” said Bill Jordan of New Mexico Voices for Children. “We need to break the cycle of violence.”

[Track HB878
PROHIBIT COCKFIGHTING
Sponsor: Peter Wirth
Current Location: House Agriculture Committee]
—–
ABQjournal: Open Cougar Hunting in Bill By Deborah Baker, The Associated Press

SANTA FE? Cougars could be shot on sight under a proposal headed to the House for a vote.

The bill, backed by livestock growers, was endorsed Tuesday by the House Government and Urban Affairs Committee.

It would take the cats? also called mountain lions or pumas? off the list of big-game animals whose hunting is regulated by the state Game and Fish Department.

Rep. Brian Moore, R-Clayton, the bill’s sponsor, told the panel it could help balance the deer population, prevent losses by ranchers and provide more protection for children and pets. …

The bill would take away the Game and Fish Department’s ability not only to set hunting limits, but to monitor and manage the cougar population, she said.

“The mountain lion population is a valuable resource to the state,” former department director Bill Huey said in a letter that was read to the committee.

The declining number of deer is a problem throughout the West, and there is no single cause for it, said Huey, who opposed the legislation.

[Track HB47
REMOVE COUGARS FROM REGULATED GAME LIST
Sponsor: Brian K. Moore
Current Location: House Government & Urban Affairs]
—–
ABQjournal: Game Parks’ Size May Rocket By Jeff Jones, Journal Staff Writer

SANTA FE? New Mexico ranchers could build high fences around massive swaths of private land and claim the state-owned wildlife inside as their own if a bill moving through the state Senate becomes law, a conservation group leader said Tuesday.

“The language is very innocuous. . . (But) it privatizes our public’s wildlife,” said New Mexico Wildlife Federation president Oscar Simpson.

The measure by Sen. Timothy Jennings, D-Roswell, would dramatically increase the legal size limit on so-called game parks, where hunters pay big money to shoot fenced-in game animals. …

Jennings, a rancher and member of the finance committee, appeared to suggest he might be interested in starting a game park of his own. …

Under current New Mexico law, individual game parks can be no larger than 3,200 acres. Jennings’ bill would boost the maximum legal acreage of a private game park to 20,000 acres, or about 31 square miles.

The owners of game parks normally stock their enclosures with game animals purchased from breeders. They then charge a fee to people who want to shoot the animals as trophies.

A Legislative Finance Committee report said Jennings’ original bill would “allow private landowners to fence in significant numbers of state owned wildlife and convert them to private ownership.” …

Many hunters object to game parks, questioning the ethics of shooting an animal behind a game-proof fence of any diameter.

[Track SB337
INCREASE GAME & FISH PARKS MAXIMUM ACREAGE
Sponsor: Timothy Z. Jennings
Current Location: Senate Finance Committee]

IMAGINE WATERGATE 2005

Welcome to uExpress featuring Richard Reeves — The Best Advice and Opinions The Universe!
IMAGINE WATERGATE 2005
by Richard Reeves

It was the persistence and courage of the press that made the difference 30 years ago [during Watergate]. Above and behind the often confused and sometimes inaccurate young men were the publisher of the Post, Katharine Graham, and her editor, Ben Bradlee, who hung tough when it counted. Would that happen today?

I seriously doubt it. Under today’s rules of the game, Nixon would have survived the rape of the Constitution and various counts of burglary and perjury. The American press is being driven into the ground like a stake by courts and government attorneys arguing that there is no such thing as constitutional recognition of any legal protections of news-gathering.

The American press is barely being protected by its own owners, many of them entertainment corporations prone to erase any facts inconvenient to those who write tax laws and approve mergers and acquisitions. The straight American press, and most of it is, is being nibbled to death by a Greek chorus of know-nothing mouthpieces mocking anyone brazen enough to question the orthodoxy of the day or the cut of the emperor’s wardrobe.

Imagine Watergate 2005, with Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly preaching their sermons on the patriotism of a 29-year-old reporter who was close to being fired for forgetting where he abandoned rental cars (private property) and whose parents were both communists — that would be Carl Bernstein. Disney and Viacom and Fox have their virtues, I’m sure, but they are no Graham and Bradlee. Graham bet the company on journalism. I think she would be laughed off the business pages today — and, in fact, over a lifetime she did decide to (or have to) plead for Wall Street’s forgiveness for her own brave brand of Americanism.

Now the laughers are in charge. In the last year, the White House has explicitly stated that it believes it has no obligation to deal with the press as anything but another special interest. In the past week, federal judges have ruled that Time magazine and New York Times reporters should go to jail for what they know, even if it was never published. Another federal court ruled that the governor of Maryland has the right to order state employees never to answer questions posed by The Baltimore Sun.

So it goes in the land of the free.

Buck the Public Mood

Crossmap News| ‘Simpsons’ Animates Homosexual Marriage, Stirs Debate

L. Brent Bozell III, president of the Parents Television Council, criticized “The Simpsons” for addressing the issue of gay marriage, though he cautioned that he had not seen the episode. A parental advisory preceded the broadcast.

“At a time when the public mood is overwhelmingly against gay marriage, any show that promotes gay marriage is deliberately bucking the public mood,” he said.

“I’d rather them not do it at all,” he added. “You’ve got a show watched by millions of children. Do children need to have gay marriage thrust in their faces as an issue? Why can’t we just entertain them?”

THE SIMPSONS – Parents Television Council Family TV Guide Show Page

The SimpsonsPTC Summary:

This long-running animated production focuses on the daily life of a suburban family living in the fictional town of Springfield. Despite its early timeslot and animated format, The Simpsons is not recommended for younger viewers. The show ridicules entrepreneurs, religion, educators, and law enforcement officials, and has occasionally incorporated foul language into its dialogue. The cartoon sends a mixed message on parenthood: while the father is a bumbling idiot, the mother is a loving and patient wife and role model.

mjh’s Blog: Bless the Simpsons!

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." — Sam Adams