Friday, February 5, 2010

The Latest from Obama's Department of Precrime


Anonymous said...

So, the backstory is that Bush gave the CIA and the military the authorization for this kind of targeting.

When that decision was made, Republican lawmakers sat on their hands or they applauded the action of Bush.

Putting aside for the moment whether Bush's decision has merit or whether it might be abused, the 'blogworld's' recent response deserves some critical scrutiny.

This questionable decision of Bush's played out in the public years ago when Bush made the decision, the constitutional scholars weighed in as well as the pundits and the talking heads. The public, these 'bloggers' included let the issue slide into obscurity and never returned to the issue.

Now that there's a Democrat in the White House, Republican Congressmen held a 'hearing' a few weeks ago, the Republicans in this 'hearing' acted outraged that someone may find merit in targeting an American who engages in terrorism against other Americans.

The 'blogworld' was mostly silent on the question, and credible news services such as Reuters and the BBC, among other world wide news outlets reported on those hearings weeks ago when they occurred.

Blogworld response then? Nothing, no one suggested they should be outraged, and true to their nature, collectively they hadn't the analytical prowess nor the interest to react.

Fast forward a few weeks to Feb 4 of 2010.:

The Republican noise machine plays up the outrage of Repubilcan Congressmen hoping to appear liberal minded in an election year.

The 'story' gets new life blown into it as a tool to present Republicans in a good light and to attempt to lay the blame off on a Democrat in the White House.

A couple of 'bloggers' who only react to whatever media story they happen upon from one day to the next, also present the story on February 4th, as if it's something to lay wholly at the feet of Obama.

The 'blog world', those who cut and paste the outrage of the day that they might run across that might suit their fancy, takes it viral a few weeks later.

After a couple more weeks the 'story', as framaaed by the Republicans, reaches the TV and is immediately picked up by the so-called 'liberal' arm of General Electric.

Along comes one blogger who happens on the story weeks later only because it became packaged by the Republicans, and only because it went viral first, and landed on his TV set.

This 'blogger' connects his bias against Obama with a chance to try to paint Obama again with his wide biased brush.

Cut and paste a video, attach a misleading headline and voila, he thinks he's acted both to ease his conscience, and lay some more misdirected blame where his bias can be satisfied.

There is much more comprehensive and objective commentary and analysis available which isn't just the same old viral outrage of the day presented with whatever personal bias one might hope to attach to it.

In other words, there are much better sources where there is a much more realistic signal to noise ratio. Hopefully, more people will start realizing that too many 'blogs' are little more than a reflection of their author's shortcomings, and much less an objective view of reality.

Anonymous said...

Now, literally nearly a decade after the authorization for such action was made, and after the issue has been totally repackaged and reframed for distribution on such stellar 'news' sources such as the right wing NEWSMAX and other outlets of the Republican noise machine, pliable and gullible sheep will jump at the chance to show their outrage.

They'll literally push shove themselves to the fore in their haste to show that they are hip to the latest offering.

But that outrage will only last until this post slides down the list, soon to be forgotten, their outrage sufficiently abated, in the rush to express their newly kindled outrage at the next newest framed and pre-packaged outlet for their limited attention.

All the while not seeing they're being manipulated to respond in just the manner that was designed for them.

All the while complacent that they could have no complicity in any act, they've been provided the evidence that they washed their hands and the blood was passed off somewhere anywhere but where it belongs.

You are all complicit, by which I mean, we are all complicit. You just think you've been excused for the time being.

Sleep tight.

Philip Munger said...

We are all complicit.

Anonymous said...

and being complicit, and truly recognizing that complicity, we need to begin to address that complicity in a manner that reflects that reality instead of merely echoing the prepackaged reframed versions of an alternate reality that are constructed to shift blame and divert attention from the reality.

Take the time to assess whether you're offering an objective, reality based view, or just playing a part in the reframing of reality to suit your own or someone else's mischaracterizations and biases.

The easy thing to do is cut and paste what's framed by others, choosing only what conforms, or only what can be further molded, or reframed one more step away from reality, to fit our own misconceptions and bias.

The harder thing to do is to be objective and present a view of reality without letting our own misconceptions and mischaracterizations distort and controvert the reality.

Those who choose the role of presenting reality have a responsibility to reality and the easy thing to do isn't deserving of any further promotion.

Anonymous said...

Ha ! Ha ! "We're all complicit" Yeah, right. Five year old kids are complicit. 12 year olds are complicit.
60 year old widows are complicit. Do you Leftists ever think abut the bullshit you spout ? I know liberal guilt is consuming you all from the inside out but don't dare presume to drag the rest of us into your self-loathing. Oh, and by the way is the whole muslim world complicit in islamic terrorism ? No, I didn't think so.

anon. said...

some of your readers are both complicit and insane.