Thursday, March 12, 2009

How the Permanent Power Structure Is Trying to Stop Obama

Is the Hunter Being Captured by the Game?

by Danny Schechter

Some things don't change. Obama may be in the White House, shuffling between the safety of the center and the language of change ("changeguage?"), firm in his commitment to the doctrine of neo-prog pragmatism which all too often requires the abandonment of ideas and ideals that could offend both the right and wrong people.

He is in office, but is he in power?

The mistake that many make is to confuse the trappings of symbolic power with the exercise of real power. Truth be told, real power is exercised mostly by unchecked private interests, lobbyists and our media. They have the power to obstruct policies, stir up controversies and orchestrate pressure to kill measures they don't like. They are well-funded minority and work skillfully in the shadows and through highly paid PR practitioners.

(I know what you're thinking.....'Oh, God....there they go again....the conspiracy theorists." Take a minute. Think. It is as we have been saying for years...."The politicians are just, for the most part, middlemen/women. When there were powerful monarchies, there were no elected officials, only nobility. Nobility and the Church stood between the beaten down masses and the Royals, as the middle class and the politicians do today. The middle class is disappearing.... splitting....splitting into 1)those who see themselves as being a part of the modern-day "nobility," making six-figure incomes. living in gated communities or grand apartments in security buildings and who have great health insurance and 2) those who know longer see themselves as middle class, are no longer in denial about their fate after the intentional demolition of the economics and security of this nation.)

Every politician knows that these non-elected power centers often have more power than elected decision-makers. They know that Congress is a swamp of competing interests catering to provincial needs. Remember the debate over "earmarks" during the campaign? McCain raised it but then Obama agreed with him. What happened?

Both parties promote them. They are, apparently, a permanent part of the system. South Carolina's Lindsay Graham thunders against them until it involves money for a convention center in Myrtle Beach SC. And etc.

AP says of the President: "He criticized pork barrel spending in the form of "earmarks," urging changes in the way that Congress adopts the spending proposals. Then he signed a spending bill that contains nearly 9,000 of them, some that members of his own staff shoved in last year when they were still members of Congress."

True, but! Like many press reports this is totally context-free, even in our Republic of Pork. These earmarks represented 2% of the budget and got 98% of the coverage.

That's because the media are in the perception-forming business, and despite some liberal (but rarely left) voices, tilts center-right when it is not blatantly serving a right-wing agenda.

Is this a conspiracy theory? I don't think so based on thirty years inside the media world.

(I sure as hell don't think this is a conspiracy theory. Many of us know this is true for other reasons other than working inside the ACNM.)

Former AP reporter Robert Parry, now Editor of Consortiumnews.com, sums up this part of the problem, "Less than two months into Barack Obama's presidency, it has become clear that the top threat to his ability to accomplish his goals - from reversing the recession to reforming health care to building a greener economy - is not just an obstructionist Republican Party but a U.S. news media that remains largely tilted to the Right.

There is the powerful right-wing media - with its many outlets in print, radio, TV and the Internet - but also a mainstream/corporate media that can't escape the old dynamic of framing stories negatively about Democrats and granting Republicans every benefit of the doubt."

This phenomenon is obvious to anyone that looks closely but few among the Democrats mention it less they be marginalized or stripped of access to the airwaves for an occasional sound bite. Even fewer try to build and support independent media like Parry's organization or our own.

Politics remains a battleground and it's not just Rush and his ditto heads who help steer or undercut the agenda. Conservative democrats are not fully on board Obama's express.

Powerful lobbies from two private sector complexes and one country have disproportionate clout. There's the long-standing military-industrial complex, there's the financialized credit and loan complex and there are the bully boys of Israeli hegemony.

The first two want to suck off the budget and deregulate when possible; the third wants money too-and gets far more than its fair share-but also to control the discourse and even name the officials who are part of it.

Example, President Obama appointed Dennis Blair Director of National Intelligence. Blair wanted to have an advisory group and reached out to a former US ambassador Charles Freeman considered to be an outspoken and outside the box thinker. Like Obama, Blair wanted some diversity of views among his advisors, and to understand a region that has largely turned against us.

What happened? Freeman who dared criticize Israeli policy was targeted by the Israeli Lobby. Rumors were floated; his record was distorted. Right wing pundits went to work painting Freeman as an enemy of the United States. He was forced to withdraw. Ironically part of this noxious campaign was steered by an AIPAC operative who is himself accused of spying for Israel.

Ray McGovern, a veteran CIA man notes that Freeman himself revealed that his character assassination was orchestrated by the Israel Lobby.

"The outrageous agitation ... will be seen by many to raise serious questions about whether the Obama administration will be able to make its own decisions about the Middle East and related issues. [It casts] doubt on its ability to consider, let alone decide what policies might best serve the United States rather than those of a Lobby intent on enforcing the will and interests of a foreign government...

"The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views ... and the exclusion of any and all options for decision by Americans and our government other than those it [the Lobby] favors."

It is almost as if every government, Republican and Democrat are required or intimidated into supporting Israel's every policy even when blatantly reactionary, racist, or even self-destructive. Are we now supposed to rubber-stamp every decision by its new ultra-right government that won power with electoral maneuvers and blatant appeals to chauvinism and fanaticism?

Obama stayed silent when his own appointee was bashed into resigning by agents of a foreign power, even if they don't cop to that description?

Has the president lost his tongue, or his courage? Must he lay down with the lions to stay in power or do the people who put him into office have to get back into action and stand up for the values and spirit that turned so many on?

As we said before the election, the battle will not be one on election days even if Obama wins. He cannot do what we want him to do without our support, whatever it takes.

Yes, he's better than Bush even if some of his recent pronouncements sound Bush-lite. We have to understand the nature or the terrain he's fighting in---and then press him to do what's right, not offer rationalizations.

We also have to anticipate what my former government professor at Cornell, Theodore Lowi is now saying, that he expects Obama too will inevitably be targeted and go through a downward spiral.

"If you check out the rhetoric on the front pages of papers and magazines and TV, you'll see how personalized references are: ‘Can he deliver? When will he deliver?' ....

"The reality is that all the powers in the world could not make it possible for him to do what's expected. That's what makes me so sad. Obama excels in all that we require in a president and he'll fail, precisely because he's president. I know this sounds like an awful contradiction or conundrum, but that's the presidency."

Mediachannel’s News Dissector Danny Schechter investigates the origins of the economic crisis in his new book Plunder: Investigating Our Economic Calamity and the Subprime Scandal (Cosimo Books via Amazon). Comments to dissector@mediachannel.org



Let The Sun Shine In......

Bushies Count On Americans' Stupidity or ADHD


No quit: the campaign to boost Bush
By: Mike Allen
March 11, 2009 04:28 AM EST

The defense never rests. When President Barack Obama released his own policy this week on former President George W. Bush’s practice of attaching controversial signing statements to legislation, a reporter quickly got a tip from a Bush loyalist: the cell phone number for a White House lawyer in the past administration.

“The spin is bogus,” said William Burck, a former deputy White House counsel, in pushing back against early news accounts framing Obama’s action as a slap at his predecessor. In fact, Burck insisted, the new policy is no different from Bush’s.

Even though Bush is keeping quiet in Texas before heading out on a lucrative speaking tour, an informal network of former aides is keeping his views in the political bloodstream, defending his legacy in TV appearances and back-grounding reporters about his record.

Former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer calls the Bush pundits “a loose confederation of people united in our belief in what President Bush did, and we’re freer now to talk about some things than we used to be — good and bad.”

The Bush defense forces include Fleischer; former press secretary Dana Perino; Bush political czar Karl Rove, who has contracts with Fox News, The Wall Street Journal and Newsweek; economics guru Tony Fratto; the prolific Peter Wehner, former director of the White House Office of Strategic Initiatives; and the graceful speechwriter Michael Gerson, who writes an opinion column for The Washington Post.

The former aides are armed with many of the same arguments that they tried out on reporters when they strolled the hallways of the West Wing.

When CNN’s Larry King recently asked what Fleischer considered to be a hostile question about tax cuts, the president’s first press secretary pulled out an ancient talking point and reminded viewers that the nation “had a record-breaking 55 straight months of job creation and economic job growth” on Bush’s watch.

“We’re invited to comment on the events of the day and along the way, we remind people that there was, indeed, good news under President Bush,” Fleischer said.

Participants say the effort is not coordinated or organized but, rather, a natural result of the hunger by bookers and reporters to get the views of aides who approached the status of celebrity through their service in a two-term presidency. The Bush alumni said they make their points subtly — both because the former president does not want to feed an Obama vs. Bush story line and because they know they will never win that battle.

“Communications-wise, this tidal wave is going to have to wash on over everybody,” said Perino, Bush’s last press secretary. “We do what we can, and we believe that history will get it right in the end.”

A few days before Obama announced he was abolishing Bush-era limits on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, Bush supporters who frequently appear on TV received an e-mail from an adviser saying: “I wanted to send you the following two documents on President Bush’s record on stem cell research: 1. a Bush White House fact sheet on President Bush’s record of advancing stem cell research in ethical, responsible ways and 2. a November 2007 Washington Post column by Charles Krauthammer, ‘Stem Cell Vindication.’”

Recipients said the information was helpful and that they were struck by the fact that it wasn’t talking points — just a savvy reminder of points the press was likely to overlook.

So the Bush message persists in the punditry ether. On National Review Online, Yuval Levin, who worked on health issues as an associate director of Bush’s Domestic Policy Council, defended his boss’s approach to the stem cell decision: “Unfortunately, the political debate has yet to recover the kind of balanced understanding of the moral quandary that President Bush offered the country eight years ago.”

Jim Connaughton, the former chairman of Bush’s White House Council on Environmental Quality, popped up on Fox the other day talking about the president’s record on energy and the environment.

And Fratto, once a top spokesman for Bush’s Treasury Department and White House, talks to reporters about economic issues just about every day.

“A lot of us still hear from you guys, looking for reaction, especially when we’re attacked, like on the budget,” Fratto said. “There’s no coordinated effort to push back on these things, but if there’s a charge, we’ll set the record straight.”

Bush-era officials walk a fine line, and they know it. The outgoing administration, in the view of even the most partisan members of the Obama team, was hugely helpful and professional during the transition — a tone that clearly started in the Oval Office. Former presidents, by tradition, try to leave the stage to their successors, and Bush — who has been largely incognito except for a visit to a Dallas hardware store, has been no different.

Former White House aides from both parties also feel a bond with the new kids in town — particularly given the economic apocalypse that they face. Fratto says he often reminds reporters to give his successors at Treasury a break, since they have so much on their plate, “some of it of their own making, a lot of it that they had to pick up as they came in.”

“That doesn’t always make the stories,” he said.

Perino said her fellow alumni have no interest in “fanning the flames of Obama vs. Bush.” But sometimes the frustration does show.

“For many years, we were accused of being too close to the Russians, right?” Perino said. “Too close to Putin — too friendly with them. And then on this recent trip, our new secretary of state wants to press the reset button and improve the relationship with Russia. And I think: Why isn’t there any critical thinking going on?”

© 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC




Let The Sun Shine In......

ALERT!!! Cheney Hit Squads?


In a testament to the vital need for non corporate, independent media, the non-profit MinnPost.com posted a Five Alarm bombshell: Seymour Hersh stated that a top secret assassination squad reported directly to Dick Cheney in the Bush Administration.

Ignored by the corporate mainstream press -- as usual -- Hersh's comments were picked up and followed up upon by the MinnPost following a forum at the University of Minnesota.

(This piece of information was not ignored by MSNBC's Keith Olbermann. He mentioned it last night and promised more details tonight.)

Hersh almost in passing revealed:

"Right now, today, there was a story in the New York Times that if you read it carefully mentioned something known as the Joint Special Operations Command -- JSOC it’s called. It is a special wing of our special operations community that is set up independently. They do not report to anybody, except in the Bush-Cheney days, they reported directly to the Cheney office. They did not report to the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff or to Mr. [Robert] Gates, the secretary of defense. They reported directly to him. ...

"Congress has no oversight of it. It’s an executive assassination ring essentially, and it’s been going on and on and on. Just today in the Times there was a story that its leaders, a three star admiral named [William H.] McRaven, ordered a stop to it because there were so many collateral deaths.

"Under President Bush’s authority, they’ve been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving. That’s been going on, in the name of all of us.

Moreover, Hersh dropped a second Five Alarm bombshell: the CIA was more deeply involved in spying on American citizens than ever previously revealed: "After 9/11, I haven’t written about this yet, but the Central Intelligence Agency was very deeply involved in domestic activities against people they thought to be enemies of the state. Without any legal authority for it. They haven’t been called on it yet."

Like BuzzFlash, the MinnPost has shown the importance of a completely independent media, free of corporate influence, to expose the crimes and shocking actions of those in power.

Coming from anybody else, these allegations would be met with some skepticism. But Eric Black of the online MinnPost knew that Hersh, a long-time intelligence correspondent for the New Yorker, has impeccable credentials and bats nearly 100% with his analysis and conclusions. So he not only found the dynamite buried in a question and answer session, Black followed up by e-mail with Hersh to verify the quotes.

Let BuzzFlash know if a former vice-president ordering and overseeing the assassinations of people in foreign countries makes the front page news of any mainstream corporate newspaper, the nightly news, or corporate radio. Somehow we doubt it will get much play, if any.

That's why we need the independent media, such as MinnPost and BuzzFlash.

Hersh spoke indirectly to the need for alternative sources of information when he observed:

“The major newspapers joined the [Bush] team,” Hersh said. Top editors passed the message to investigative reporters not to “pick holes” in what Bush was doing. Violations of the Bill of Rights happened in the plain sight of the public. It it was not only tolerated, but Bush was re-elected.

But the only completely independent alternative to the corporate press is a grassroots-supported media, which is accountable to the citizens of America and its communities.

MinnPost.com proved that once again.

Now, we still have a question at BuzzFlash.

When will Dick Cheney be tried and put away for war crimes and violations of American law?

Damn Good Question. One we would sure like and answer to. Surely to God, after all the other crimes against the Constitution as well as International law, A.G. Holder cannot ignore this.


Let The Sun Shine In......