Paying Attention

[Gary Sisco]

June 10, 2007
Leavitt Requests Meeting with Dead Senator
The office of Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt called Sen. Craig Thomas's (R-WY) office Thursday afternoon to request a meeting with the late senator, the Washington Post reports.

Thomas passed away on Monday after a seven month battle with leukemia.

"Needless to say, grief-stricken Thomas staffers were stunned."

********************

Duh?

This is the couln't-shoot-straightest Gang-in-Charge, ever.

And to think they call the rest of us "ordinary people."

[Gary Sisco]

Link at Sullivan's page:

On Saturday in Rome, the president agreed that there should be a deadline to end the United Nations talks, saying: "In terms of a deadline, there needs to be one. It needs to happen."

But on Sunday, Mr. Bush tried to backtrack when asked when that deadline might be. "First of all, I don't think I called for a deadline," Mr. Bush said, during a press appearance with Mr. Berisha in the courtyard of a government ministry building. He was reminded that he had.

"I did?" he asked, sounding surprised. "What exactly did I say? I said deadline? O.K., yes, then I meant what I said." The reporters laughed.

[patricia]

Originally Posted by Gary Sisco

The reporters laughed.

Much as they laughed and cavorted at the dinner at which M C Rove
made his embarrassing debut, with their full participation as well.
Reporters have become so used to their access to the President depending on their not asking hard questions and follow-up questions that they seem scared to death that that access will be cut off if they don't laugh at Dubya's jokes.
Reporters whose job it is to inform the public have become co-conspirators in the embarrassment that is the Bush Administration.
Sad and scary.

[Gary Sisco]

I think they were probably laughing at his idiocy, Pat.

In truth, though, you ask tough questions and insist on answers, your name is never called to ask a question or you just disappear from the press corps.

It's like anything else. They get to feeling part of something, even if they're not.

[patricia]

Originally Posted by Gary Sisco

I think they were probably laughing at his idiocy, Pat.

In truth, though, you ask tough questions and insist on answers, your name is never called to ask a question or you just disappear from the press corps.

It's like anything else. They get to feeling part of something, even if they're not.

That's what I mean.
Are the press, in a way, prostituting themselves in order to continue to be close enough to the Bush Administration to touch the edges of their robes??
I keep thinking of David Gregory, up there sucking up to Karl Rove and tolerating being called Stretch by the President in order to keep in their good graces. At what point do the press people start to hate themselves in the morning??

[Gary Sisco]

The press? Prostituting themselves?

You must be kidding.

[patricia]

Originally Posted by Gary Sisco

The press? Prostituting themselves?

You must be kidding.

Nope. I'm not. I don't know what else to call what they have been doing.

[Sandi22]

What is this with GW Bush. besides the Rove incident, as well as numerous other gaffs, have you been reading about the things he's said and done while abroad? Has his mind completely left him? Do they pump him up on things when he travels? His actions with the pope and others in Europe is so off the wall it has me thinking they must.

The thing is, as to how it is with the press, no ones wants to be surplanted. They all have their mortages, and many other obligations, these reporters. None of them have a room in the flea bag hotel next to the News Papers headquarters any longer, they're not drinking their breakfasts at the hotels bar. They've moved on up for the most part. They all want the good life and who's to blame them? If they were to lose their jobs in large numbers due to taking a strong stand, we still wouldn't be hearing all of what we should, and they would have to scrounge about for other employment. However, their bosses should be ashamed for selling us down the road by keeping their reporters at bay; not letting them report the hard news; the important stories. Their own agenda is what it's all about, not the truth.

The latest stories coming out of Iraq, Iran, China, Turkey, Israel and Washington, etc., etc., etc., is a lesson in how to become depressed. What is it with these world leaders? Why are they so hell bent on destruction and control? Feeding and Oiling the machines of war, seems to be their main focus in life.

So a reporter gets the boot or the cold shoulder from the President and his handlers; there's ways to counter-act this, or so one would imagine. That is if a news organization is a good one. Who would know for sure any longer, as we haven't seen much of it at work, this standing up to Dick Cheney & GW Bush. It's started, however they have a long way to go.

Helen Thomas, now's when we need you!

Surely there's others out there in the Bill Moyers mold, who will work to keep this group honest, or at least be willing to lose out because they tried to write what it is a lot of us still expect from our reporters, and news sources, the inside stories; the truth. There is so much we blame reporters for these days. Is this blame falling fairly on those who just report the news or should all the blame be heaped on their bosses? The blame seems to be perched equally on everyones shoulders, if not, where does most of the blame lie for what has been allowed to happen in government without anyone being held accountable?

Our situation is like the proverbial snow ball, it gets worse with each passing moment. Scary times we're living in, with these men in office hell bent to take us in to a major conflict, a horrific war with a standing army, forget about our past and ongoing losses with the rag tag insurgents in Iraq. Iran is a different case, they are a much larger, and more heavily populated country with more educated people and their army is better equipped, as well as being better trained. With nuclear warfare being bandied about, with small and more specialized nuclear weapons being talked about as the weapons of choice, as they're smaller and more efficient than ever before, this just sounds too ominous for words. It does sound as though we're all in for a tough go of it, this if we allow these men in office to continue unabatted with their plans for Iran.

[patricia]

And who's to stop them??
The politicians are setting fire to their own hair, figuratively, for God's sake and nobody is stopping them.

[Sandi22]

We're living in a world gone mad.

[Dr Dave]

Originally Posted by Sandi22

We're living in a world gone mad.

Gotta step up to it, Sandi!

When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.

[Gary Sisco]

Or they turn back to private lives, throwing up hands in despair.

[Sandi22]

It's a mission Dr. Dave, even if one person reads what we believe is wrong here, we've accomplished something and if they come away thinking as we do, and they in turn share that thought with just one more person, or group of friends, it won't be for naught. We have to keep up the pressure to abandandon the ideas that it's another war front which is needed.

Not so sure it's all happening in time as now they're in France, (our Ambassador), saying that Iran is supplying arms to the Taliban.

Senator Lieberman is chomping at the bit for an attack on Iran, so, on and on it goes; this talk of war, of us hitting Iran with a military strike, our beating of the drums escalates each and every day.

[Gary Sisco]

Is there something unfair about someone else than the US supplying arms to thugs and crackpots? This is a question that has often occurred to me and has never been answered with any degree of satisfaction. Is it only the US and its "allies" (most would use the more accurate "toadies" but hey, why quibble) that are "allowed" to do whatever the fuck they want in Afghanistan or anywhere else?

[Sandi22]

Originally Posted by Gary Sisco

Is there something unfair about someone else than the US supplying arms to thugs and crackpots? This is a question that has often occurred to me and has never been answered with any degree of satisfaction. Is it only the US and its "allies" (most would use the more accurate "toadies" but hey, why quibble) that are "allowed" to do whatever the fuck they want in Afghanistan or anywhere else?

We want the monopoly on that export. Have to keep the old war machine up and running. But has anyone explained why we're still buying bullets and other small arms munitions overseas?