1. P.N.A.C.
The People For A New American Century think tank in Washington is one of the most influential political tools for the Current administration. Started by Vice President Richard ( Dick ) Cheney, the p.n.a.c. has some of the biggest names in conservative ideology on it’s member list. Many of its founders have found a home in the lesser Bushes White House, notably fan favorite’s Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz. The less respected but still rich Steve Forbes as another think tanker.
Some say that p.n.a.c. shot itself in the foot in 1998 when it advocated the overthrow of Saddam’s regime to then President Clinton in a concerned letter. Some also say that this is proof of the intentions of the current administration to look for excuses to go to war in Iraq well before 9/11. Well, people who are aware of this information say that, but for the most part the intention of p.n.a.c. have flown pretty far underneath the radar of most Americans. Even one of our staunchest supporters, Tony Blair, claims to have never read any of their literature. This must be because they have no sinister designs on the future of mankind. This sort of thought may prove misleading if one delves a little deeper.
Most Americans are unaware that our Country was not a “superpower” until after WW II. Most simply assume that it always was and it always will be. At p.n.a.c., they realize the importance of the role America has to play in the shaping of the future, as well as having a firm grip on the realities of the past. The ideas and schemes being plotted by the brilliant minds is easily accessable to the average American through a string of friendly journalists and television networks, like George Will and Fox News, who share the optimistic goals of semi world dominion with the einstiens over at p.n.a.c.
I hope I do not sound cross, but I think a common misrepresentation that I made in the last election is that the majority of Americans were similar to me in the fact that they tried to stay on top of the news. I think this a mistake that I made in regards to public interest based on the amount of time I spend online examining news and thee people who make it. P.N.A.C.’s site almost comes off like a Yes Men parody, but it cannot be taken lightly if one wants to see this country go in a direction other than the one charted by these uber-patriotic capitalists.
The media is more than complicit with this plan and has been feeding the American public a steady stream of fear and Patriotism while misrepresenting the war in Iraq and it’s toll considerably. Networks like CNN and Fox News have kept solidly spinning p.n.a.c.’s policies in the face of constant dissent and inquiries from curious civilians. One has difficulty avoiding the sympathetic media’s take on things, unless one knows the backdoors in American media.
The people of our country need to pay more attention to the available media if they want to know the direction that this administration is planning on taking the country. Skull & Bones, P.N.A.C., and a lot of these groups get labeled as simply conspiracy theories unless one actually researches the groups intentions.
The press, in an attempt to remain neutral and patriotic at the same time, has mislead the public as to the intentions and realities of P.N.A.C. and the policies that their think tank has implemented onto our country.
2. A Return to pre-civil rights era?
There are two schools of thought on voter disenfrachisement in this previous elections. One is that it didn’t happen, that the vote irregularities are simply your normal, everyday voting mishaps. The other is that there has been a concerted effort since the 2000 election to alienate and discourage people from exercising their rights, knowing that it may be futile. Whether or not the discrepancies in the vote count are natural or not, I think that minorities have been finding themselves in a position where their voices are not heard.
In my opinion, the last two elections will certainly elicit voter apathy among minority voters, but the awareness that has been created will go a long way to stem that tide before the next election. We hope. But, Americans are torn between patriotism and fear, and this election drew clear lines in the sand no matter what your ethnic background or sexual preference was. I feel like the addition of the vote on gay marrige to many of the states polls was an unfair stab at the homosexual community, using the controversy created by a reactionary public to sway voter opinon. Homosexuals are not the only minority who are being singled out by the administration, the relitivly slight notice given to the N.A.A.C.P. by this administration, as well as Fox News’s hounding of Rev. Jesse Jackson has continued to exploit the myth of civil rights. Not to mention the rather harsh treatment the Arab American community has received the last three years.
Women, although they do consititute the majority in our country, seem to have taken a blind eye to the fact that this administration has discussed overturning Roe vs. Wade, and the slow dismantling of planned parenthood. Womens roles in the workplace have been established, but many of the other goals sought by the feminist movement have gone unexplored in the rush to get into the workplace and the enivitable family that ensues. I’m certainly not saying every woman gets married and has children, but this is the role the current incarnation of America has forced upon women. I think that this effects the way women vote and the importance they place on staying informed. And to some extent an uninformed voter is essentially disenfranchised from the get go.
Racism is ever prevalent in our society, every other race has become the grendel to the white mans Beowulf, and our media and policy reflect that. The fact that the president and his administration can pay no attention to the atrocities in the Sudan and not fear losing enough votes to matter is a good indication of how high the priorities of this democracy are in regards to international civil liberties. And also the lack of outrage in our communities at his indifference speaks volumes on the agenda setting of the media.
I’m not sure that the intentions of the civil rights movement were ever realized except on their most basic points, minority representation has been few and far between, and minority voiced have had a difficult time finding an ear. As this administration enforces double standards by nominating decidedly controversial minority representatives to higher positions, it is interesting to speculate on where racism is headed in the new century. I think it will be a battle between classes, with the upper class convincing as many of the lower class as possible to be satisfied and content with what they’ve got. It’s good enough, seems to be the mentality. As the American worker becomes more of a cog in the international corperate scheme, and our standard of living drops, it is an amazing feat by the Bush Administration if you really think about it. And with super store’s like wal-mart offering the “hottest” cheap items fresh from overseas, the chances that the masses will awaken from this slumber before it is too late seems an ever more difficult goal.
As long as Americans can all have the same products and the income gap remains shrouded in secrecy, there will be less and less of an outcry as our civil liberties are stripped from us day by day. It is up to us to defend the rights of those who have been disenfranchised due to felony lists or voter intimidation, because it will take a concerted effort on all parts of the minority of America to get it’s voice heard in an increasingly deaf governments ear.
3. Successes and Pitfalls
As the campaign wore on, I realized that it was going to be a losing battle for Kerry. I think what made me finally see the futility was when I realized that very few of my fellow Americans had as much respect for a openminded strong speaking woman like Teresa Hienz Kerry. I think she, coupled with Kerry’s relatively soft spokenness, lost a lot of voters for him. Even though, with the exception of the poke at Cheney’s daughter, Kerry hands down won the debates, his personality and character never resounded with the American people in the necessary way to get him Ohio and Florida. Besides the constant attention focused on his time in the military that threw his campaign through a loop, Kerry was never able to portray himself as man of the working man, an image that somehow people associate with G.W.B
Bush somehow weathered the storm and turmoil. There were not many bright spots in the road for him, but the fear and paranoia of our nation was strong enough to give him and his fathers friends another four years. One excellent strategy employed by the G.O.P. was to devide the democratic party into factions, the old elite guard versus the party of the working man. Bush’s weakness’s are too many to attempt to list, but the strength of the campaign of fear that has been waged on the American people for four years was barely enough to overcome them. His refusal to open debates, the war in Iraq, and his relative ignorance on his own policy should have been enough seal the fate of his presidency into the lame duck section of history, but the media’s careful sculpting of his endless patriotism and garbled sound bites. Bush’s real strength in this election was the media’s refusal to engage him in difficult questions regarding the war, 9/11, and the economy. Or it was the intolerance of those who voted for him and against gay marrige.
Kerry’s attempt to please everybody resulted in a serious muddying of his stance on issues, and voters had a difficult time distinguishing between the two, Bush’s success in Iraq(mission accomplished) and the conservative agenda of deviding the democratic party and insinuating disloyalty, may have effected the party for years to come.
5. Media coverage and the 2004 election
I was not at all impressed with the way that the media handled coverage of this election, but to be honest, I shied away from television pretty much from June on, with the exception of the debates, because I have found myself disgusted to no end with the pitiful state of the news media and what it focuses on.
With the exception of c-span, the only network I believe actually gave seven or eight of the “third” party presidential candidates a chance to publicize their views, the media mainly focused on the yellow journalistic credo of diggin up dirt and not letting it die. From one candidates military service to the other, from phoney documents of real events ( the Rather-gate phenomenon) to true documents we wish we would have never seen (Abu Ghraib), this election season was chock full of suprises, but the big one everyone was expecting never seemed to materialize.
I was also put off by the lack of “spine” by the media to get the presidential debates more in the style of an actual debate as opposed to a simple reading of talking points. I thought that American journalism lost a lot of credibility when it layed down for that one and allowed a single host format. To me that seemed to signal a rather obedient national media.
The way that the media has handled the war is a good example of how complicit the media has become to potentially damning policies of our current administration. The war, even though it is a dangerous place to be, cannot be covered in a way that can be honestly interpreted when the government embeds reporters with troops. I think that war reporting has lost some of its appeal, there are no Murrows, no Pyle’s, no Neil Davis’s searching for the glory of the story, just a bunch of faceless heads with explosions in the far distance. So, we get to see Saddam as soon as he is captured, but we never get to see the fallen soldier’s casket as it makes the long journey back.
There were outlets for those willing to look. Amy Goodman’s Democracy Now is an excellent news source that recently became available to a wide audience, and Air America Radio is still holding relatively strong after the elections. These shows give the realities of the war and the administrations reluctance to discuss topics openly a forum to finally be discussed, and that forum will be needed even more in the next four years.
To tell you the truth, the way that the media has conducted itself since Clinton/Lewinsky has been off-putting for me. The lack of questions over the 2000 election, the “ party line shift” to uberpatriotism on behalf of the conservative networks, the unethical journalists claiming to be fair and balanced, and the immediacy with which the media chose to accept the outcome of 9/11 and the build up to war all point to, at least for me, a useless media. Or, at least, a media which seeks to entertain wholly and educate nonely.
Luckily there’s the world wide web for more savvy news buffs, and there is a chance, however slim, to stay on top of world news for at least another couple months. While the internet is great for national and international issues, it is more difficult to stay on top of local races, but those often get drowned out in the other mediums anyway by a more nationally minded media base. As it stands now, I believe it is up to individual citizens to stop letting the media think for them and start making their own opinions over the direction our country needs to take.
6. A political bias
One political bias that I had coming into class was that the presidential election was decided by the voters. I consider myself to be informed, and I thought that an informed public would have the sense to change the system before the election, ensuring that there would be less shenanigans than the 2000 election. But the lack of attention paid to reforming the electoral process led to a general apathy to the cries of a relatively small faction interested in reform.
The movies we watched and the lectures reinforced my existing theories of communication in relation to politics by highlighting the man behind the image of the president, and the many other voices that must carry his message. But none really dealt with the idea of voter reform except the last one, “ Unprecedented”. I came to the conclusion in this class that the press and the politicians control the outcome of the elections in the way they play the issues, and the American people are essentially used as a platform to step upon to reach the highest office in the land. I suppose that I also came into the class assuming that the best canidate for the job usually got the support of the American people, but I have seen that the candidates themselves are not superhuman and that there have been many times in america’s history where the public has had to flip a coin in terms of voting.
One thing that I took out of this class was a more curious mind in terms of knowing both angles being played by the political parties and understanding the people in the organization and how they relate to the canidate. It is often the people who back a canidate that really make the policies and issues that the candidates focus on. Characters like Karl Rove and George Soros proved to be much more influential than their obscurity
The People For A New American Century think tank in Washington is one of the most influential political tools for the Current administration. Started by Vice President Richard ( Dick ) Cheney, the p.n.a.c. has some of the biggest names in conservative ideology on it’s member list. Many of its founders have found a home in the lesser Bushes White House, notably fan favorite’s Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz. The less respected but still rich Steve Forbes as another think tanker.
Some say that p.n.a.c. shot itself in the foot in 1998 when it advocated the overthrow of Saddam’s regime to then President Clinton in a concerned letter. Some also say that this is proof of the intentions of the current administration to look for excuses to go to war in Iraq well before 9/11. Well, people who are aware of this information say that, but for the most part the intention of p.n.a.c. have flown pretty far underneath the radar of most Americans. Even one of our staunchest supporters, Tony Blair, claims to have never read any of their literature. This must be because they have no sinister designs on the future of mankind. This sort of thought may prove misleading if one delves a little deeper.
Most Americans are unaware that our Country was not a “superpower” until after WW II. Most simply assume that it always was and it always will be. At p.n.a.c., they realize the importance of the role America has to play in the shaping of the future, as well as having a firm grip on the realities of the past. The ideas and schemes being plotted by the brilliant minds is easily accessable to the average American through a string of friendly journalists and television networks, like George Will and Fox News, who share the optimistic goals of semi world dominion with the einstiens over at p.n.a.c.
I hope I do not sound cross, but I think a common misrepresentation that I made in the last election is that the majority of Americans were similar to me in the fact that they tried to stay on top of the news. I think this a mistake that I made in regards to public interest based on the amount of time I spend online examining news and thee people who make it. P.N.A.C.’s site almost comes off like a Yes Men parody, but it cannot be taken lightly if one wants to see this country go in a direction other than the one charted by these uber-patriotic capitalists.
The media is more than complicit with this plan and has been feeding the American public a steady stream of fear and Patriotism while misrepresenting the war in Iraq and it’s toll considerably. Networks like CNN and Fox News have kept solidly spinning p.n.a.c.’s policies in the face of constant dissent and inquiries from curious civilians. One has difficulty avoiding the sympathetic media’s take on things, unless one knows the backdoors in American media.
The people of our country need to pay more attention to the available media if they want to know the direction that this administration is planning on taking the country. Skull & Bones, P.N.A.C., and a lot of these groups get labeled as simply conspiracy theories unless one actually researches the groups intentions.
The press, in an attempt to remain neutral and patriotic at the same time, has mislead the public as to the intentions and realities of P.N.A.C. and the policies that their think tank has implemented onto our country.
2. A Return to pre-civil rights era?
There are two schools of thought on voter disenfrachisement in this previous elections. One is that it didn’t happen, that the vote irregularities are simply your normal, everyday voting mishaps. The other is that there has been a concerted effort since the 2000 election to alienate and discourage people from exercising their rights, knowing that it may be futile. Whether or not the discrepancies in the vote count are natural or not, I think that minorities have been finding themselves in a position where their voices are not heard.
In my opinion, the last two elections will certainly elicit voter apathy among minority voters, but the awareness that has been created will go a long way to stem that tide before the next election. We hope. But, Americans are torn between patriotism and fear, and this election drew clear lines in the sand no matter what your ethnic background or sexual preference was. I feel like the addition of the vote on gay marrige to many of the states polls was an unfair stab at the homosexual community, using the controversy created by a reactionary public to sway voter opinon. Homosexuals are not the only minority who are being singled out by the administration, the relitivly slight notice given to the N.A.A.C.P. by this administration, as well as Fox News’s hounding of Rev. Jesse Jackson has continued to exploit the myth of civil rights. Not to mention the rather harsh treatment the Arab American community has received the last three years.
Women, although they do consititute the majority in our country, seem to have taken a blind eye to the fact that this administration has discussed overturning Roe vs. Wade, and the slow dismantling of planned parenthood. Womens roles in the workplace have been established, but many of the other goals sought by the feminist movement have gone unexplored in the rush to get into the workplace and the enivitable family that ensues. I’m certainly not saying every woman gets married and has children, but this is the role the current incarnation of America has forced upon women. I think that this effects the way women vote and the importance they place on staying informed. And to some extent an uninformed voter is essentially disenfranchised from the get go.
Racism is ever prevalent in our society, every other race has become the grendel to the white mans Beowulf, and our media and policy reflect that. The fact that the president and his administration can pay no attention to the atrocities in the Sudan and not fear losing enough votes to matter is a good indication of how high the priorities of this democracy are in regards to international civil liberties. And also the lack of outrage in our communities at his indifference speaks volumes on the agenda setting of the media.
I’m not sure that the intentions of the civil rights movement were ever realized except on their most basic points, minority representation has been few and far between, and minority voiced have had a difficult time finding an ear. As this administration enforces double standards by nominating decidedly controversial minority representatives to higher positions, it is interesting to speculate on where racism is headed in the new century. I think it will be a battle between classes, with the upper class convincing as many of the lower class as possible to be satisfied and content with what they’ve got. It’s good enough, seems to be the mentality. As the American worker becomes more of a cog in the international corperate scheme, and our standard of living drops, it is an amazing feat by the Bush Administration if you really think about it. And with super store’s like wal-mart offering the “hottest” cheap items fresh from overseas, the chances that the masses will awaken from this slumber before it is too late seems an ever more difficult goal.
As long as Americans can all have the same products and the income gap remains shrouded in secrecy, there will be less and less of an outcry as our civil liberties are stripped from us day by day. It is up to us to defend the rights of those who have been disenfranchised due to felony lists or voter intimidation, because it will take a concerted effort on all parts of the minority of America to get it’s voice heard in an increasingly deaf governments ear.
3. Successes and Pitfalls
As the campaign wore on, I realized that it was going to be a losing battle for Kerry. I think what made me finally see the futility was when I realized that very few of my fellow Americans had as much respect for a openminded strong speaking woman like Teresa Hienz Kerry. I think she, coupled with Kerry’s relatively soft spokenness, lost a lot of voters for him. Even though, with the exception of the poke at Cheney’s daughter, Kerry hands down won the debates, his personality and character never resounded with the American people in the necessary way to get him Ohio and Florida. Besides the constant attention focused on his time in the military that threw his campaign through a loop, Kerry was never able to portray himself as man of the working man, an image that somehow people associate with G.W.B
Bush somehow weathered the storm and turmoil. There were not many bright spots in the road for him, but the fear and paranoia of our nation was strong enough to give him and his fathers friends another four years. One excellent strategy employed by the G.O.P. was to devide the democratic party into factions, the old elite guard versus the party of the working man. Bush’s weakness’s are too many to attempt to list, but the strength of the campaign of fear that has been waged on the American people for four years was barely enough to overcome them. His refusal to open debates, the war in Iraq, and his relative ignorance on his own policy should have been enough seal the fate of his presidency into the lame duck section of history, but the media’s careful sculpting of his endless patriotism and garbled sound bites. Bush’s real strength in this election was the media’s refusal to engage him in difficult questions regarding the war, 9/11, and the economy. Or it was the intolerance of those who voted for him and against gay marrige.
Kerry’s attempt to please everybody resulted in a serious muddying of his stance on issues, and voters had a difficult time distinguishing between the two, Bush’s success in Iraq(mission accomplished) and the conservative agenda of deviding the democratic party and insinuating disloyalty, may have effected the party for years to come.
5. Media coverage and the 2004 election
I was not at all impressed with the way that the media handled coverage of this election, but to be honest, I shied away from television pretty much from June on, with the exception of the debates, because I have found myself disgusted to no end with the pitiful state of the news media and what it focuses on.
With the exception of c-span, the only network I believe actually gave seven or eight of the “third” party presidential candidates a chance to publicize their views, the media mainly focused on the yellow journalistic credo of diggin up dirt and not letting it die. From one candidates military service to the other, from phoney documents of real events ( the Rather-gate phenomenon) to true documents we wish we would have never seen (Abu Ghraib), this election season was chock full of suprises, but the big one everyone was expecting never seemed to materialize.
I was also put off by the lack of “spine” by the media to get the presidential debates more in the style of an actual debate as opposed to a simple reading of talking points. I thought that American journalism lost a lot of credibility when it layed down for that one and allowed a single host format. To me that seemed to signal a rather obedient national media.
The way that the media has handled the war is a good example of how complicit the media has become to potentially damning policies of our current administration. The war, even though it is a dangerous place to be, cannot be covered in a way that can be honestly interpreted when the government embeds reporters with troops. I think that war reporting has lost some of its appeal, there are no Murrows, no Pyle’s, no Neil Davis’s searching for the glory of the story, just a bunch of faceless heads with explosions in the far distance. So, we get to see Saddam as soon as he is captured, but we never get to see the fallen soldier’s casket as it makes the long journey back.
There were outlets for those willing to look. Amy Goodman’s Democracy Now is an excellent news source that recently became available to a wide audience, and Air America Radio is still holding relatively strong after the elections. These shows give the realities of the war and the administrations reluctance to discuss topics openly a forum to finally be discussed, and that forum will be needed even more in the next four years.
To tell you the truth, the way that the media has conducted itself since Clinton/Lewinsky has been off-putting for me. The lack of questions over the 2000 election, the “ party line shift” to uberpatriotism on behalf of the conservative networks, the unethical journalists claiming to be fair and balanced, and the immediacy with which the media chose to accept the outcome of 9/11 and the build up to war all point to, at least for me, a useless media. Or, at least, a media which seeks to entertain wholly and educate nonely.
Luckily there’s the world wide web for more savvy news buffs, and there is a chance, however slim, to stay on top of world news for at least another couple months. While the internet is great for national and international issues, it is more difficult to stay on top of local races, but those often get drowned out in the other mediums anyway by a more nationally minded media base. As it stands now, I believe it is up to individual citizens to stop letting the media think for them and start making their own opinions over the direction our country needs to take.
6. A political bias
One political bias that I had coming into class was that the presidential election was decided by the voters. I consider myself to be informed, and I thought that an informed public would have the sense to change the system before the election, ensuring that there would be less shenanigans than the 2000 election. But the lack of attention paid to reforming the electoral process led to a general apathy to the cries of a relatively small faction interested in reform.
The movies we watched and the lectures reinforced my existing theories of communication in relation to politics by highlighting the man behind the image of the president, and the many other voices that must carry his message. But none really dealt with the idea of voter reform except the last one, “ Unprecedented”. I came to the conclusion in this class that the press and the politicians control the outcome of the elections in the way they play the issues, and the American people are essentially used as a platform to step upon to reach the highest office in the land. I suppose that I also came into the class assuming that the best canidate for the job usually got the support of the American people, but I have seen that the candidates themselves are not superhuman and that there have been many times in america’s history where the public has had to flip a coin in terms of voting.
One thing that I took out of this class was a more curious mind in terms of knowing both angles being played by the political parties and understanding the people in the organization and how they relate to the canidate. It is often the people who back a canidate that really make the policies and issues that the candidates focus on. Characters like Karl Rove and George Soros proved to be much more influential than their obscurity
Comments