Friday, January 11, 2008

The marginalizations of candidates in the mass media

Watching the media frenzy over the whole election circus, we see the following:

Obama!
Hillary!
Huckabee
Edwards....
(Ron Paul, Mike Gravel, Thompson)

I am not a Ron Paul supporter but the guy has an interesting take on things and his views should be heard. Even though he was polling more than Thompson and beat Rudy 9/11 at the time, RP was excluded from a FOX "news" Las Vegas republican debate. No reason for his exclusion were given.

See Fox News Greta van Susteren: "At the risk of getting in trouble..."

So Mr. Paul got 10% of the vote at the time, beat Rudy Guiliani ("My platform is... 9/11! As a president I will... 9/11! Did I mention 9/11?"), but is excluded from the republican presidential debate anyway.

Similarly, Gravel and now Kucinich were and are marginalized. See the "experts"/pundits articles on the net or in the newspapers; watch those slime on TV. The candidates not supported by the "beltway old boys network", their corporate masters are simply Orwellian "non-persons".

As blatant it is with Ron Paul on the Republican side, it is JUST as blatant with Kucinich on the Democratic side. From the AlterNet blog article by Joshua Holland, quoting Kucinich's statement:

" Less than 44 hours after NBC sent a congratulatory note and an invitation to Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich to participate in the Jan. 15 Democratic Presidential debate in Las Vegas, the network notified the campaign this morning it was changing its announced criteria, rescinding its invitation, and excluding Kucinich from the debate.

NBC Political Director Chuck Todd notified the Kucinich campaign this morning that, although Kucinich had met the qualification criteria publicly announced on December 28, the network was "re-doing" the criteria, excluding Kucinich, and planning to invite only Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and former senator John Edwards."

Can we get more blatant please?

Sure we can!

ABC News follows suit and also ignores Kucinich, and why not - see the candidates own blog about it Lets exclude Kucinich from a debate in Manchester. NH. And why not? Is he running for president or something?

These candidates - they might as well not exist.

The media certainly tries to pretend they do not.

And I think we all know by now that even bad publicity is much MUCH better than none.

So, in fact, by picking on which candidates speeches are shown on TV, which candidates are talked about on those pundit shows I dislike so much, and which ones are left out of the public eye, what we have here is blatant favoritism.



People might vote for Kucinich, Ron Paul or Mike Gravel - but, since they are marginalized by the media, the citizens are stuck with an strong impression left by the media that these candidates have no chance, do not count, are a joke.

And so they vote for the annointed ones...

This is not dirty tricks on election day - this is contempt being shown by the elites towards us, the American public, for this whole election.

"We, the media, will spotlight the candidates we like, and the rest of them can go fuck themselves".

Am I the only one to see it (other than the Ron Paul folks who have the right idea)?

All the TV, radio and newspaper propaganda outlets in the USA concentrate on selling us on an elite group of candidates, and do their utmost to put the others in losers positions. Here are the annointed ones and their accomplishments:

Obama, Barack; accomplishment as congressman:
1) nothing.
2) He wrote three books for a couple million $. Whoopee, so did L. Ron Hubbard...
accomplishment as presidential candidate:
1) shouts the word: "Change!" a lot

Clinton, Hillary; accomplishment as wife to Bill:
1) NAFTA ("Since the accord took effect, real wages for Mexican manufacturing workers have dropped 13.5%, and more than half a million U.S. workers have gone into government retraining programs after their employers shifted production south or north of the border, IPS says." - there we go, if you believe that NAFTA is pro labor in both USA and Mexico, I can sell you a bridge in Brooklyn - cheap!). Jeez, isn't NAFTA just great for both Americans and Mexicans!

accomplishment as congresswoman:
1) voting for the Iraq war.

Thompson: accomplishment: movies!

Huckabee: accomplishment: being crazy!

And that's about it. A snicker or two when a pundit comments on Edwards, who is next in line to be marginalized.

Here are the criteria according to which a candidate becomes marginalized, and ceases to have any chance whatsoever at winning the presidency:

Reason number 1 - lack of funds. This is quoted as key reason by the media pundits, as in American democracy those without generous patrons (who are international business as well as various political "push" groups, such as AIPAC, NRA, etc) have no chance. So if you alienate big business and/or other entrenched interests, if you run on a platform to change the status quo and shake up the system, you have no chance. And how do you alienate these wealthy donors? By not voting in your political career as you are supposed to...

Reason number 2 - because we, the "experts" on TV, personally do not like them, or were told by our bosses to not like them. Goes hand in hand with reason 1.

Reason number 3 - we don't need a reason to show the candidates we and our network bosses like nyah nyah!

So all of yah go on voting for your Obamas and Hillarys. Count me out of this systemic stacked failure. I will vote my conscience and vote for Gravel or Edwards, who have ACTUAL policies spelled out.

Full disclosure:

I am not a Ron Paul fan, and believe that his ideas are unrealistic and wrong for America. But, like many Americans before me (and very few who do so now), I will fight against his censorship by the establishment.

"I may disagree with your ideas but I will fight for your right to speak them".
Gee, does that make me a libertarian in this case?

Also, I will vote Democrat this election cycle, as I simply cannot stomach 1 day more, never four more years, of republican incompetence and useless wars.

But I do not want a candidate shoved my (and America's) throat by the hand of the big business, the media, the lobbyists, the pundits, the propaganda think tanks.

It leaves a bad taste in my mouth, this American "democracy".

web analytics

 Del.icio.us Add to my Technorati Favorites! StumbleUpon

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Just because he says change a lot doesnt mean he is for changing the syetem.

In fact obama liked lobbyist money just fine, and only for his presidential bid stopped taking it.

Tom said...

see video: It's Too Dangerous to Give Hillary Clinton Another Shot

see video: Petty Clinton Omits Gravel, Hillary Shows Her True Colors

see video: Noam Chomsky applauds Senator Gravel's past and present accomplishments

wikibuddha said...

Let's see if we can't overhall the system!