Where is the "Al Gore" of Election/Media Reform to challenge the Swiftboating of American Democracy?

[omega minimo]

Global Warming, yes indeedy. That's one thing we all have in common. We need a planet to live on. The bastards that are perpetrating the War on Terra must have the ultimate Undisclosed Location or an Elevator To The Moon or sumthin-- the rest of us are stuck here.

Another thing we mostly agree on is that MegaLoMedia is contributing to the destruction of the planet and our political system. Where is the rockstar to champion media reform that will break down the crappification of public discourse and begin to normalize the not-so-long-ago concept of an "informed populace"?

And since it's now an open secret -- announced during the Academy Awards to the tittering of stars and the rattling of jewelry -- that "America voted for Al Gore," isn't it time to get serious about election reform? Where is the Oscar winning film on President Gore, President Kerry and Resident Bush?

If we can't have a Rockstar for each issue, can we have one for BOTH? A celebrity champion to challenge the Swiftboating of American Democracy?

:patriot:

[omega minimo]

1. Good night and good luck

:hi:

[omega minimo]

2. Four More Gores!! Global Warming, Mega Media, Black Box Voting, War Crimes

:kick: :kick: :kick: :kick:

Anyone want to nominate another topical rockstar?

[blm]

3. I agree - I hoped it would be RFK Jr. but he's having difficulty breaking through

because of the superficial way too many react to his voice problems, imo.

[omega minimo]

4. His voice is MORE powerful as he Says What Needs To Be Said

every week on Ring of Fire!

:thumbsup: :yourock: RFK Jr.

I'm always blown away that I'm listening to Bobby Kennedy's son.... who carries on.

[blm]

5. And many of us agree with you 100%.

The superficial who refuse to focus on his words are, unfortunately, the audience who the corporate media pander to the most.

[omega minimo]

6. Yes, there was an

interesting thread in GD: P full of disinformation about why "The Left" "loathes" The Clintons




:thumbsdown:

[blm]

7. Well, though the RW lies consistently about the Clintons, there are some lefties

who find legitimate disappointment in the closeness of Clinton and Poppy Bush as we have been fighting against everything BushInc has done to this country and the world for at least two decades now - some DUers go back 4 decades with their battles against Poppy Bush and his cronies.

Those who haven't been fighting that particular battle for so long may not be invested in it as much as those of us who have been. So maybe some space would be appropriate for that view since it is rooted in longheld conviction that the core agenda of BushInc needs to be exposed and brought to justice for this country to continue in any truly democratic form.

And I know that a more exposed Poppy Bush would also help shut down the network of cronies who also gained control of our election process via their control over the voting machines, their input and output.

[omega minimo]

9. and those who choose to discredit legitimate concerns in petty ways

don't seem to have real answers to the problematic aspects of the Clinton administration.

Floating more boats was accompanied by a continuation of the agenda of what Thom Hartmann calls "Reaganism" and the ultimate destruction of the middle class.

NAFTA :thumbsdown: "End Welfare As We Know It" :thumbsdown: Media mega consolidation and the Telecommunications Act :thumbsdown:

[Uncle Joe]

8. I believe some of what you are referring to

will be addressed by Al Gore this spring when his new book "Assault on Reason" comes out.

[omega minimo]

10. sounds good. gotta blurb?

:hi:

[Uncle Joe]

11. What's a blurb?

:hi:

[omega minimo]

12. can you tell us more about the book?

:popcorn: :thumbsup:

[Cerridwen]

13. Gotcher blurb right here. :D

Book Description

A visionary analysis of how the politics of fear, secrecy, cronyism, and blind faith has combined with the degration of the public sphere to create an environment dangerously hostile to reason

At the time George W. Bush ordered American forces to invade Iraq, 70 percent of Americans believed Saddam Hussein was linked to 9/11. Voters in Ohio, when asked by pollsters to list what stuck in their minds about the campaign, most frequently named two Bush television ads that played to fears of terrorism.

We live in an age when the thirty-second television spot is the most powerful force shaping the electorate's thinking, and America is in the hands of an administration less interested than any previous administration in sharing the truth with the citizenry. Related to this and of even greater concern is this administration's disinterest in the process by which the truth is ascertained, the tenets of fact-based reasoning-first among them an embrace of open inquiry in which unexpected and even inconvenient facts can lead to unexpected conclusions.

How did we get here? How much damage has been done to the functioning of our democracy and its role as steward of our security? Never has there been a worse time for us to lose the capacity to face the reality of our long-term challenges, from national security to the economy, from issues of health and social welfare to the environment. As The Assault on Reason shows us, we have precious little time to waste.

<snip>

link at Amazon

[Uncle Joe]

14. Dang, you beat me to it Cerridwen

:hi:

http://www.amazon.com/Assault-Reason-Al-Gore/dp/1594201226/sr=8-1/qid=1172765674/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-6638466-7827801?ie=UTF8&s=books

Editorial Reviews
Book Description

A visionary analysis of how the politics of fear, secrecy, cronyism, and blind faith has combined with the degration of the public sphere to create an environment dangerously hostile to reason
At the time George W. Bush ordered American forces to invade Iraq, 70 percent of Americans believed Saddam Hussein was linked to 9/11. Voters in Ohio, when asked by pollsters to list what stuck in their minds about the campaign, most frequently named two Bush television ads that played to fears of terrorism.

We live in an age when the thirty-second television spot is the most powerful force shaping the electorate's thinking, and America is in the hands of an administration less interested than any previous administration in sharing the truth with the citizenry. Related to this and of even greater concern is this administration's disinterest in the process by which the truth is ascertained, the tenets of fact-based reasoning-first among them an embrace of open inquiry in which unexpected and even inconvenient facts can lead to unexpected conclusions.

How did we get here? How much damage has been done to the functioning of our democracy and its role as steward of our security? Never has there been a worse time for us to lose the capacity to face the reality of our long-term challenges, from national security to the economy, from issues of health and social welfare to the environment. As The Assault on Reason shows us, we have precious little time to waste.

Gore's larger goal in this book is to explain how the public sphere itself has evolved into a place hospitable to reason's enemies, to make us more aware of the forces at work on our own minds, and to lead us to an understanding of what we can do, individually and collectively, to restore the rule of reason and safeguard our future. Drawing on a life's work in politics as well as on the work of experts across a broad range of disciplines, Al Gore has written a farsighted and powerful manifesto for clear thinking.

[Cerridwen]

15. LOL I can be fast on the google and post, sometimes.

Hey, back atcha!

:hi:

[omega minimo]

16. LOL -- thanks to both of you-- hadn't heard of this yet......

Sounds like a great book. Vital subject.

Are Dems willing to look at recent history that they contributed to the problem...............? :yoiks:


"We live in an age when the thirty-second television spot is the most powerful force shaping the electorate's thinking, and America is in the hands of an administration less interested than any previous administration in sharing the truth with the citizenry."

"How did we get here?"


Well, that 1996 TeleCommunications Act had a lot to do with it. One of the concerns that comes up when we discuss a Clinton or a Gore campaign.


Thanks again Cerridwen and Uncle Joe. :yourock:

[Cerridwen]

17. Re: "vital subject"

"Are Dems willing to look at recent history that they contributed to the problem?"

Based on what I've seen around here - not so much. We seem to have a sort of "under siege" attitude in which we feel we must defend Dems to the death; even if they're wrong or they've been complicit in what's gone wrong. I say we in the broad sense since it's not all of us, as we well know. *chuckle* I understand why this is happening, 8 years of "Hunting the President" is at least part of it. However, I honestly believe we do ourselves and our party a disservice by participating in the "cover up" or denial of Democratic Party mistakes and power struggles. While at the same time we need to keep a majority, no matter how slim, we also need to hold our representatives accountable. It's a tough catch-22 situation. I wish I saw the answer to it. Right now I'm busy trying to puzzle out the questions; such as, what IS the Democratic Party agenda? Which issues are we willing to put off until later in order to achieve a solid Democratic majority? Who do we lose if we put off issues until later? Does it matter? And, so on.

Some days I wish we had a Parliamentary system. This zero sum system is destroying us. The world and our issues have too many intermingling causes and consequences to focus on binary solutions.

Anyhoo, if I had all the answers... *sigh*

[omega minimo]

18. Fascinating

Great, thoughtful post. TY Cerridwen.

To sort it out, we might take a cue from the 'vital subject" of the new book.

The "under siege" attitude may be partly fostered by the bumpersticker opinions that result from the "powerful forces shaping the electorate's thinking." Simplistic arguments and knee jerk defensiveness are convenient ways to :hide: head in the sand.

And it's become the way things are done. So is it "old-fashioned" to have the confidence in one's POV --and in the comprehension skills of others-- to discuss honestly how the "intermingling causes and consequences" (great phrase) affect the issues AND the STRATEGY for a Party?

The easiest thing is to connect the dots. The hardest is to get people to look at the picture they make and BELIEVE THAT OTHER PEOPLE SEE THE SAME PICTURE. IMHO, a lot of the cynicism, "strategery," corporate branding marketing consultant mentality adopted by non-industry types while looking at politics, is all based on underestimating the audience and thinking everyone ELSE is always the sucker who doesn't get it-- so we have to "frame" properly to "sell" the ideas that we want the dumb plebes to "buy."


AND I SAY SKIP THAT!!

That is no way to have a democracy, that is no way to live life, that is commerce, not politics.

But like Bush said, "Money trumps peace, sometimes, heheheh ehhe heh."



"We live in an age when the thirty-second television spot is the most powerful force shaping the electorate's thinking....

"Gore's larger goal in this book is to explain how the public sphere itself has evolved into a place hospitable to reason's enemies, to make us more aware of the forces at work on our own minds, and to lead us to an understanding of what we can do, individually and collectively, to restore the rule of reason and safeguard our future."



"Reason's enemies" were aided and abetted by the 1996 Telecommunications Act signed by President Clinton. If you tried to find an article in the newspaper about it when Congress was discussing it-- WASN'T there!!!!!!!! The people's air waves were sold out from under them and the news media of the day neglected to cover the story. Megamediaconsolidation proceeded apace. It would be very interesting to read in the book what the Vice-President has to say about that (missing) bit of history.


If we stay stuck in "under siege" mode, we block out the truth of events as they occur and refuse to learn from the past or to avoid foreseeable "intermingling causes and consequences."

If we continue doing that, nothing will change, the United States of America is over.