Friday, August 27, 2004

The Spectator and the Spectacle


A word of caution to the wise. If you aren't already in the know, media outlets already have a political viewpoint that informs their coverage of certain events.

As the RNC kicks into full swing this coming weekend, the winds of disapproval from many are rustling many political branches. But who will be giving you the most accurate representations of these opposing voices?

Examples:
Today's NY Daily News reporting on the ACT UP activists' nude civil disobedience that took place in Midtown yesterday, have already set the standard for the distorted atmosphere from which Bush opponents are to be viewed--lunatics.
"The madness has begun: Naked activists, Bush-bashing rappellers and drum-thumping, tie-dye-wearing marchers unleashed a torrent of wacky and daring civil disobedience yesterday."
Suggestive and imposing content?--Yes. Surprising?--No.

CNN is reporting that a survey of 876 registered voters shows that Kerry and Bush are neck and neck with Kerry leading by a point.
Personally, I find it hard to believe that a majority of voters are not yet in the loop about the very blatant acts of deceit and manipulations perpetuated by the Bush administration and corporate media outlets in an effort to forward their war agenda.

So how accurate are these surveys? Who sponsors them? Which cable networks air these statistics? Are mainstream media outlets so afraid to go against the major flow of information that they'll just distort statistics to come up with median results? Wasn't that how George W. Bush was declared president select--elect?

These are just some of the basic questions that I implore you to ask and investigate before you even consider resolving a political opinion that might inform your vote in November.
I not only call for you to excercise your critical evaluation skills with mainstream, but also with left wing media venues.
Again, most (I can't say all because I haven't been privy to all media outlets) media outlets have an agenda and in the process some critical information or events may be omitted as a result of narrow vision or purposeful censorship in an effort build a stronger argument.

My agenda: To not have George Bush re-elected.
This does not conclusively establish that Kerry is who I consider the best representation of my views. I also know that voting for Ralph Nader would increase the chances of Bush winning.

Long story-short: Question and evaluate your flow of information about your world. It's okay if your opinion does not subscribe into any mold that the press has laid out for you.

Thursday, August 26, 2004

Cameras and Smut: Defrocking the Republican Dictatorship in NYC


Looking to make a few extra coins to make next month's rent and dispise the Republican leeches who are fully prepared to test the patience of New Yorkers during the RNC?

Well, grab your cameras, wear your best cologne and c'mon down.
There's no better way to drag GOP figure heads' names in the mud than with a well-documented sex scandal that you can blast all over the web and the airwaves.

The Indypendent, has learned from the NY Daily News competiton will be 'stiff' because sex workers are flying in form all over the world to attend the RNC.
Escorts, pimps, whores, trannies, you name it, will be on call to provide much needed services to repressed, over-worked double-talking, hypocritical Republicans.

We're no fools. We know what some of these freaks will be looking for when it comes to a little R-n-R behind the confines of their posh hotel rooms.

So if you're smart and realize the sizeable money-making potential, at the expense of GOP's reputation, you'll be prepared to cash in on the deal.
These over-paid closet dungeon masters will think twice about coming back to New York and disrupting our commute!

When a lucrative book deal comes from these upcoming events, don't say I "Why didn't I think of that." You heard it right here. And if you end up profiting from my heads-up, 10 percent of your earning will be plenty thanks for me.

Tuesday, August 24, 2004

US Accountability for War-Mongering Terrorism Abroad


A few surprising revelations emerged today in relation to the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal that befell the US government.

One is that Gary Meyer, the attorney for one of the military police officers on trial in Germany today, said "What went on at Abu Ghraib was a complete breakdown of discipline and authority, and these are merely specific acts within a sea of a multitude of specific acts."

Also, a high-level panel investigation in Washington, DC has concluded that top Pentagon offiicials including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, is ultimately responsible for the mayhem that ensued at the Iraqi prison. Apparently they failed to administer proper supervision over "confusing" detention policies at US prisons in Iraq.

Hmmm. Let's think about that for a minute.

Is it any wonder why the great George W. Bush was so eager to push the initiative to renew the resolution to grant US troops immunity from being prosecuted by the International Criminal Court. Fortunately, the UN Security Council had the good sense to reject that ridiculous proposal in time to let this trial happen in Germany today.

There always seems to be 'shock and awe' (to borrow a US military term) when Americans have to face the music for crimes they committ abroad.
It appears that American arrogance and a false sense of entitlement hardly ever goes over well with our neighbors overseas.

Monday, August 23, 2004

Land of the Free: Zero Tolerance for Criticism


In the latest effort to further divert the voting public's focus on the issues, former Republican Sen. Bob Dole, has jumped on the Kerry firing squad bandwagon, highlighting Kerry's criticism of the Vietnam War.

Dole is now suggesting that Kerry make a formal apology to the Vietnam vets for openly criticizing the unjust, and inhumane acts committed against civilians during the war by American soldiers.

Dole:
"One day he's saying that we were shooting civilians, cutting off their ears, cutting off their heads, throwing away his medals or his ribbons. The next day he's standing there, 'I want to be president because I'm a Vietnam veteran.'"

"And here's, you know, a good guy, a good friend. I respect his record. But three Purple Hearts and never bled that I know of. I mean, they're all superficial wounds. Three Purple Hearts and you're out."

I not only don't care about the comments Kerry made about the Vietnam decades ago, I don't believe it relates to what his perspectives on the issues are today.

Are we shallow and gullible enough to believe that people's political opinions however noble or disgraceful, whatever their political party, can't change decades later?

I also take issue with the onslaught of McCarthy-ist persecussion that's sloppily tossed about everytime someone openly critiques any political issue or figure worth analysis. How the hell else can we, as the voting public, shape our own ideas about how and by whom this country should be run?

Debating the issues should not only happen during presidential campaigns, it should take place all the time and given a proper platform and vehicle for transmission, which we all know isn't supported by corporated media outlets.