Exit strategy?

Interesting information, xingu. I wonder where the big media people are? They're all shivering in their boots, because if they whisper the wrong information, their life will be worth zilch.

It's both: Bushco is one of the most secretive administrations in history, and it's obvious that the media of today lacks the investigative reporting of the past. Nobody in the media is asking the tough questions about this administration - they're getting a free pass. Even many of the democrats are marching in lock-step with the republicans in congress.

but what this administration has done is illegal and should be punished, but nobody is willing to take the necessary steps. They are all fearful.

cicerone imposter wrote:

It's both: Bushco is one of the most secretive administrations in history, and it's obvious that the media of today lacks the investigative reporting of the past. Nobody in the media is asking the tough questions about this administration - they're getting a free pass. Even many of the democrats are marching in lock-step with the republicans in congress.

It's both what?

Let's, for the sake of dicussion, assume that you are right; that the Democrats and the news media are not asking tough questions about this Administration. Why do you think that is the case? Because they fear for their lives if they unearth information that the Bush Administration wants to keep hidden?

Not for their lives, but for their livelyhood. However, their outing of a CIA undercover agent is a threat not only against her, but those she has come in contact with.

I don't expect you neocons to understand any of this, but what this administration has done is illegal and should be punished, but nobody is willing to take the necessary steps. They are all fearful.

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

It's both: Bushco is one of the most secretive administrations in history, and it's obvious that the media of today lacks the investigative reporting of the past. Nobody in the media is asking the tough questions about this administration - they're getting a free pass. Even many of the democrats are marching in lock-step with the republicans in congress.

It's both what?

Let's, for the sake of discussion, assume that you are right; that the Democrats and the news media are not asking tough questions about this Administration. Why do you think that is the case? Because they fear for their lives if they unearth information that the Bush Administration wants to keep hidden?

finn

First, as to whether the claim of unprecedented secrecy in governance holds water, Project Censored, a yearly study done by Sonoma University of the important news stories NOT covered in the press, has precisely that claim as the Number One un-reported (or under-reported) news item. Many of us who read widely and who've watched government for a long time have understood the claims validity, but I thought I'd give you that extra information.

Well aren't I fortunate then to benefit from the words of a widely read, long time government watcher?

As for Project Censored, I'm afraid I don't find it an objective and/or persuasive study.

I think it can fairly be said that this administration is sensitive to leaks, and works to prevent them. To me this is understandable. Because an insider, secretly, passes information to the press, doesn't make it, automatically, more reliable than the information officially released. In any case, its been pretty obvious, over the last 5 years, that the Bush Administration does not have leak free plumbing.

Information is so managed and manipulated by all parties in the political process (including the media) that I think it's impossible to single out the efforts of one group and label them unprecedented.


Now, it becomes a poignant question whether or not democracy (in the sense we've always understood the term - government in the service of the citizens) can really withstand such decreases in transparency. I don't think it can. I do not trust either the motives or the judgement of people in power who hide. I don't think you should either.

I don't completely trust the motives or judgement of anyone in power, irrespective of whether or not they engage in practices that meet your definition of hiding, but I certainly agree that we need, within reason, a largely transparent government. I don't agree that the Bush administration's government has been terribly opaque.


How does a government lock out the press - and of course therebye, lock out the honest gaze of the citizens?

Denial of access to individual reporters - this is a Rove speciality, though not by any means original to him. If you write the wrong things, or ask the wrong questions publicly, you (and your paper/station/network) are passed-over in briefings and in news releases and in the numerous daily 'leaks' and 'tips' and late night phone calls, etc.

Stonewall everything - resist and barrier all attempts by reporters and Congress and NGOs and citizens to gain access to information which may embarrass (coffin photos, Energy Committee invitees and minutes, judicial papers, military administration memos, etc etc). Forward a notion that the administration ought to act this way - that it has a right to act this way.

Bully and threaten - when a reporter or a story gets released (or is discovered about to be released) which might embarrass the administration, call up the medium and warn them there will be consequences for such an act.

That's how it is done.


So you believe that Democrats and the press are not asking the tough questions of this administration because:

1) They will be passed over at infrequent press conferences (no application to Democrats)
2) They know the Administration will resist answering them, and so therefore why bother?
3) They have been bullied and threatened

With #3 we return to CI's insinuation. How are they being bullied and threatened? And while we're at it, what are the tough questions everyone is so afraid to ask?

1) Did you, using the CIA and the Mosad, plan the attacks of 9/11?
2) Did you steal both the elections of 200 and 2004 through widespread intimidation and fraud?
3) Did you launch a war in Iraq not to achieve any of the goals you have stated as your reasons, but because you want American oil executives to get richer, and because the president was really pissed at Saddam for trying to off his dad?
4) Do you plan on refusing to leave office in 2007 and instead declare yourself Dictator For Life?
5) Did you have Paul Wellstone murdered?

That's the job for the congress to investigate crimes committed by government employees. The average citizen does not have the wherewithal to do any investigation of government emplyees, especially those in this administration.

Many international governments have complained about this administration, but they are also powerless.

IMPEACH BUSH!