News-Record.com

JR, I actually applaude your move towards local news. The responsibility to national and politics should be left to CNN, Fox News, and AP etc.

I believe there are so many political things going on in our nation, that it's hard to streamline what news should be brought to surface. Note that NY Times made a mention of it, but there just wasn't enough interest.

Personally (since I hate delving into politics, this is my "1" comment and I'm going to quit posting on this subject) I believe people are sick of the whole liberties thing. I recently posted on RealID along with Jay Ovitorre, and as we all know, the Senate passed it with 100-0. Obviously, even trying to fight for your own rights doesn't quite make it these days. I have more say in local politics because I can bump into the people and ask them straight out. You really think the Senator Dole or Burr care about what "I" think? No way. Not after the extensive emails from before and faxes. (Heck, John Edwards replied to every single email I wrote).

Forget the war and focus on home for a second, where was the coverage on RealID? Why weren't there more people trying to stop THAT?

Well Ben, here's the thing. Ignore national politics and foreign policy at your own peril, because they're all related to our domestic problems

Number one, you can't trust CNN and Fox et al to give the real story because they're little more than a conduit for the official Bushspeak. Just for instance, they're still claiming that the Al Qaeda guy they just got in Pakistan, al-Libbi, is the number 3 man in the AQ. Foreign policy experts in other countries dispute this and say he's a low level middle manager and the real #3 is a man with a similar name, al-Liby. All you're getting from the MSM is pre-packaged PR for Bush and his failed policies.

Number 2, you can't trust Yahoo, or google or the AP. The piece John linked to said Bush was cleared by the Senate Intelligence Committee and his own Presidential Commission but the facts, as reported by the WaPo (and buried deep in their pg 18 piece) is that neither body was allowed to investigate Bush's involvement.

Number three, and this is important, Real ID did get coverage when it was out in the open as an issue on the floor. The reason it got passed without any controversy is that there was no debate. It was clear they couldn't pass it through normal procedures. The bill authorizing it was snuck on as a rider to the $83 Billion emergency military appropriations bill for Iraq expenses by the GOP extremists at the last possible moment and few Congressmen had the gravitas to vote against that in order to block the Real ID. Now the only recourse is for the states to file suit since the Real ID scam is basically an unfunded mandate that will cost a bundle in state revenues, leaving even less funding for necessary services like schools and law enforcement.

If you could trust the MSM to give you the truth, I wouldn't have asked John to start this thread. I think this is huge and the only reason you (and I mean that collectively - not personally) don't give it more importance is because it's been obscured.

This news came out over two weeks ago. The US press is just getting to around to mentioning it and that's only because the left side of the blogosphere has kept the story moving. It should be on the front page of every newspaper in America with blaring headlines - Proof that Bush Lied. This is much bigger than a semen stained dress for instance. But instead it's buried deep in the paper with ho hum headers that don't even mention Bush half the time.

These minutes from the UK intelligence agency PROVE that Bush had a long standing plan to oust Saddam and take control of Iraq and he knew he didn't have legal grounds to do so. He then ordered our intelligence agencies to provide him with false information in order to justify his scheme and cut a deal with Blair to back him up. Furthermore the minutes prove he had no exit plan nor any plans to deal with the country post invasion. And believe me, it had nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with money - money that is for his corporate cronies who donate large sums to GOP election campaigns.

Hello out there folks. This is proof your president deliberately lied to you and now our country is $300 billion in the hole and there's no end in sight. He just asked for another $50 billion on top of the $83 billion that was just passed. God know what evil legislation they'll attach to that appropriation in the middle of the night.

Not to mention that over 1,600 Americans are dead, tens of thousands have lost limbs and/or their sanity and insurgency is growing stronger daily. We are currently building at least 14 permanent military bases there as you read this and if you're of draft age you should really be paying attention because recruiting is not going so well these days.

So if you're not concerned, I'd really like to know why. And Ben, I'd like to know what you mean when you say people are sick of liberties. You mean they're sick of having them or sick of hearing about how they are being systematically destroyed by this administration?

On the national or local level, it's real easy to get away with things when (1) there is no debate, or (2) there is no investigation and/or (3) there is no press coverage.

Evil usually wins unless Good is paying really close attention (a variation on a Star Trek quote).

John Edwards did not answer my e-mails. Ben must be special.

"Well Ben, here's the thing. Ignore national politics and foreign policy at your own peril, because they're all related to our domestic problems"

I don't think that's what Ben said at ALL. Your diatribe about news is understandable; there are lots of problems in our country but not every one is a conspiracy. Ben offered his own suggestion (remember, folks, what the TOPIC is) about what the N&R could have covered - Real ID. He agreed with N&R policy to put local issues first (and I agree).

These long-winded off-topic posts against commenters are going to drive good commenters away. Keep the post on-topic or write a counterpoint for the editorial page.

Libby, no one's saying you shouldn't speak your mind and no one's suggesting your points aren't valid. They're just not on-topic in this case.

Sue, with due respect, except for the longwinded part, I plead not guilty to your charges. No way was I commenting against Ben, I respect his thinking and am genuinely interested in why this story is not important to him or apparently to you. I have a blunt style but I mean whatever I say in the kindest manner possible.

The topic of John's post was the story of there being proof that George Bush lied to us in order to start the Iraq war and I think it's being buried in the US media. My premise is that this should have been on the front page of every newspaper and every newscast in America two weeks ago. Instead it was some runaway bride.

This to me, implies control of the press by the government. That frightens me and I'm puzzled why so many obviously intelligent and thoughtful people are not equally concerned. Why they're not angry about it even.

This, in my inelegant style is what I'm trying to find out. I'm obviously what you folks would call a Yankee liberal. I recently moved to Orange County, mainly to be with my family, but part of the reason was to leave the "blue state" politics behind and learn about what makes the "red states" tick. I may talk a lot but I don't think I have all the answers. I have mostly questions and an open mind.

In any event, if I am also guilty of suppressing the discussion with overly enthusatic posts, I promise not to post again on this thread. I think I've said enough already to make my point and I really want to know what the NR readers think about this. I'd be grateful if the other readers would weigh in on this issue.

Thanks in advance.

Sorry html error. I didn't preview and didn't intend to bold that first paragraph.

John wrote: "We simply continue our move to focus on local news. That focus means that we don't put as much emphasis or space on national and political news as we once did. Or perhaps as we should, sometimes. A mistake?"

To me, Libby, that was the topic of the post, not the Bush/British memo or why other news outlets didn't carry the story in depth (btw, I agree that it appears to be a common effort NOT to carry it and it mystifies me).

I didn't charge you with anything; you don't need to plead not guilty. I reminded everyone that John's post was, to me, a dicussion about carrying local v national news in the framework of that particular story. Ben mentioned another story that could have also seen more coverage, in his opinion.

Libby, I respect your opinions and your assertiveness. Just allow others to swim in the pool without harranguing them with extended posts about issues that are near and dear to you. (theme music from "Jaws" here)

Sue: John did begin this blog by discussing the President's intention to commit war on Iraq and then John explained why the N&R did not run the story. Libby's comments were on topic and the reason for this thread. Maybe the best idea is to let Libby have her say and you have your say. Unless you are the official blog police nobody really needs you to guide the discussion or to decide who can join in.

A response to Libby and a question or two for John.
Libby, I got the story from the news media in the UK. Also visited media sites in India, Australia, Asia, and China for their coverage. Much of the world media seems more interested in this story than our own media. I am perplexed by the dearth of media coverage on the UK story. In the rush to war why didn't the media probe deeply into the quagmire of WMDs? In 1994 the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs released a report titled, "U.S. Chemical and Biological Warfare-Related Dual-Use Exports to Iraq and the Possible Impact on the Health Consequences of the War." Between 1985 and 1990, lobbying by the Washington based U.S. Iraq Business Forum, influenced Washington to approve 771 different export licenses for sale of dual use technology to Iraq. What did Washington sell to Iraq? Part of the witch's brew included anthrax, botulinum toxin, and gas gangrene to name just a few. It is awkward to ask our soldiers to face death by WMDs that Washington provided Iraq. There was no debate on this war and honestly I can't decide how much blame to place on the printed media. Going to war and the loss of life requires more than a ten to thirty second sound bite.
John, if you have time, there are two national stories that I would like to know your thinking as to their newsworthiness locally. First, in today's online edition of the UK's Independent there is a story about US military deserters. Quoting from the story, "The most recent Pentagon figures suggest there are 5,133 troops missing from duty. Of these 2,376 are sought by the Army, 1,410 by the Navy, 1,297 by the Marines and 50 by the Air Force." The story goes on to state, "Staff who run a volunteer hotline to help desperate soldiers and recruits who want to get out, say the number of calls has increased by 50 percent since 9/11. Last year alone, the GI Rights Hotline took more than 30,000 calls. At present, the hotline gets 3,000 calls a month and the volunteers say that by the time a soldier or recruit dials up the help line they have almost always made up their mind to get out by one means or another." Second, In the December 9, 2004 edition of the Boston Globe there was an article titled, "Amputation Rate for US Troops Twice Those of Past Wars." The article states, "US troops injured in Iraq have required limb amputations at twice the rate of past wars, and as many as 20 percent have suffered head and neck injuries that may require a lifetime of care, according to new data giving the clearest picture yet of the severity of battlefield wounds. Only 1 in 10 US troops injured in Iraq has died, the lowest rate of any war in US history. But those who survive have much more grievous wounds. Bulletproof Kevlar vests protect soldiers; bodies but not their limbs, as insurgent snipers and makeshift bombs tear off arms and legs and rip into faces and necks. More than half of those injured sustain wounds so serious they cannot return to duty, according to Pentagon statistics. Much attention has focused on the 1,000 plus soldiers killed in Iraq, but the Pentagon has released little information on the 9,765 soldiers injured as of this week." The article also states , "These injuries, surgeons said, have long-term implications, with many involving irreversible brain damage, breathing and eating impairments, blindness, or server disfiguration." Professor Debbage used a phrase in Sunday's paper, "Think Global, Act Local." It should apply to more than economic issues.
Thank you for the opportunity to express an extended post about an issue that is near and dear to me.
Tom D. Collins

Tom, good questions. We have published a handful of stories about the number of service people maimed in the war.

We're a bit stymied by articles published in the foreign press. We subscribe to no news services that use them, so we rely on the Associated Press and American news agencies to write their own stories about the reports. It's a trust and credibility thing.

I do think that's newsworthy, but I doubt we would banner it on the front page.

So is this where you start a blog covering foreign news sites?

Not a bad idea, really.

Sounds more like an idea for a larger newspaper, say, USA Today!

John, my last comment on this topic. It may very well be that more than a few of us are using the foreign press because we don't get information from our government and media. For example we get reports from Iraq from embedded reporters that are on a pretty tight leash. I do understand not getting much info from local newspaper media because they are fixated with trying to figure out what in the world has happened to them.
Thanks again for the opportunity to express an opinion. It is appreciated.
Tom D. Collins