MSM and the Delphi Technique

I wonder, as do many of my friends, why the MSM, and specifically the New York Times and the Washington Post, give so much weight to the happenings at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo. After all, panties over the head and touching the Koran pales in comparison to beheading, fingernail pulling, shoulder dislocating, and bottom of the feet beating.

In fact, the MSM has elevated Gitmo to a level where Amnesty International can say with a straight face its today's Gulag.

Are what we seeing here the use of the Delphi Technique on a mass scale. http://www.premier1.net/~barkonwd/school/DELPHI.HTM

In Educating for the New World Order by Bev Eakman, the reader finds reference upon reference for the need to preserve the illusion that there is "Lay, or community, participation in the decision ­making process), while in fact lay citizens are being squeezed out."

So has the MSM created an illusion that we (the community) have decided that Gitmo is today's Gulag and what happened at Abu Ghraib was, in fact, the vilest of torture?

{In the Delphi Technique} attendees are broken up into smaller groups ­ usually of seven or eight people ­ each group with a facilitator. Discussion ensues wherein the participants are encouraged to discuss preset issues,... Usually participants are encouraged to put on paper their ideas and disagreements, these to be later compiled by others. Herein lies a very large problem. Who compiles what is written on the sheets of paper, note cards, etc.? When you ask the participants, you usually get, "Well, they compiled the results." Who is "they?" "Well, those running the meeting." Oh­h! The next question is ­ How do you know that what you wrote on your sheet of paper was incorporated into the final outcome? The answer you usually get is, "Well, you know, I've wondered about that, because what I wrote doesn't seem to be reflected here. I guess my viewpoint was in the minority."

In this scenario the "facilitator" is the New York Times and the "discussion group" is their latest poll. I may not think that Gitmo is as bad as the Times paints it, but after front page story after story and quote after quote condemning it, I may think my opinion is in the minority.

Alinsky and the Democrats

The Democrats are winning the war of words. They claim that congress, and specifically the Senate, will be irreparably damaged if Republicans are allowed to exercise their majority. And the electorate is buying it and the MSM is selling it. For example the Democrats don't need a plan to reform Social Security when they can rely on the New York Times et al. to mold public opinion against Bush's proposed reform.

Unfortunately most of the electorate relies on sound bytes to form their opinions; and the Democrats are purveyors of spin par excellence, tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth for the ill informed.

Saul Alinsky, a leftist radical and Hillary Clinton's one time mentor, wrote a blueprint for current Democrat tactics in his book Rules for Radicals. Diane Alden writes an intuitive treatise citing the relationship between Alinsky's book and the DNC.

Alinsky had a true genius for formulating tactical battle plans for the radical left...The transition of the old Democratic Party to what exists today should not surprise or confound conservatives. Nor should Alinsky's tactics seem foreign. After all, for nearly 40 years, Republicans and the conservative agenda have been getting hammered by the left through the successful use of Alinsky tactics.

In that cause, radicals and the liberal-left gravitated toward the print and electronic media, toward the university professorate and the law. The left, consciously or unconsciously, adopted Alinsky's rules. The impact changed the nature of the Democratic Party and the direction of the United States. Increasingly, the left is succeeding in changing the nature of the Republican Party as well.

Suffice to say the greatest change has taken place in the relationship between the state and the individual. America is rapidly descending from a representative Constitutional Republic to a collectivist empire controlled by elites of one sort or another.

Diane Alden is a graduate of the University of Minnesota with degrees in political science, economics and history. Dubbed the "prairie pontificator," she also has grad work in international economics and international political movements. See her full bio

Golden Carp of the Year

The Golden Carp of the Year goes to the U.S. Senate, John McCain, R-AZ, Lindsey Graham, R-SC, et al. Democrats roll Republican moderates. Three of ten presidential nominees will not be filibustered.

Hugh Hewitt puts it this way: "It is impossible to say whether this is a'terrible' deal, a 'bad' deal, or a very, very marginally 'ok' deal, but it surely is not a good deal. Not one dime more for the NRSC from me unless and until the Supreme Court nominee gets confirmed, and no other filibusters develop. I won't spend money on a caucus supporting organization when the caucus can't deliver a majority." (more)

Right on!

Send a Check to Senator Lindsey Graham

Word is that Lindsey Graham may be the linchpin in a bad deal being cooked up on judges. Lindsey, can you hear me? If there is some back room deal with your name on it back stabbing the president's judicial nominees, I for one will send a $100 check to your opponent in your next primary. Every judge, and the American people, deserves an up-or-down vote. Those wishing to fortify Senator Graham can send him a check payable to his "next election opponent". His Address is 290 Russell Senate Office Bldg., Washington, DC 20510-4001.

Attempting to reach a congressman when you are not one of his constituents is a frustrating exercise (there ought to be a law). Never mind that how he or she votes will affect you, but money talks and a senator will listen when bucks are involved. So send him a check.

TV Labels Consevatives, but not Liberals

In the six months since November’s elections, network reporters have zeroed in on “conservatives” — especially “religious conservatives” — as an energized and unwelcome force in American politics. As TV told it, George W. Bush won re-election because of strong support from “social conservatives” and would pack the courts with “conservative” judges. It was “conservatives” who pushed Terri Schiavo’s right-to-life case, and “conservatives” like Tom DeLay and John Bolton were embroiled in controversy. See more

Clinton's Korea Legacy

Absent from reportage on North Korea's nuclear saber-rattling is the genesis of how things reached this point.
( more).

The Pretend Debate

The following is a conversation I had with my 10 year old nephew, in which I explained the US Senate committee system and the filibuster. After reading several polls on the filibusters, a lot of people seem to be on the same intellectual level as my nephew.
There are 100 guys in the US Senate, but they aren't like the senators in Sparticus. They don't meet and discuss every issue. They don't have the time, so they create committees. Committees investigate proposed laws, nominations, treaties etc.and are made up of Republicans and Democrats.(More)

Can the Senate change the rule that 60 Senators must vote to end a filibuster? Professor Vikram David Amar looks at the question here in part 1 and part 2.

"LA Slimes" Reflects on Bolton Nomination

Regarding the Bolton's nomination as ambassador to the UN; the LA Times wants us to believe that Bush is responsible for all the rancor surrounding the Foreign Relation Committee's deliberation. If Bush had only gone to the Democrats and asked for their approval before he made his choice, things would run so much more smoothly.

And as he has many times before, Bush won the legislative fight by the narrowest of margins — maintaining just enough support from Sen. George V. Voinovich of Ohio and other conflicted Republicans on the committee to overcome uniform Democratic opposition and move the nomination to the floor on a party-line vote. In that way, the vote demonstrated again Bush's willingness to live on the political edge — to accept achingly narrow margins in Congress and at the ballot box to pursue ambitious changes that sharply divide the country. "This is their style of governing," said Marshall Wittmann, a former aide to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), now serving as a fellow at the Democratic Leadership Council. "You build upon the base and pressure the middle and you ignore the other side. You push across the finish line and you move on. In their mind a win is a win, regardless of how narrow or polarizing it is." (more)

Let's consider Bush's pursuit of "ambitious changes." He wants to reform Social Security to make it solvent in the future and to give retirees more money. He believes judges should not make law and should follow the US Constitution not foreign law. He wants to send a tough guy to the UN to facilitate much needed reform.

The LA Times can't believe that Bush is pushing his agenda. Because, hey man, he was reelected by such a slim margin. Evidently the GOP majority in the Senate and the House is meaningless.

And the Democrats have been so conciliatory. Yeah right.

<

DeLay Decried Disproportionately

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-TX, is persecuted in the MSM, while a criminal trial of a Democrat election law violator goes under reported. Delayed Response But expect less DeLay coverage as the light shines on other congressmen guilty of more egregious ethics violation than that of which Delay is accused Lax Ethics Enforcement

AOL News, Beyond Bias

Each time I log on to AOL the welcome window appears with yet another bias news slant. I don't know why, but AOL must appeal to Bush bashers. From time to time they run a straw poll on various political issues giving Bush haters a forum to vent.

The latest poll asks; Who is more to blame for the icy relations between the U.S. and Russia? Results are; Bush 43%, Putin 33% and both 24%. The use of the word "blame" here is pejorative. My dictionary defines blame as "finding fault with." This question is red meat for liberal hounds.

Never mind that Bush went to Russia and looked into Putin's soul and said, hey this is a good guy. But Bush is not known for his intuitiveness. When he first came into office he thought he could work with Senator Ted "water board" Kennedy. He even invited Kennedy over for hot-dogs and a movie and what did it get him? The bloated one has been ripping Bush on every issue since. And Putin as been no better.

This latest AOL poll shows the absolute illogical knee jerk reaction by Bush haters. The second part of the poll asks: Do you agree with Bush's visit to the Baltic despite Russian protests? Results are, Yes 57%, No 43%. Think about this folks, one of the main reasons Putin's attitude has turned icy towards the U.S. is because Bush is visiting the Baltic and supports democracy in states that were previously part of the Soviet Union. Would the Left want to see Bush support Russia's attempt to install puppet governments in the Baltic? And should he support Russia's sale of arms and nuclear technology to Iran? Let's put these question in a poll.

Putin should be blamed for having never acknowledging the turmoil communism has caused. OpinionJournal

What you're seeing here in this AOL poll is unabashed Bush bashing. They don't like the way he walks, the way he talks or the way he prays and blame him for everything. If you want to get the pulse of the man on the street Democrat, go to Dummy Funnies for a wild trip on the left side.

The Red Arrow

This Carp goes to the guy who thought up the "Red Arrow." By the way, some readers of this blog may not get the significance of the "Golden Carp." It is used here in two ways; to carp means to complain and as the carp, an odious fish not respected by real fishermen. Its full of tiny bones and is only eaten by Russians. Not that I have anything against Russians since I stopped loving the bomb.

Back to the Arrow. I'm writing about that annoying no-turn-left-red-arrow. I don't think I have ever wanted anyone to actually go to hell even though I might have given them directions. But I would hope the guy who thought up the arrow will have a painful trip as he passes o'er the river.

The psychology of the Arrow is demeaning. The city is telling us that we are too stupid to drive a car. As you sit there and the last oncoming car clears the intersection, the red arrow tells you, no no, you can't turn left because even though you cannot see a car for a mile down the road, still one may materialize from where I don't know and truth be told traffic engineers don't know either. But hey, they're just doing their part in our trip from cradle to the grave. Traffic lights have sensors. Surly there is a gizmo that would change a red arrow green if there are no oncoming cars.

(This is the first in a series titled Lost in Traffic. In the next installment I excoriate drivers that stop two car lengths back from a light and then creep forward) Reader imput is welcome.

Bolton Must be Confirmed

More indication that John Bolton's enemies continue their "death by a thousand cuts" efforts to derail his nomination to the UN as ambassador.(more)http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/43496.htm

Is National Public Radio Bias Left

Is the the tax payer funded NPR bias left? Is the Pope a catholic? (Actually some pundits were shocked to learn that the Pope was, in fact, a catholic and wasn't going to approve abortions, gay marriage or women priests).

But I digress. Jacob Lakin, in an op-ed A Turn of the Dial posted on WSJ Opinion Journal has some interesting obsevations.
He writes "Well, one way is to look at an NPR show (On the Media) that is itself devoted to the media. Surely this is one place where NPR's objectivity would be thunderously vindicated, assuming that it exists at all."

-snip-

Jeffrey Dvorkin, NPR's ombudsman has said NPR "comes under attack quite frequently for its apparently left-wing bias, but most of these criticisms come from media organizations that are openly conservative. So I take those kinds of criticisms with a certain amount of salt."

"Mr. Dvorkin also noted that liberal bias, far from being a problem, should be seen as an occupational quirk among journalists: 'There is some kind of liberal empathy on the part of some journalists, because their curiosity about how other people live tends to involve a certain liberal stance,' he said."

In theory, On The Media disclaims any partisan agenda. (More) http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110006657

Draconian Solution For The Illegal Alien Problem

Michael Medved in his radio show (Denver KNUS 2 PM to 4 PM) often rails against deporting illegals. He contents that there are too many Illegals to deport. Its too big of a problem. Ha, I say, if the government can make every business owner a tax collector, then they can make businesses police illegal aliens.

Here's how it works. If a business, knowingly, hires an illegal alien, then the illegal alien can report his employer and automatically becomes a citizen and his employer must pay a $50,000 fine. If the illegal alien is shown to have used fraudulent papers to get the job he goes to jail or back to Mexico.

But the New York Times would have you believe that, because there are sad stories of the illegal immigrants' plight, our laws should be ignored. (more)
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/05/nyregion/05license.html?oref=login

Denver Post, a liberal rag

The Denver Post editors supported John Kerry for president and our duplicitist Senator Ken Salazar. They believe Ward Churchill has a right to bash the US while teaching young college mush minds. The Post once wrote a story about a *poor illegal immigrant who was refused in-state tuition at CU even though he had graduated from a Colorado high school. The Post refuses to call illegal immigrants " illegal." Instead they're referred to them as undocumented workers.

But wait, some how during my surfing I stepped through the looking glass. Lo and behold, I 'm reading an oped by David Harsanyi in the Post that make sense. He attacks the "Theocracy Card." Harsanyi's opinion may not be the editor's opinion, but its a welcome relief from the Post's left leaning elitist views. (must read) http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~31908~2846978,00.html

Carp* The Denver Post ran a front page story about this poor illigal kid's quest for instate tuition and used his name. After reading the story, Representative Tom Tancredo (R-CO) called the immigration authorities to report this kid and his family. Of course the feds didn't do anything as is their policy, but Tancredo's call set off a big battle with the Post.

The Post was embarrassed that they ran the kids name and someone had the gall to complain. Immediately a story appeared about Tancredo's use of illegals to work on his house. Two unnamed "undocumented" workers were quoted in the Post (they could not use the names of the undocumented workers, of course, since when they used the kids name they got him in trouble). Tancredo had hired a general contractor who in turn hired the workers. The general contractor claimed he had all the documents to prove his workers were legal, but the Post stuck it to Tancredo with "unnamed" sources.

Email No Longer Dependable

Thanks to the war between spam and anti-spam, email is no longer a reliable way for communication. Your email could be bounced back because the recipient's email system rejected it, or even worse, the email could be dropped silently without anyone knows its existence.

People hate spam, and so, just like spam, anti-spam is becoming a booming business. There is no need to tell you how bad spam is, because you know it. We here instead intend to warn you that, email filtering of some anti-spam program can do more harm than good.
(More) http://www.websina.com/en/spam.html

Potpourri

ALEXANDRIA, La. - A judge has ordered a teenager who blasted his pickup truck stereo to remove all non-factory installed sound equipment for violating a noise ordinance.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050502/ap_on_fe_st/stereo_penalty
Carp. There is a god and he doesn't like loud music.

Frist Should Have Taken The Deal
Peter Brooks, NYT
Last week, the Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid, made an offer to head off a nuclear exchange over judicial nominations. Reid offered to allow votes on a few of the judges stuck in limbo if the Republicans would withdraw a few of the others.
But there was another part of the offer that hasn't been publicized. I've been reliably informed that Reid also vowed to prevent a filibuster on the next Supreme Court nominee. Reid said that if liberals tried to filibuster President Bush's pick, he'd come up with five or six Democratic votes to help Republicans close off debate. In other words, barring a scandal or some other exceptional circumstance, Reid would enable Bush's nominee to get a vote and probably be confirmed. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/opinion/01brooks.html?hp

Carp Frist risks his presential bid and the wrath of the GOP base, but hey, Reid promises to not filibuster the admistration's supreme court nomination unless Bush nominates a wacko. But the agreement must be secret, says Reid. Right , and Reid can sell you some swamp land in Nevada. Peter, where is your journalistic skepticism, You know, the skepticism you use when President Bush said he believed that Iraq had WMDs.

Runaway News
Yet another reality show clutters Fox. Its The "Runaway Bride" soap opera promoted by Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly et al. Hannity is almost orgasmic. He gets to talk to a myriad of ladies on his talk show. I don't know if Hannity just has a propensity for ladies or if he's on a quest for the holy grail of female listeners.

Its the "Princess Di" syndrome. Fox and sundry talk shows take a tabloid news story and beat it to death giving it much more importance than it deserves, but in this dumbed downed country, soap operas find an audience. Maybe its a women thing.

You know you're old when you have never watched a reality show or American Idol. My sister, a vice principal, and a very smart lady can't miss Survivors or the Great Race. Did you ever notice that all reality show actors are good looking with great bodies. To me reality shows are on the same par with wrestling.

Debate With a Liberal

Emails from my liberal nephew-in-law, D.G., (he's a big McCain upporter and is anti-Bush).

D.G. McCain supports the "Minutemen". Bush calls them vigilanties.

Carp. McCain only has to worry about AZ, and the Minutemen are popular right now, so he'd be a fool to oppose them. Bush has to worry about the whole country. He would be excoriated by the press, if he changed his position on immigration. If Bush supported the minutemen it would be official policy of the United States. And there are too many variables which could bring about an incident between the US and Mexico.

Whereas McCain is the darling of the press and they'll give him a pass if he wants to make illigals legal and yet support the minutemen. He can have it both ways and the media will give him a pass. Comparing the responsibilities of a president versus a senator is like comparing apples and lemons.And in this case I know who the lemon is. More http://members.aol.com/upcreek/mcain/

Get Strokes When Playing a 14 Year Old

Before I die there are just three things I would like to understand: the meaning of life, women and why I can't hit the ball on the course like I do on the driving range. I once tried self hypnotism, where you count back from 20, deep breathing in between numbers. But I always lost track of what number came next.

I had a friend that found the answer in a beer can. On the 4th hole of every Saturday round you could hear the fissspop as he cracked a cool one. His game would markedly improve I tried playing after taking muscle relaxants for a back problem. I shot a 92; but, hell, I didn't give a damn
more