You know when something is real serious and shifting of sands

[nadinbrzezinski]

in the US?

Well, when MSNBC does news on Saturday and FLIES it's ONLY foreign correspondent to the theater. When CNN does likewise. and for the shock of the shocks, when Fox talks to the NYT Pentagon Reporter... they don't have people on the ground. that costs money.

But so far all THREE channels (thanks to a DU'er I actually turned on Fox) have tried doing hard news. This is a real pivot point in history. We are at another marker for the fall of the American Empire... but lord... this is one of those weeks that we are all going to remember...

Now let me turn on the Al Jazera feed, after an hour of Gerardo actually trying to do news... lordly.

Oh and one more thing... Fox ain't pushing, that hard, the Muslim Brotherhood is behind this. In fact. Anthony Weiner was allowed to speak, and neither Huckabee or Gerardo interrupted. They actually listened... i know just as shocking at Gerardo talking to the NYT reporter. (COOTIES)

Oh and in the no news department... Judy (Miler), dear, come over here, Jordan is not going to explode, it already is, and the protest in Yemen are not in suport of Egypt. I know precious, you fed a lot of crap during the road to the iraq war, but precious, this is moving too fast for ya... I get it. That was the most deep propaganda they pushed... oh and I wonder if she actually knows where either are in a map;

[brewens]

1. Is it the money? Fox doesn't send it's people in harms way. Just

like their viewers heroes that never went to Viet Nam. It's just their way. Let others take the real risks.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. No, they don't have the people, serious

they mostly have enough to cover the US, and that is just barely. It is the model. They are part of the Murdoch Empire, so if they are really pressed... Murdoch has reporters in Jerusalem that can parachute in, or Sky News, again part of Murdoch press.

Fox is literally serving a customer base that probably turned the show off tonight... Egypt, who cares? If it is not us doing some shock and awe... or sports, they don't care... oh or obama care. That is their viewership. Yes I know a few.

[SharonAnn]

12. Most news organizations cut back or closed their foreign offices in the last 10 years

[patrice]

3. Maybe it's unavoidable recognition of what triggered this: the size, composition, & ownership of the

Derivative Crash that "we" caused in 2008.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. That crash had all to do with Greece and Portugal

little to do with Egypt...

As much as they are connected through globalization this is the end result of the last 30 years of depressed conditions.

[Joe the Revelator]

5. Somehow you even try to turn this into your apocalyptical rantings about "the fall of the American e

Anything for the agenda.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. So you think the US will remain an Empire forever

and the loss (quite possible) of soft power in the ME is nothing?

Just wondering how long for the rose colored glasses to finally lose their sheen?

[Joe the Revelator]

7. No rose colored glasses here

Everything is eventual. I just don't pretend to know more then I do to further my own doomsday predictions.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. So to you it is doomsday to point out that all empires die

ok... what can I say? Why don't you just use the ignore button if this bothers you so much? And you think events in the ME will not affect the US? Serious?

[Joe the Revelator]

9. Why should I ignore you? This is a discussion board, where we can discuss all sorts of things.....

Like your obsession with 'the American empire" falling every time the world hiccups.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. It is not an obsession, it is a historic reality

we are at that moment, but I will ignore you. I really have no time for this idiocy. Have a good day...you do not want discussion, but you want insults, good bye.

[Joe the Revelator]

11. The ignore feature is the refuge of the weak.

[Wednesdays]

15. Or, the refuge of people who want to get on with their lives.

nt

[gratuitous]

13. Kind of a big series of hiccups

And it's not like the U.S. is in a very good position right now. Decades of neglect of the area, if not outright abuse, have deprived us of credibility. The sterling policies of the late Bush administration were unsustainable, and their continuation - if even only in part - by the Obama administration have badly eroded any trust. Apparently our intelligence community has been caught almost completely off guard, and trying to play catch-up when the tanks are already rolling in the streets is not a good recipe for success.

Our favored method of foreign relations is already occupied in a couple of different areas (Irag and Afghanistan). Which means we're going to have to rely on diplomacy. :scared:

Right now, everyone's kind of off balance. But I don't think it will be very long (and John Bolton is already getting air time for some reason) before the usual suspects are yammering for some kind of military response. To this point in his presidency, Obama has shown himself to be very sensitive to this yammering. Do we pull troops out of the two wars we're already prosecuting? Start mobilizing more reserves? Can we afford either option? Can Obama make the case for patience and stick to it, allowing these countries to work things out for themselves?

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. Add Judith Miller to the list of usual suspects

already rolled out.