READER COMMENTS ON
"NATIONAL MEDIA OUTLET FINALLY COVERS AMERICA'S 2006 ELECTORAL SYSTEM MELTDOWN!"
(11 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
...
Larry Bergan
said on 5/1/2006 @ 9:39 pm PT...
Let's WRITE them over there, so we don't have to WRITE them here!
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
...
SPAM COMMENT
said on 5/2/2006 @ 4:39 am PT...
{ed note: Spam comment deleted.}
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
...
Dredd
said on 5/2/2006 @ 5:28 am PT...
... somebody has to be the media ... the MSM is a conduit for the comfort zone ... zoned out from the reality of the republican dictatorship in the US ...
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
...
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 5/2/2006 @ 5:45 am PT...
We've come full circle, folks. The American tradition of press freedom began with John Peter Zenger, who was acquitted of libel against the colonial governor of New York, William Cosby, in the 1730s (please see "The Lindbergh Syndrome" for details). Cosby was an appointee of King George II (isn't that an irony, the second George!), and the question before the court was "Is it libel to print the truth?" English courts said truth was irrelevant to a charge of libel, but the colonial court disagreed. That ruling was codified into our Constitution later.
Now America has corporate-controlled media that stifle unpleasant truths about an American president, which are outed by a British source. And our King George II might just go the way of his namesakes on account of it. First the Downing Street minutes, now an election expose. God Save the Queen!
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
...
Dredd
said on 5/2/2006 @ 5:52 am PT...
RLM #5
Where is the libel ruling "codified into our Constitution"? Libel is one leg of "defamation", the other being "slander".
The MSM is ignoring Colbert's roasting of the duhcider in chief (Raw Story here).
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
...
KestrelBrighteyes
said on 5/2/2006 @ 6:11 am PT...
Re: The train wreck -
I'm thinking we should find out when each state's primary is taking place, which machines are used in the elections, and print out fliers to hand out (being careful to check the legal restraints first of course) detailing the flaws with those particular machines and warning the person that their vote may not be counted, and why.
If not fliers, perhaps posters...full page ads..rolling billboards..ads on the radio...a banner behind a plane...little flags and magnets on cars with the bradblog or velvet revolution address...hell I don't know, but we have to wake people up!
Maybe we could do a "runaway bride" publicity stunt...that seems to get the public's attention.
(Okay, I think I need more coffee.)
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
...
calipendence
said on 5/2/2006 @ 9:27 am PT...
At least they have "the Olds" over there... We're still waiting for "the News" or "the Olds" and have neither.
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
...
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 5/2/2006 @ 10:37 am PT...
For Dredd: "Slander" pertains to the spoken word,
"libel" to the written (printed) word. Thus "slander" is irrelevant to freedom of the press, but relevant to freedom of speech. "Libel" is what matters when we talk of press freedom.
My phrase "codified into the Constitution" was meant in a broad sense, not with reference to a specific article. To this day, English libel laws are more stringent than ours; they still cling to the notion that one can write truthfully and still be guilty of libel. We exempt truth from attack under libel statutes. The "fourth estate" wouldn't bear that designation if this weren't the case, so the Constitutional reference is valid, I think.
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
...
unirealist
said on 5/2/2006 @ 12:49 pm PT...
My guess is that they're not warning us about the upcoming train wreck because they don't intend to inform us about it when it happens.
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
...
Dredd
said on 5/3/2006 @ 10:46 am PT...
RLM #9
Depends on who you listen to, and whether the "case" is handled in court or in the public opinion court.
Freedom of the press is both speech and print. Freedom of speech is too. It might be understood better as freedom of expression.
You did not cite the constitution, but instead yourself. Quote yourself then, instead of the constitution. You have inherent power to quote yourself.
I was just wondering if I missed something in the constitution as I was reading it for the umteenth time. I have found that "the constitution" to most folk is a feeling they have, like a gut feeling, about what they feel it is. But generally when people are asked they realize that themselves.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
...
emlev
said on 5/5/2006 @ 12:02 pm PT...
Hold these two morsels in your mouth at the same time and see if you like the flavor:
From the Financial Times article:
"One problem is that many of the new voting machines that will be deployed are arriving from offshore manufacturing sites – mainly China – and are being rushed into service without adequate quality controls, says Kimball Brace, president of Election Data Services, a voting consultancy firm."
From Stephen Colbert's speech:
"I believe democracy is our greatest export. At least until China figures out a way to stamp it out of plastic for three cents a unit."
---
KestrelBrightEyes, you have some good ideas there.