Fox News isn’t just bad for America, which is the usual liberal complaint. It’s also bad for the Republican Party, the still-conservative Bartlett holds, because it has stunted the GOP’s growth with a news agenda that ships “misinformation” to the party’s far-right base.
This is the so-called Fox “echo chamber” effect you’ve read so much about …
According to chamber theorists, Fox “breeds extremism” within the Republican Party by convincing viewers to reject other news feeds as biased and to partake only of Fox content and like-minded conservative radio fodder. The echo chamber, so the theory goes, has deluded the party into thinking that support for its radical-right views is greater than it really is. This, in turn, has convinced the party to run radical candidates who aren’t as electable as they seem to be. And all this extremism prevents the GOP’s presidential candidates from reaching centrist voters, who are essential for victory.
… the network is better at employing presidential candidates than electing them. …
… The median age of a Fox viewer is 68 … and its median age is rising. …
“My conscience won’t let me go shoot my brother or some darker people or some poor, hungry people in the mud for big, powerful America.
And shoot them for what? They never called me nigger, they never lynched me, they didn’t put no dogs on me, they didn’t rob me of my nationality, rape and kill my mother and father.
Shoot them for what? How can I shoot them poor people? Poor little black people and babies and children and women. How can I shoot them poor people? Just take me to jail.”
One of the many things that revolts me about the GW Bush years was their introduction of “enhanced interrogation techniques“.
A new documentary reminds us of American torture.
FRONTLINE investigates the fight over the CIA’s controversial “enhanced interrogation” methods, widely criticized as torture. Based on recently declassified documents and interviews with key political leaders and CIA insiders, filmmaker Michael Kirk investigates the secret history of what the CIA did — and whether it worked.
It didn’t work. It was torture. If another nation had used these techniques on Americans, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld would have called it torture.
Enhanced interrogation techniques … … methods included prolonged stress positions, hooding, subjection to deafening noise, sleep deprivation to the point of hallucination, deprivation of food and drink — as well as waterboarding, walling, nakedness, subjection to extreme cold, confinement in small coffin-like boxes, and repeated slapping or beating.
There were also cases of medically unnecessary forced rectal feeding (anal rape) and threats to harm family members. …
A nonpartisan, independent review of interrogation and detention programs in the years after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks concluded that “it is indisputable that the United States engaged in the practice of torture” and that the nation’s highest officials bore ultimate responsibility for it. …
The hijackers in the September 11 attacks were 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda, and 15 of the 19 were citizens of Saudi Arabia. The others were from the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Lebanon.
So why did Bush evacuate 2 dozen members of Osama bin Laden’s family from the United States the first few days following? (They were friends of the Bush family.)
Why did GW attack a completely different nation – Iraq?
Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9-11. He didn’t even like Osama bin Ladin.
The war was going to happen. The WMD claims were the result of the need to find a case for the war, rather than the other way around. Paul Krugman is exactly right when he says:
The Iraq war wasn’t an innocent mistake, a venture undertaken on the basis of intelligence that turned out to be wrong. America invaded Iraq because the Bush administration wanted a war. The public justifications for the invasion were nothing but pretexts, and falsified pretexts at that.
There are plenty of good arguments against the word “marriage” being used for same sex couples.
I respect those who feel that way. But this battle is pretty much over. If a nation as Catholic as Ireland votes this way, almost every nation will. Homosexuality was illegal in Ireland until 1993 and abortion remains prohibited except where the mother’s life is in danger.
A 2012 Gallup poll interviewed a random sample of 1,012 American adults, aged 18 and older. …
Forty six percent Americans believed in creationism, 32 percent believed in theistic evolution and 15 percent believed in evolution without any divine intervention. …
As an Agnostic, I believe creationism is wrong. Flabbergasted that so many thinking adults could overlook the inconsistencies between what their eyes see and the possibility that the Earth is only something less than 10,000yrs-old …
An overwhelming majority of the scientific community accepts evolution as the dominant scientific theory of biological diversity.
Nearly every scientific society, representing hundreds of thousands of scientists, has issued statements rejecting intelligent design …
61% of Canadians believe that humans evolved from less advanced life forms, while 22% believe that God created human beings in their present form within the last 10,000 years …
According to a 2008 Norstat poll for NRK, 59% of the Norwegian population fully accept evolution, 24% somewhat agree with the theory, 4% somewhat disagree with the theory while 8% do not accept evolution. …
The US has one of the highest levels of public belief in biblical or other religious accounts of the origins of life on earth among industrialized countries. …
Of the 2016 Republican candidates for President, so far, Huckabee, Perry, Santorum and Ben Carson are creationists. None of the others will admit they believe in evolution. They try to duck the issue often claiming: “I’m not a scientist.”
When Bill O’Reilly asked Lt. Col. Ralph Peters what his strategy would be to defeat the jihad, he said:
“You go wherever in the world the terrorists are and you kill them, you do your best to exterminate them, and then you leave behind smoking ruins and crying widows.”
The lifeless bodies of Afghan children lay on the ground before their funeral ceremony, after a NATO airstrike killed several Afghan civilians, including ten children during a fierce gun battle with Taliban militants in Shultan, Shigal district, Kunar, eastern Afghanistan, Sunday, April 7, 2013. The U.S.-led coalition confirms that airstrikes were called in by international forces during the Afghan-led operation in a remote area of Kunar province near the Pakistan border. (AP Photo/Naimatullah Karyab)
Though I totally disagree with Ralph Peters, I respect his honesty. He admits innocents will be killed.
IF the USA wants to fight terrorists overseas, with drones or smart bombs, that’s probably the best way. Boots on the ground is the worst way.
Instead, foreign nations should isolate Islamic nations. Close embassies. Enforce boycotts. Freeze bank assets. Stop giving them an excuse for terrorism.
If you leave Islamic hotheads alone, it won’t be long before they are fighting each other.
Homeland security should be security within your own borders.
New. Announced November 2014 for tourists wanting to travel to India.
e-Tourist Visa. Online. US$60. Good for 1 month. Single entry.
Here’s the application page (I hope). I’ll try it for a trip September 2015. Wish me luck.
Original post from 2014 ____
I’m in Nepal. Visa on arrival. No hassles. Nepal loves tourists.
India still requires a visa in advance for Canadians, a stupid and time consuming process from the days of the Raj.
Though open-for-businessModi promised Obama it was coming, it’s not yet here.
India is working on a proposal for visa on arrival (VoA) facility for US tourists, one of the big-ticket announcements expected to be made during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s high-profile visit to the US beginning September 26. …
Since 2010 visa on arrival was available for citizens of these nations: Finland, Japan, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Singapore, Cambodia, Vietnam, Philippines, Laos, Myanmar, Indonesia and South Korea.
Yet they cannot bloody add more nations to that list? 😦
UPDATE – The list has been expanded to 43 nationsincluding the USA. … But NOT Canada. NOT U.K.
No word yet whether the parents will be charged. I believe they should.
An experiment run by an Eckerd College professor … for ABC’s 20/20 on children and guns …
Doctor Marjorie Sanfilippo specializes in child psychology and her curiosity turned her to what children would do when adults are not around and they were told to not play with a clearly visible gun. …
Almost every kid went for the guns, waved them around and even pointed them at each other. …
The Clinton Foundation (founded 2001) … is a nonprofit foundation established by former President of the United States Bill Clinton with the stated mission to “strengthen the capacity of people throughout the world to meet the challenges of global interdependence.” The Foundation focuses on improving global health and wellness, increasing opportunity for women and girls, reducing childhood obesity and preventable diseases, creating economic opportunity and growth, and helping communities address the effects of climate change. …
politifact – The claim contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression, so we rate it Mostly False.
I love it when rich people set up Foundations and do good works. Many Republicans have donated to the Clinton Foundation including Mitt Romney, John McCain, Donald Trump, James R. Murdoch, News Corporation Foundation (parent company of FOX News), etc. It’s a “not-for-profit” organization that should have nothing to do with the Democratic Party.
Trump gave at least $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation
One of their partner organizations was the Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund.
094500 Former Presidents Bush and Clinton join forces in establishing the Bush/Clinton Katrina Fund to assist with humanaterian and reconstruction efforts. 2005 Photo Credit: Courtesy Reuters, Richard Carson
There are some valid concerns about the Clinton Foundation.
WHAT ARE THE CLINTONS’ CRITICS SAYING?
Among the complaints:
— The foundation could serve as a backdoor for governments or foreign citizens hoping to influence a future president. U.S. law bans political campaigns from accepting foreign money.
— Many big donors to the foundation also lobbied the State Department while Clinton was in charge.
— Despite pledges of openness, names of foreign donors who contributed through a Canadian affiliate of the foundation haven’t been made public.
— Some of the foreign sums are mind-boggling. Canadian mining billionaire Frank Giustra, founder of the Canadian affiliate, has given the Clinton Foundation more than $31 million. Ukrainian billionaire Victor Pinchuk and the country of Saudi Arabia each gave between $10 million and $25 million, according to the foundation. …
— Donations from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and other Mideast nations that deny women equal rights have been criticized by Republican presidential candidates. Sen. Rand Paul said promoting women’s rights while taking millions from countries where “rape victims are publicly lashed” is “a grand hypocrisy.”
— Many of the foundation’s donors are companies and organizations that also paid Bill Clinton six-figure speaking fees while his wife was secretary of state. And several are big contributors to Hillary Clinton’s political campaigns.
— Clinton’s husband and daughter are still on the foundation board, leaving an opening for conflicts of interest. Bill and Chelsea Clinton just wrapped up a nine-day trip to Africa to highlight their charity’s good works. The former president said he would consider stepping down if his wife wins her own term in the Oval Office. …
WHAT DO THE CLINTONS SAY?
Hillary Clinton hasn’t responded to specific allegations. She dismissed the criticism generally as the kind of “distractions and attacks” to be expected during a presidential campaign. …
Bill Clinton says he’s proud of his foundation’s work, and that 90 percent of donors give $100 or less.
And the big money? There’s nothing “sinister” about getting wealthy people and nations to help the poor in developing countries, Clinton said in an NBC News interview.
“There’s been a very deliberate attempt to take the foundation down,” he said. “And there’s almost no new fact that’s known now that wasn’t known when she ran for president the first time” in 2008.
The State Department said last month that officials conducted a review and found no evidence that any of Clinton’s actions as secretary of state were influenced by donations to the foundation. …
Rick McCharles 