News-Record.com

There is much truth in the writers' letter - some overt and much hidden.

Sowell's commentary jumps off with the mainstream media premise "... the military, the White House and the culture at large have not publicized their actions ... have been too busy depicting our troops as victims ... where American victories on the battlefield [are] turned into defeat on the home front by the filtering and spin of the media."

Certainly the Troops are doing their durndest in a really tough situation - BUT ....

The military, the White House did a huge dis-service to the troops - caught bold face lying - exploiting the stories of Private Jessica not-really-the-hero Lange and the Pro Foot-Ball player turned killed-by-friendly-fire Soldier.

The White House did a huge dis-service to America by bold face lying about the reasons for war in the first place ... and it continues with shifting sands of rationale.

Certainly we NEED to receive all sides of anything that affects our national security and policies .. and one-sided reporting is THE danger to democracy -- so let's hear the good stuff too ... but by golly that is a dual edged sword.

Slightly off topic (but not fully - gimme a second to explain ...)

I just recieved a note from RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman, stating ".. the cost for recovery [from Katrina] will be staggering. For that reason, we are asking you, our supporters, to make [donations] to hurricane relief efforts."

My God what a disaster those folks are facing.

But back on thread ...

Mehlman also states "During times like these, there is no room for politics and partisanship. This is a time when we all come together to help our neighbors."

OK - so our enemies, who have vowed to bury us, who have cost to date about 10 times the amount of Katrina ($300 billion vs. $30 billion); our enemies, who have vowed to bury us, who have cost to date about 100 times the American lives (2000 lives - of course the MSM and the Whitehouse separate Afganistan and Iraq, plus 3,500 on 9-11, plus many others also not reported (more later if you want) .. vs. perhaps 75 lives from Katrina ...

NONE of which is to belittle Katrina - may God bless the people ... but for the past 4 years shouldn't Chairman Mehlman - along with the current Bully in the Pulpit - have been stating this: "During times like these, there is no room for politics and partisanship. This is a time when we all come together to help our neighbors."

"We are entitled to receive all sides of anything that affects our national security and policies, whether we agree with them or not."

How do you figure that? Are you telling me that there's no freedom of speech? Or more precisely, are you telling me there's no freedom not to say certain things? Furthermore, are you telling me that you agree with involuntary servitude, that someone must perform a service for you, such as informing you of something?

"It is not the media's authority to only publish what they believe is the best policy."

A private media outlet has a right to publish whatever they feel like publishing, as long as it doesn't amount to libel. I hope you aren't implying that there should be more government control of the media than already exists. How could you possibly trust the government to present us with the truth over a free market in which all sides could present their views?

Paul,
Are you suggesting the press has no duty to print the truth.I suggest you read the Locke report,yesterday, where a state employee commited suicide, just before is was to testify against the good ole boys. By the way he had his hands tied behind his back, with a plastic bag over his head" Did you see these in other papers??? Last week Doug Clark praised Basnight as a honorable man for the way he handle the lottery. When Basnight pulled his sham over the lottery, Basnight name was not in MR. Clark story. That is called bias reporting. Sorry Paul, I think the press should report it, like it is. Not how the GOOD OLE BOYS WANT IT.

Doug,

So it should be illegal to have opinions and to express them or to refrain from expressing them?

Like I said, I think libel should be illegal. You can't, for instance, say that Food Lion sells spoiled meat if it's not true, because that could ruin their reputation unjustly.

But you're saying media should be unbiased and that they should tell the whole truth. But what should be done and what people can rightfully be forced to do are two completely different things.

Would you honestly trust the government to present unbiased news? Only a completely free market in media will ever give us any hope of knowing the truth to some degree. When all voices, sides, and views can be heard, the truth will be more easily extracted.

The N&R or any other paper, magazine, TV, or Radio news service has a duty to print or broadcast anything they jolly-well please - we live in the USA - our constitution allows for FREEDOM of speech and FREEDOM of the press so that Rush Limbaugh can say what he wants and I don't agree with his point of view but I would defend his right to broadcast - I just listen to a different channel. I don't like the N&R'S right leaning editorial slant so I don't buy it. I would ; however defend their right to support the republican party's agenda.

Tom, Doug, if you would rather live in a country that controls the news you should try Saudi Arabia or Cuba or well you get the point - FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.

You know, folks may not have been as open to accepting the rationing, etc. of WWII if the full brunt of US weakness and failure during at least the first year of that conflict had the FULL truth of the situation been known. It was only the politicians, and not all of them, who knew the FULL truth.

It is only when a government "of the people, by the people, for the people" is held accountable that same cries "foul" when the fuller truth is known. If knowing the full story hurts one's case, one would rather only the "pertainent" facts be known. So, what is the problem?

Does this not sound like GCS to anyone?

Shalom

This only happens about once a year, but I agree with Yallerdawg. The media have the right to produce whatever they want, short of libel as Paul states.

That being said, the mainstream media no longer has a choke hold on the news as there is now cable news, talk radio, publications galore, and the Internet. In fact trust in the media is at all time lows:

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/2237374306

So Mr. Lain, don't expect to see balanced news on CBS, NBC, and ABC it ain't gonna happen. A spade is a spade and now most Americans realize this. If you have cable turn on channel 40 for a change.

This is a silly point that comes up every once in a while. Why aren't we getting the good news from Iraq? Could it be because it's a war that is making no noticable progress and the balance of the news is bad. Wars and good news are not that compatable. As a reporter what are your going to cover: the school opening or the Humvee getting blown up with American soldiers killed?

Perhaps the press corps should focus on the streets that aren't flooded in New Orleans and ignore the destruction.

We are getting a realistic picture of what's going on in Iraq and that's what a lot of folks don't like who would like the rose colored version of events desiminated. Americans realize that 1800+ troops didn't die in traffic accidents.

We're smart enough to know that there are good things going on along with the bad but our troops aren't over there to build schools. The folks that want a bunch of happy talk coming back from Iraq are just wanting their point of view justified. I'm just glad we don't have that sort of press. Perhaps these folks should subscribe to the Chinese press if they want the governments view to be the one presented.

"We are entitled to receive all sides of anything that affects our national security and policies..."

Not, apparently, when the adminstration was trying to make the case for war.

The news media is a money-making enterprise, they'll market what sells.
It is mostly a liberal-run industry, and their product reflects their left leaning bent.
If we buy it, we're buying into the impression that their opinion is the correct one.
I urge you to get as much news from as many sources as you can and make your own decisions about he war, etc., instead of buying into what the libs cram down your throat for profit.

Tom,
Thomas Sowell has every right to drop what he's doing as a member of the media and apply for the needed press credentials so he can go to Iraq and be embedded with a military unit. If Jeff Gannon/Guckert can get White House creds, then Sowell should have no trouble. Since you are someone who reads and appreciates his columns, why don't you ask him?
That also goes for the Rhino Times, Greensboro's basher of the MSM. I notice they had no trouble managing the expense to send a reporter to Hawaii to report on the convention that our county commissioners attended. I'm sure that their budget could handle this assignment, since they are so dedicated to reporting the truth.
By the way, 60 journalists have been killed in Iraq in the last 2 years. That figure matches the number of reporters that were killed in Vietnam over a 20-year period. All I can say is that the reporters that are sending back "only negative" reports from Iraq must be really dedicated to their agenda to be willing to put themselves in harms way for it. Is Thomas Sowell willing to risk his life to report the positive stories from Iraq?

I have stated the same thing before here that we can't forget what we did to the Veitnam vets. The armed forces are there doing their jobs, some want to be there some not. It is up to us as a nation to support them regardless of our own personal feelings about the war, terrorism, and whatever else we want to complain about. The fact of the matter is that we can't change the fact that we are in a war in Middle East. It is up to the President and I don't think anyone (even a mother that lost her son who volunteered for the mission)can make him change his mined. Right now sitting on the couch next to me is a kid (looks like a man, but just turned 21)that will be leaving on Labor day to report back to duty. He is shipping out on the 16th for Iraq. He is a infantry man, a machine gunnist. I say to all of you, you can rant and rave on here anonymously but what would you say to his face? If you say that you have the audacity to say to his face he is wrong to go and fight for what he believes is his duty then there is truly something wrong with you. Why not speak in here as if you are speaking to the one's that are over there, the one's that are going , and the one's that won't come back. We claim that we are humanitarians, are we truly?????

I would like to inject two points I saw from some recent news show. On lasts Sunday Meet the Press Timm Russert interviewed four retired generals. Three,after speaking with the commanders on the ground, felt that the press was missing the good points BUT they did admit the progress we are making there are coming in very small steps. They felt the press had a right to print the other stuff but should do a better job on talking about the good progress. But my question was if this is true,ie small steps and I believe them, how long are the american people willing to wait?

Second on CNN INternational they have a show where they bring in reporters and discuss how the press are covering the current topics. Hard question do get ask about the bais of the press and is it fair and normally they have their critics on this show. This one show they looked at the coverage of the Iraqi war. They had a reporter from the BBC, Washington Post, and an Iraqi reporter working for a local Baghdad newspaper. The one question I felt was interesting was;"Why was it the military press and international press were given positive answers about how the iraqis viewed the US and different answers to iraqi press people?"Washington post sent people out with the military,for safety reasons, to ask how they felt and got in general postive answers and then sent out iraqi press people alone and asked the same question returning with contradicting answers.

And what even the Iraqi newsreporter supported was that the iraqis are willing to tell the military what they want to here but are more willing to tell the truth to local iraqis. He did add that there a many iraqis who are happy that the US is there but maybe not as many as the military wants us to believe.

The point of all this is that the truth about what is taking place in Iraq is well hidden and often not so clear. Each news company reports what they see and maybe you dont like it but it doesnt make it wrong what they report. It amy be incomplete but it doesnt make it wrong. The reality is you need to be willing to look at the complete picture using each media outlet for whatever advantage the have even the ones who print or report what you dont like. Afterall a complete picture means even recognizing there is another side to the story.

Sara, I pray that the Prince of Peace will intervene and the US Military will be removed from Iraq before your son is due to go.

I will state here, as I would face-to-face with anyone. I am a peace-loving, anti-war person. Because I have been redeemed and shown the light by the Prince of Peace, I am called to work for peace.

Peace means without conflict. I state again a sign that I have seen, "Waging war for peace is equal to having sex to promote virginity."

Violence only begets violence. If the US military withdrew from Iraq right now, the attacks on the Iraqi people would stop! Therefore, there would be no reason to attack Americans. WIthout US interference in Middle East matters that are not issues related to the US, there would be no cause for alarm. American imperialism needs to cease!

Shalom

"Violence only begets violence. If the US military withdrew from Iraq right now, the attacks on the Iraqi people would stop!"

Sorry Darryl, I don't believe that they would. We have created a power vacuum In Iraq that has to be filled. The killing will continue till the power situation settles down. War usually causes more problems than it solves?

If it's amazing, Dan, that you agree with Yellowdog for once, what word would you use to describe the fact that I agree with him? ;-)

Marshall: I'm with you on this: "We have created a power vacuum In Iraq that has to be filled. The killing will continue till the power situation settles down."

All - I was a bit controversial above, but note today a UK paper picked up a similar theme ... http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1560269,00.html

(how do ya'll post those pretty links in here?)

First and formost Darryl he is not my son, the assumption that you have thinking that I would only feel this way about my own child makes me ponder the fact of your Prince of Peace.....have you been taught to only care about your own?
Secondly, what did your Prince of Peace do when He went to the temple and got pisses off about people making a mockery and profit on what was supposed to be a sacrifice to God? Was He not attempting a coup to take down the wrong doers? It amazes me that people speak of Jesus as just a one emotion person love, love, love,.....I think not.....Jesus had the backbone to stand up and say what He thought. What would Jesus say about the gasing and ethnic cleansing that happened in Iraq? I just wonder why such radical Christians still seem to be more or less pick and choose Christians.....you choose out of the bible what you want to follow and forget all the rest. When Jesus said "turn the other cheek"....if you had don't the right studying of the verse and the history of that time....you would know that the turn the other cheek deal is this: In those times if you were "smitted" that menat that someone had backhanded slapped you, turning the other cheek forces the smitter to slap you as he would an equal not a slave or a woman.....People need to learn that their relationship with God is their relationship and not behave as they can just start the propaganda of the Kum Ba Yah......I thought almighty God was the judge I am glad He has so many people now-a-days appointed to speak for Him and be a judge by proxy....one last thing, when I read the bible several times I remember many wars in it. hmmmmmmmm.

Dan, Paul, all ican say is WOW. I think the key word to this meeting of the minds is "FREEDOM".

OK sara, my error in thinking the "kid" mentioned was your child. I read too deeply into the comment made, for that I apologize. I also apologize for the anger that it caused you.

Second, check the context (whole context) for Jesus' anger on cleansing the temple in the reference given.

Now, in regards to the previous paragraph, what theme is constant and continuous throughout Jesus' teaching? I find LOVE to be that commonality. If I am wrong, prove me and other "radical" Christians wrong. Also, thanks for that compliment! (:o)

I do not feel that I am being a "pick & choose" Christian in the matter. LOVE is the key. Love also covers a multitude of sin, at the rate of things, there is a great deal of love out there!

Shalom

Darryl,
I was going to write back a response to you in detail,,,,,but I just decided that after reading your other comments in the other strings that I would just let you be. You seem to think that anyone that responds to you are angry, and your word should be the end all be all. May I just say "thou protest too much".......

Sara, I am saddened that those feelings are sensed from my posts. However, if my feeling strongly about protesting for peace are wrong in another's eyes, then the problem is with that one. I act as I feel led. I believe that activism is a postive force.

As for "letting me be," that is a disservice to others. You see, all can learn from these discourses. Yet, one one feels that it is useless to respond/counter another, then the discourse is lost.

As for my stance on peace, blame that on God. You see, that is where I get the evidence for my stand. I will share it in the best means that I deem possible that I feel led to do so. I do not take my stand for popularity. I stand for peace because that is what I am called to do as a Christian. If one disagrees, that is fine. I disagree with those who beat the "war drums." That does not mean that they are not doing what they feel led to do. Each person must be fully persuaded in his/her own mind. I hope that something positive comes from my peaceful stance.

Shalom

I hear you Darry and I wish you luck and pray for your courage.
Take care

Thank you so much for those words Sara, please know that you too are held in the Light.

Shalom