Five years? Paula Zahn on the Impeachment fiasco tomorrow night.

can you imagine what THAT's going to be like?

I can't wait to see all the Conasons, Lyonses, Toobins, Bugliosis, John Deans, Blumenthals, etc., that she'll have on to deal with the reality of the situation.

any guesses on who she'll have on as her experts?

I'll bet anything that Ken Starr will be there.

here's hoping they;ll vacuum Babs Olson out of her ashtray for some useful contribution.

perhaps David Bossie, or Dan Burton?

how bout David Schippers?

Newt?

Livingstone?

two legs of the new Trifecta this week: first Saddam, then the Impeachment Anniversary.........what's the other?

I know this won't have Saddam's legs, but it's just another episode int the "governance by publicity stunt," first espoused by the estimable Jeff Dorchen, in his excellent radio column, "The Moment of Truth"

well worth checking out every Saturday here:

http://www.thisishell.com
every Saturday morning, 9AM-1PM, CST

his archives are here:
http://www.oblivio.com/mejeffdorchen/archives.html

the original editorial:

http://www.oblivio.com/mejeffdorchen/moments/moment_beans.html
Now, if you find you are unable to see what I mean when I say the US under demagogic corporate rule is like a big, slow-motion suicide cult, do not fret. You may still be able to get a job at Fox News Channel. You probably already work there. If not, perhaps your brain is actually a tiny nucleus, and you are a one-celled organism. In which case you probably work at the American Enterprise Institute, and God bless you.

The question is, when policy is based on such mangled yet pervasive premises, what exactly does a policy-maker do? To illustrate the paradox of our present situation, let me compare policy making under the prevailing economic logic to riding a bicycle based on the theory that a bicycle will take you anywhere you want to go if you just put a bag of magic beans on the seat.

First you need a motley collection of gullible fools. We'll call them The Markets. The Markets believe in the magic bean theory. So when someone puts the magic beans on the seat, The Markets get all excited and start saying, "The bicycle's getting ready to go!" They tell everyone who will listen that the bicycle is on its way. And so for a while the theory is convincing.

But what about when the bicycle doesn't go? Then it's up to the Bicycle Rider to convince The Markets that there aren't enough beans in the bicycle-seat beanbag. Or the person putting the bag on the seat isn't the right kind of person. Or the bag itself isn't pretty enough and needs new decorations. And so policy-making becomes an exercise in manipulating the parameters of the bicycle-seat-beanbag theory.

So, for example, if we just make Arnold Schwarzenegger the Governor of California, then for a while The Markets will believe and get everyone else to believe that the California bicycle will go. That euphoria will last a little while.

now, for crux:


Then maybe a big corporation will fire a bunch of people, and The Markets will get excited again. But again, the bicycle will not have moved, and eventually another dazzling spectacle, another publicity stunt, will have to be arranged. Or maybe a new technology will be developed, and The Markets will resume jabbering happily. But still the bicycle will not move, and as the confetti settles and the party balloons sag and wrinkle, the sobering image of a motionless bicycle with a bag of magic beans on its seat will again come into focus.

Yet there's really no finite supply of publicity stunts. In fact, the art of governing has become the art of producing publicity stunts. And a really good policy maker is a guy who can come up with an engine for producing a long chain of publicity stunts that seem to follow logically from one to the next, based on some kind of principle or other. Like "family values" or "the strong, independent American." Or "Jesus is Lord." Or "poor people just don't have what it takes." Or "War on Terrorism."

Now go back to FDR. I don't know why, I just see his policy-making as more authentic. I'm no historian, obviously. But I just I don't see the New Deal as a series of publicity stunts. Certainly FDR's attempt to manipulate the makeup of the Supreme Court was fascistic. But was it a publicity stunt? Maybe I'm wrong, but the jobs programs seem like a genuine attempt to get money, food and housing to people who didn't have any by creating jobs the corporate sector was unable or unwilling to provide.

and here, from the site, in his words, regarding fair use:

"Notice: The copyright on these essays will only be invoked if someone besides Jeff Dorchen tries to make a profit with them or uses them without giving Jeff credit."

Let's draw attention to the Inquisition of the last popularly elected President of the USA. Let's review his record on peace and prosperity. Then let's review the 8 year/$70MM taxpayer financed RW attack that ended with one parking ticket conviction.

Let's open it up to discussing the ethics of asking questions about the sex life of public officials and the use of sex as a tool for impeachment.

Then let's compare that to lying about the reasons to wage war that kills hundreds of US soldiers and 1000s of innocent Iraqis. Then lets discuss the lie that this administration had no idea that planes could be flown into the WTC...thusly killing 2500+ Americans.

I'm sure Paula will bring her "A" game for that discussion....

you KNOW that's not going to happen, of course, but what a pleasant surprise if she gives even, say TEN percent of the coverage to the real story.

but then she's just one of the myriad 'fools for scandal,' hey?

and.....any thoughts on Dorchen?

I'm not he, BTW. just think his stuff is VERY mordantly interesting, as well as quite easy reading. especially when considering that it's all based on broadcast material.

I've seen one of his plays, too, and it was very very good

:puke:

I think she's kind of easy on the eyes...until she speaks

Have you noticed how many young, very attractive newsreaders there are on TV these days? I think they are hired on 2 attributes:

(1) Looks
(2) A Republican bias

I watched the ABC overnight news Monday evening and I was stunned to listen to 2 different, very attractive women gushing over Bush like the proverbial HS cheerleaders who love thier quarterback. I could not believe the amount of positive editorializing for Bush and the disdain that they had for Democrats.

Really pathetic.

But I think that their are a lot of gullable guys out there that subconsciously respond to their viewpoints. Really, these women are no better than Hannity or O'Reilly, but they can present their biases in such a way that the sex appeal allows the logic to take a backseat.

Paula is the original model, I think.

however, I will tape, and drop in to see what depredations she and her snuzzlers will wreak on truth, justice, and the amerikkkan whey.

curdling at the thought, I must hit it

Lord, I was SO depressed until I came on to DU today, EVERYONE is getting me to laugh so hard, I will need a truss for the rest of my life.

You fellow DUers are the best medicine a person can get!

It seems, through coincidence or design, that the latest 9/11 revelation will be swept under the media rug, or at least they will attempt it. :grr:

9/11 Chair: Attack was preventable
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/17/eveningnews/main589137.shtml

How remarkable that it can be seen nowhere in the news. I'm sure Jon Stewart will be reporting on it within the week though.

stewart calls his stuff the "Fake News"

actually, just about everything else has become the REAL FAKE NEWS.

his show is just about the only place in the "mainstream" media where anything approaching the real truth appears.

I wonder, though, whether he'll touch that one.

he only goes so far, and that one doesn't lend itself to humor as well as the other insanity going on

I absolutely hope you're right, though, and his show will motivate some of the callow youthsters into getting their asses off the couch and into a polling booth next year.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=934890

see post number 9

it's SO obvious