The Seattle P. I. comment is from a reader’s blog.

Excellent deconstruction, thanks BT.

And I’ll say it before Phoenix Woman comes along: this is why we call it the GOP/Media Complex. Because it’s simple, and non-complex.

This is often misunderstood I feel…”the refs” are knowingly fixing the game. BigMedia owners (who call the shots…doesn’t matter what individual producers/reporters think) are playing along, and Repubs just have to play along as well.

I’ve always felt Rove, Luntz, etc. get way too much credit as being political geniuses. Repubs screw up massively and often in the message game, yet it doesn’t matter if they never get called on it in any meaningful way in BigMedia. John Q. Nascar will keep voting them in thinking they’re working in his best interest, when in fact they’re selling him out daily.

BigMedia busting up and replacing with New Media is perhaps the most important issue of our time, since every other issue is so influenced by how each issue is presented to the public. When people know the actual facts and given honest debate, they almost always side with truth and justice. History shows this.

You are correct.

Here’s how they do it.

Ta-dah!

The GOP/Media Complex operates much like the military/industrial one, and has many of the same constituent units.

For a man dubbed “No Drama Obama”, drama and controversy sure seems to dog him no matter what he does. Witness his platitudinous but still-controversial education speech today.

And Chuck Todd calls GOP’s terminal goal of dismantling the Dept of Education a legitimate position, on Dr.Nancy.

Agree completely. The GOP message machine is nothing special. They’ve bought the “refs”. How hard can it be to get the ‘refs’ to act stupid or ignorant when they’ve been paid to act stupid or ignorant?

Did BO note that the jury is still out on that “gravity” theory? Exactly. Therefore, the talk was obviously controversial.

PW: If Eisenhower would have seen the GOP/Media Complex coming, he probably would have warned against that, too.

and wash their hands to avoid getting sick.

Guess the wingnuts prefer to eat first after wiping.

My fav part of the President’s speech:

“Every single one of you has something that you’re good at. Every single one of you has something to offer,” Obama told students

And I also liked hearing about his mom home schooling him.

I thought that NBC guy’s name was “Chuck Tool”. I stand corrected.

I’ve always felt Rove, Luntz, etc. get way too much credit as being political geniuses. Repubs screw up massively and often in the message game, yet it doesn’t matter if they never get called on it in any meaningful way in BigMedia.

Yup. About the only time a right-winger ever gets in trouble with his/her fellow right-wingers in the media is if he/she sides with non-right-wingers on an issue.

Case in point: Pitchfork Pat Buchanan, whose racist and anti-Semitic attitudes were and are tolerated if not blatantly feted by his fellow media elitists, except for that brief period around 2003-04 when it suddenly became fashionable to remember that he was indeed a bigot. That period, of course, coincided with his vocal opposition to the invasion of Iraq. (Of course, his once and future media buddies used the fact of his opposition to the invasion to try and paint all Iraq war foes as bigots.)

“Pitchfork Pat Buchanan”

Yup. Last week he came out with his “Hitler didn’t want a war” theory, and we heard (approximately) *crickets*…

The Democrats are in the majority but make no effort to control the messages. Sure, Fox News is hopeless, but they still could get their message out. It should not be all on Obama and his Administration. Where are Pelosi and Reid? They seem determinded to lead the Democrats back to the Minority.

According to Pat, the president is “exotic.” That’s probably the main reason why his speech is “controversial.”

Fascist Fux

MUCH ADO,ABOUT NUTTIN
RINSE,LATHER REPEAT….FART,RINSE LATHER REPEAT
on infinitum

This “controversy” over a President’s school kids could have long-term unintended consequences. If kids are learning hostility to government at an early ages, we might well be nurturing a future generation of anarchists.

Learning mistrust of government at an early age may not be such a bad thing.

i wish this man to lose control of his bowels,after he loses his mental capacity,while the any virus or bacteria eats up what remains of his brain,in a peaceful,non violent way…oh and let his insurance company drop him……..

Teaching kids to worship St. Reagan seems harmful, but that’s what the wingnuts do.

REM/Moveon Vid on Health Care

if I understand where the wingnuts du jour are coming from, the Federal government would consist of the Dept of War (renamed DoD.. DoW was what DoD use to be called, DoW would also replace both State and Commerce), the Dept of Homeland Security (which would replace a number of agencies including Education and Health & Human Services), the Dept of Faith, and the Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (which would replace the DoJ). There you have it. The Federal government under President Palin.

The Democrats are in the majority but make no effort to control the messages

Oh, but they do. They’re constantly holding press conferences, putting releases and so on, but they’re basically ignored until they do something fits into a Reich Wing Repub framing, then all hell break loose.

I’ve started watching various Dem leaders’ Web sites, and you see all this great stuff coming out and often first out of the gates, yet all I ever hear on the CNN radio cut-ins is John “Ohian Tropic” Boner or Chinless McConnel setting the terms of the debate.

Actually, I’ve been pleasantly surprised since I started doing this more. A lot of these Dems are pretty good at the message game.

The original concept of the lesson plans for the speech contained questions and requests of how I can help President Obama. Substitute Bush for Obama and tell me if you would think that a speech like that would be appropriate by Bush?

This new approach is very legitimate and should have been the emphasis from the start.

I have worked on a group associated with the National Center for Educational Statistics. When NCES contracted for personnel they paid 200% of the cost of personnel. One hundred percent for the person and one hundred percent for the contractor. This is and was a waste of taxpayers dollars by every administration Republican and Democratic.

I’m okay with that reorganization as long as pot is legalized.

You forgot the Dept. to Catapult the Propaganda.

A very humanistic and civil approach to those with whom you disagree.

The original concept of the lesson plans for the speech contained questions and requests of how I can help President Obama. Substitute Bush for Obama and tell me if you would think that a speech like that would be appropriate by Bush?

Funny you mention that, because a Bush said exactly the same thing about 20 years ago and wingnuts didn’t say peep.

Probably all kids will learn a lot about ‘controversy’ and ‘learning’ this week. If a few are moved enough to want to learn at school (like their president did), it’s a net gain.

Propaganda would be the main function for all of the remaining agencies.. of course, the actual performance of that function would simply be outsourced for Fox.

Isn’t this the point in the movie that a hysterical guy starts screaming “WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE!” and then gets slapped across the face by the private detective to bring his silly butt to his senses.

HAH … excellent, Teddy !

Wow. Thanks for that. And Shrub Sr. did it right before a Presidential election! Obama’s much more nonpolitical talk doesn’t even have any effects on any elections, yet the howler monkeys are out in full force.

There’s no “United We Stand” with this “people.” Everything’s simply a big political game to them. Meanwhile, people die as they play in the sandbox.

It’s because the media only wants to see a fight. In their models thats all that sells, so they have to turn everything into a fight.If a right wing nutjob complains, its a controversy.If the the right demanded that its raining in the sahara long and loud enough then the weather would be “controversial”. The many vallid, working theories of evolution are considered “controversial”, even though they are not in dispute, because some American political right weridos insist that they are. Of course, the only reason the media can claim that they are controverisal is because they are ready and willing to push the phony arguments of the deniers.

Sadlyyes !

I think the “Brain” part has already occurred.

Much better to tell old people they will be killed by death panels. Take that weak shit somewhere else.

In 91 when Bush spoke to students, Democrats investigated, and held hearings for an almost identical speech. The Far Left and far right make us moderates want to scream… I guess both parties are more alike then you think :)

So quickly you forget:
The controversy over President Obama’s speech to the nation’s schoolchildren will likely be over shortly after Obama speaks today at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia. But when President George H.W. Bush delivered a similar speech on October 1, 1991, from Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington DC, the controversy was just beginning. Democrats, then the majority party in Congress, not only denounced Bush’s speech — they also ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate its production and later summoned top Bush administration officials to Capitol Hill for an extensive hearing on the issue.

Unlike the Obama speech, in 1991 most of the controversy came after, not before, the president’s school appearance. The day after Bush spoke, the Washington Post published a front-page story suggesting the speech was carefully staged for the president’s political benefit. “The White House turned a Northwest Washington junior high classroom into a television studio and its students into props,” the Post reported.

With the Post article in hand, Democrats pounced. “The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students,” said Richard Gephardt, then the House Majority Leader. “And the president should be doing more about education than saying, ‘Lights, camera, action.’”

[modnote: please respect copyright and quote parts of an article and then provide a link to the original source. thank you.]

They have no ’stars’ so they don’t get covered. They have selected two colorless leaders in Reid and Pelosi. The Majority Leader and the House Speaker should be able to get the message out. They are both so bad at it, they are ignored. The media ignore Democrats because they are not interesting and make no effort to be interesting. The media (excluding Fox) didn’t all just decide to not cover Democrats.

Wow another “controversy”..that dosent exist. the democrats who complained in 91, complained about bush politicizing the department of education, which was put to work for bush and pushing policy initiatives . no federal agency has anything to do with pres Obamas speech, and it has nothing to do with ANY policy…again with the equivocation. more babyish rightwing “you did it first” bullshit. and reaching back to 91. jesus you people are pathetic.

You can cut and paste Byron York all you want. Doesn’t make the wingnut hissy kabuki over Obama’s speech — and it’s coverage in the media — any more reasonable.

cut and paste argument. tis the wingnut way

yes i thought so,he already is shit for brains……

that or he shit his brains out when they liqufied

You hit the nail squarely on the head. Both Pelosi and Reid are not merely colorless, they are nauseating.

Pat Buchanan has the revisionist view of the Fuhrer. Because the victors write history after a war. So Pat gives us the version of history assuming Hitler had won World War II.

Neo-conseratives seem to still be attracted by Adolph’s charismatic leadership. The Jesus-likes-money fundies of C-street want to copy his strategy. Start with a small secretive cult. Then seize power by ruthlessly destroying their enemies using lies, threats and violence. Especially it is necessary to eliminate the liberals.

That is the very definition of neo-con of course.

amazing what thell say for a couple a MILL a year,and cocktail weenies…………..g how ya doin today pal?

I think it is less of a question of working the refs than owning the refs. There is a reason that Robert Parry is not editor of Newsweek.

PETOVANOVIZCAYA!!!!

Neo-conseratives seem to still be attracted by Adolph’s charismatic leadership. The Jesus-likes-money fundies of C-street want to copy his strategy. Start with a small secretive cult. Then seize power by ruthlessly destroying their enemies using lies, threats and violence. Especially it is necessary to eliminate the liberals.

so good
it had to be repeated

Frankly I’d be more impressed at the wingnut media manipulation if the media wasn’t owned by the right. As it stands it is about as impressive as Paris Hilton managing to land a job at one of her parents’ hotels and then bragging about how cool her interview technique must have been.

Please quit talking as if the media was a neutral referee. It isn’t. It’s a rigged game. That’s why the wingnuts “win”. You don’t win a rigged game by playing harder. You win a rigged game by overturning the board.

I guess both parties are more alike then you think :)

You’re right. They should all get together in a remote field that the pigs don’t know about and get high together.

A Wimbledon GRAND SLAM…COMMENT!

I concur……and Goebbels 101

So nothing from Obama about the Labor Theory of Value or the dictatorship of the proletariate?

yup

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faxEtxEzP2M

If that was true then the media would call the Afghan and Iraq wars controversial and field anti-war types. The media is right-wing. It’s that simple.

ah the plumber just left, he works for a non union company so i added 25% to the bill and gave it to him in cash. im doing ok, thanks for asking

does “obama” have anything to say about the value of labor? i havent heard him say anything about it, or was that just an irelevant lead in to a question about a bolshevik theory, do you want to talk about labor, or Bolshevik?

Your correct, and there is a partisan angle for “controversy” reporting, but its also true that they like to set up these phony confrontations, i dont think one excludes the other.

sorry im all ovver the place, i realize you werent talking to me.

Republicans * Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke.
* They stand four-square for the American home– but not for housing. * They are strong for labor– but they are stronger for restricting labor’s rights. * They favor minimum wage–the smaller the minimum wage the better. * They endorse educational opportunity for all–but they won’t spend money for teachers or for schools. * They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine– for people who can afford them. * They consider electrical power a great blessing–but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. * They think American standard of living is a fine thing–so long as it doesn’t spread to all the people. * And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it.

Harry S. Truman

goes for DINOS too

Aren’t they already doing that but in a airport bathroom somewhere?

Texas Reader I see Blue Texan beat me to the comment about cutting and pasting of Byron York formerly of the New Republic. But you know it would be nice if you at least identified where you lifted it from.

Since you didn’t, I’ll cut and paste from SourceWatch from the Center for Media and Democracy. About the paper and the people so that people know who you are in bed with. One thing you will note is how they are all part of various wingnut welfare groups. The money losing, Rev. Moon funded Washington Times, and the Scaife funded Media Research Center or the Heritage Foundation created Townhall.com

Political slant

The Examiner’s editorial page is heavily conservative; it is headed by Mark Tapscott, with American Spectator senior editor Quin Hillyer serving as its associate editor. The paper’s national political coverage, which also appears in Examiner papers in Baltimore and San Francisco, was previously headed by Bill Sammon, a former Washington Times reporter who has written several books praising George W. Bush. (Sammon is now the deputy managing editor for Fox News Channel’s Washington bureau.[1]) Chris Stirewalt, who has been described as “a true conservative voice”[2], is the Examiner’s political editor. Mary Katherine Ham, former managing editor of the conservative Townhall.com, briefly served as the Examiner’s online editor for a few months in 2008 [3] before joining the Weekly Standard.[4] Matthew Sheffield, executive editor of the Media Research Center blog NewsBusters, is in charge of the Examiner’s website.[5] Byron York, formerly of National Review, joined the paper in February 2009.[6]

http://www.sourcewatch.org/ind…..n_Examiner

With friends like these:
Josh and Talking Points Memo couldn’t help themselves.
(What’s all that talk about Bad Progressive messaging?) :

“President Obama Delivers Indoctrination speech”
“Critic of Obama Indoctrination speech Backs Actual Indoctrination in Textbooks”

I get the wink-wink but Come-On guys!….
(they pulled it I guess but here’s the screengrab-I posted it on Tullycast)
http://bit.ly/UjwS9

The media (excluding Fox) didn’t all just decide to not cover Democrats.

I think they do. Again, it’s not the employees of the conglomerates. It’s the owners who can easily dictate what they employees do, because if some some employees don’t follow orders, they’re fired. I know this first hand (wasn’t fired, but quit the biz because of this central dynamic).

Pelosi, while not one the greats at the message game, is often quite good at leading a strong message, but I only seem to notice her in BigMedia when there’s a screw up, or when they create some false story about her that fits into one of the pre-approved false Dem narratives, such as when she was in Middle Eastern headress or she supposedly knew about the torture details, and so on. Then, she’s literally frontpage news for days or weeks, and for what? She didn’t really do anything wrong in these situations, yet there it is.

Meanwhile, it’s not just Repub “leaders” anyway. Any pre-approved Repub is allowsed basically unlimited air time to spew talking points with little to no scrutiny whatsoever, each and every day. A handful of uber-wealthy liars control every bit of BigMedia, including the AP, and they make sure any actual Liberal reform never happens.

Yes, some of the Dems are fairly weak at this game, but some are quite good, but it doesn’t really matter since the BigMedia mavens are going to do the same things they’ve been doing for decades now to keep actual Liberals out of power. That’s the real problem.

NYT say Obama speech “uneventful”

The corporate media, print and broadcast, are nothing but sluts to their corporate masters and that’s not really being fair to sluts. A legitimate 4th Estate? Laughable.

The healthcare argument is a pristine example of what your talking about, The only voices ive heard are from the whacko coporately owned right, and the dishonest corporately owned “middle”. They choose a set of facts to define the argument and then “experts”, (partisan policy flaks and political operatives; axlrod, H. ford jr. tom daschle) and admitted posers pretending to have some kind of authority(media personalities eg.,chris mathews,george will,peggy noonan, tom freidman, jon alter, ad nausemum) spin the various talking points in a parody of an argument that leads to a predetermined result.

He didnt deploy any childrens’ mind control devices?

I have been looking at the news as it is reported in Kenya to see how the Obama ‘controversies’ are handled. For the most part, there is little reporting on Obama. Their scandals are much bigger and juicier at home. I did find this report on the Obama-hatin’ preacher and a comment on the time-wasting activities of Obama-haters in putting up fake Kenyan birth certificates. Here’s the last part of the article posted on the Daily Nation website:

http://www.nation.co.ke/News/w…..index.html

Apparently Dems investigated Boosh when he spoke to the kiddies.

Along these lines in 1941 leading newspapers of the day would read too much controversy over FDR’s response to Japanese attack. FDR brainwashes Congress.

Seems doing it right before a Presidential election makes Shrub Senior’s much different. It wasn’t the first day of school, or in an off-election time, like President Barack Hussein Obama’s was today.

And I see the same hapless Infiltrator Dems involved anyway. People like Gephardt were/are there specifically to undermine Dems from getting anything accomplished, and making them appear trivial is a big part of that. My take anyway…

An hour or two ago, a CNN graphic/chyron called the speech “controversial.”

Yeah, MSM, epic fail, ReichWing, take a bow…

Right. And I would disagree with those who think it’s some corporatist conspiracy. Yes, there’s a real problem with the corporate media, but here, it’s a combination of overreaching for “balance” and banal laziness.